cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
Beck said:
Ain't that the truth!
Ain't that the truth!
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
...
There's a company called JRF Magnetics, and they specialize in refurbishing and modding recording heads & recorders. They have some awesome retrofit kits for base units such as Otari & Ampex,... but not Tascam. It's into a high dollar realm, though it can be done.
Most of the time it's cheapest to get a popular mainstream model off Ebay (that doesn't require mods), & just go for it. (34, 38, TSR8, Otari MX5050, etc)
There's a company called JRF Magnetics, and they specialize in refurbishing and modding recording heads & recorders. They have some awesome retrofit kits for base units such as Otari & Ampex,... but not Tascam. It's into a high dollar realm, though it can be done.
Most of the time it's cheapest to get a popular mainstream model off Ebay (that doesn't require mods), & just go for it. (34, 38, TSR8, Otari MX5050, etc)
A
audiophilez
New member
well, I guess I am in the market for a tascam tsr-8 or a 38, or maybe even a 4 track tascam if the price screams to be purchased. I take it tascam is a pretty solid decision, I dont know if I want to take a chance with otari, fostex.., I am sure they are great machines, but I know of many tascam repair locations. Again, thanks for all the help. I'll be "reel" crazy soon!
Guy Lewis
Guy Lewis
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
audiophilez said:
I definitely would go with a TASCAM. Others are great too but you will find, after getting to know the opinions of many on this group that going with a TASCAM really makes sense. It seems you're from LA so it'll be that much easier to score something local.
Hey, you also have TASCAM in Montebello so that should be real convenient for all your service, allignment and parts issues! 
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
Tascam still supports most of it's old legacy equipment,...
but I don't think you can say as much about Fostex,... (also based in L.A.).
but I don't think you can say as much about Fostex,... (also based in L.A.).
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
As Dave said ....
...and that right there is a major reason to go with TASCAM. Not to mention that they're really good quality, home recordist friendly machines.
...and that right there is a major reason to go with TASCAM. Not to mention that they're really good quality, home recordist friendly machines.
E
eeieeio
New member
Beck said:There are no remarkable differences between these two formats. The Tascam 30-Series is a good example, as ARP pointed out above.
The listed specs of the Model 34 (1/4” 4-track) and the Model 38 (1/2” 8-track) are identical by the numbers. Technically speaking, the track width is marginally greater on the 1/2" 8-track by 0.003 of an inch.
Track Widths
Model 38: 0.039 inches
Model 34: 0.036 inches
For reference the standard track width for 2” 24-track is 0.040 inches.
These are all very close. The difference in track width between the Tascam 38 and a 2” 24-track is less than the thickness of 1-mil audiotape, such as Quantegy 407. As you can see the Model 34 is not much smaller. Track width alone doesn’t distinguish these machines from each other.
Other brands and models will be about the same… for example the Tascam 44 vs. 48, or Otari MX5050/8 vs. MX5050/4.
In general a ¼” 4-track will compare favorably with its ½” 8-track sibling in the same series, where electronics will be the same.
Be sure you really only need four tracks. Many people find that whatever they buy, they soon wish they had more.
~Tim
Hey, I'm new at this stuff so please forgive me for butting in, but from my research most 1/4 machines run at 7.5 ips and most 1/2 machines run at 15 ips. Electronics and all else being the same wouldn't the speed alone warrant a fairly good step up in sound quality with a 1/2 machine?
jpmorris
Tape Wolf
Not quite. I'd guess that the 1/4" machines you've seen are consumer models. Pretty much all studio or broadcast 1/4" machines are 7.5/15ips switchable.eeieeio said:
Speaking only of 2-track machines:
The Revox B77 is available in 3.75/7.5 or 7.5/15 models. There are some which have been factory-modified to 30ips as well. The PR99 variant is only available in 7.5/15 format IIRC.
The Tascam 32 is available only in 7.5/15ips as far as I know, although there was a logging version of the '34 which ran at 0.9 ips or something icky like that.
The BR20 is 7.5/15ips although I think there was a 3.75ips option.
The Otari 5050 can run at 3.75/7.5 or 15ips and there are probably 30ips versions.
..where multitracks are concerned, they almost always run at 15 or 30 ips. The only exceptions I know of are the Tascam 388, and I think the ITAM recorders had a 7.5 ips mode for recording dialogue rather than music.
B
Beck
Guest
Yeah, what JP said... and all the 1/4" machines in my previous post can run at either 7.5 or 15 ips. The specs I spoke of as being the same are based on 15 ips speed.
Mark7
Well-known member
Don't the early Fostex 8 tracks run at 7.5 too?
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
Yep. Once upon a time the consumer used to be respected and justifiably so, and righteously so
If taking to consideration just those two charactristics: track width and tape speed, I would say: a system built on the base of 4 track 1/4" tape width (1/4-track) running at 7-1/2 ips speed can be and in practice commonly is capable to become a source of pleasing sound, which many (if not all) so-called Professional systems, built on the base of the alternative to analog technology, fail to become a source of.
B
Beck
Guest
Mark7 said:Don't the early Fostex 8 tracks run at 7.5 too?
I think you might be right, but I'm not 100% sure. A friend of mine had the first version of the Fostex A-8, which came out in 1981. I thought it not only ran at 7.5 ips, but also had Dolby B, rather than C.
I have a brochure for the A-8LR, which is a later version. It runs at 15 ips and has Dolby C. That's as far back as I can check, so I may never know if I remembered the early A-8 right or not. They may have improved the first A-8 before this... not sure.
I was not a big Fostex fan at first. The Model 80 and beyond was a big improvement though.
Last edited:
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
Hello,...
All the Fostex 8-tracks run at 15 ips (only), and Dolby C.
Goodbye,...
/DA
All the Fostex 8-tracks run at 15 ips (only), and Dolby C.
Goodbye,...
/DA
B
Beck
Guest
Heh, heh... I was gonna say, ARP would probably know. Having Dave around is a good thing.
jpmorris
Tape Wolf
Mine doesn't. I don't know how early or late it is, but it's Dolby C at 15ips. It's one of the older designs, with 4 inputs and 8 outputs.Beck said:
E
eeieeio
New member
Ok, I'm learning some stuf here!
Let me ask you guys this question. With all the talk about track width. Why is it that in the old days 24 tracks recorded on to 2' tape was mixed down to cassette tape and still it sounded professional? I guess my point is, if that's the way it used to be done, what's the big deal about tape and tracks, width and bouncing and loss in quality and so on when they used to squeeze everything on 1/8 inch tape and achieved high quality results.
Let me ask you guys this question. With all the talk about track width. Why is it that in the old days 24 tracks recorded on to 2' tape was mixed down to cassette tape and still it sounded professional? I guess my point is, if that's the way it used to be done, what's the big deal about tape and tracks, width and bouncing and loss in quality and so on when they used to squeeze everything on 1/8 inch tape and achieved high quality results.
jpmorris
Tape Wolf
eeieeio said:
Ugh. I've never heard of anyone doing that, not that I know a great deal. Most studios that could afford a 2" machine used 1/4" or 1/2" for the mixdown, or failing that a digital format such as DAT, Exabyte, or PCM on videotape. Until everything went digital, 1/4" was the de facto standard. I can understand clients being given a cassette copy, but I really doubt it was used for the actual mixdown master apart from in small and home studios.
B
Beck
Guest
The quality you start with, whether with tape or digital, will greatly impact the quality of the end product. For example, if you record a DVD movie onto VHS tape, it will have a well-defined picture compared to recording a VHS to VHS. More sonic detail during tracking means the end product will have a sharper picture of the sound to work with.
Everything is higher quality during the tracking stage – signal-to-noise, crosstalk, print through, frequency response, etc.
Everything is higher quality during the tracking stage – signal-to-noise, crosstalk, print through, frequency response, etc.
E
EDAN
New member
jpmorris said:
I think maybe he/she just meant that no matter what the process up until that point in the end it was all recorded to cassette for the consumer anyway. Beck gave a good explaination.
M
MCI2424
New member
A Reel Person said:I'd have to differ with the previous opinion, (EDAN).
A 1/4" 4-track and a 1/2" 8-track should have the same overall fidelity *(AT THE SAME TAPE SPEED), with the obvious exception that the 1/4" has 4-tracks and the 1/2" has 8,... given that all other things are equal *(HEADS/ELECTRONICS), such as in a series of units like the Tascam 30-Series (32/34/38).
Without consulting the (Tascam) manual, (which I'll do later), the track width on the 1/4" 4-track should be virtually the same as the 1/2" 8-track. Also, the electronics of these (Tascam 30-Series) decks are virtually alike.
IF, by chance, you're comparing different makes and brands of recorders, then all bets are off, and they should be compared on a case-by-case basis.
F/I, a Tascam 38 won't sound quite the same as an 80-8, nor will it sound exactly the same as an Otari or Ampex recorder, although the track width & tape speed on these different decks should be virtually the same. At that point, differences in the heads and electronics will give a characteristically different sound for each deck.
So, given what you're comparing is not clearly defined, there's a lot of leeway for differing answers on general fidelity of units. I've framed my basic answer in a Tascam:Tascam comparison of formats,... but there's a lot more to it if/when you mix & match various formats and brands for comparison.
Not to start a huge debate, but, 1/4" vs. 1/2" etc. really boils down to the quality of electronics that are employed. There are 1/4" decks that sound waaay better that 1/2" decks and visa-versa.
Like a 1/4" Studer vs. a 1/2" TASCAM.
No debate at all. Look to the build quality and electronic design before committing to anaything.
Depends on what you want to achieve.
Love, MCI2424