244 & PreAmp

  • Thread starter Thread starter sugarbeet tom
  • Start date Start date
S

sugarbeet tom

New member
I was wandering if anyone could give me a bit of guidance on this subject. I'm going to be recording demos on a Tascam 244 but i'm not sure if it's worth using an external preamp to run the mic through or if the trims on the 244 are decent enough to get a good signal without the use of a preamp?
 
Most condensers don't have battery power, so if you're planning to use one it can provide an easy answer for you.

An excellent value, if you can get by with a single pre, would be the Joe Meek 3Q mic pre/compressor/EQ that streets for about $200 IMHO.

You'll hear the biggest difference in the vocal tracks BTW.
Recording in a good sounding room helps a lot too.

IF the demo is for something important like an artist or song demo,
it's normally wiser to use what you have for rehearsal purposes to get
ready to be professionally recorded.

That means you could cut back on the pre budget and put $$$
towards quality pro studio time instead.

Chris
 
sugarbeet tom said:
I was wandering if anyone could give me a bit of guidance on this subject. I'm going to be recording demos on a Tascam 244 but i'm not sure if it's worth using an external preamp to run the mic through or if the trims on the 244 are decent enough to get a good signal without the use of a preamp?
Click to expand...

The 244 preamps are TONS better than the ones they put in the most recent 424mkIII and 414mkII portas and the like. The 244, when in good condition and maintained well, is a VERY fine sounding recorder (I have one) and comes very close to CD quality sound - to an untrained ear (many avarage listeners) it is as good as CD. What the 244 imparts is a nice color tho, from it being recorded to tape - a warm, robust and deep tone. It ain't open reel but does very well. Getting back to the 244's preamps ..... I think they're better than "good enough", have relatively low noise, are clean and don't distort easily. Gotta tell you tho, that even an Avalon hooked up to a 244 would yield crap if one doesn't know the ins and outs of proper recording technique. When done right however, many won't believe you used cassette.

My recommendation: Don't bother with an out-board pre, unless you go into open reels ....

Daniel
 
I think the correct answer lays somewhere in the middle of what's been written so far.

The 244 does offer a decent microphone pre-amp which can not be bypassed easily unless you use the insert patch point jumper to take the internal pre-amp out of the equation all together.

The amount of self noise in the 244's internal mic pre-amp will be Dependant on how much gain you need to get a healthy level on your meters which on a 244, means an average signal of -7db to -3 db on the vu meter when recording with the dbx noise reduction system which is not switchable on a 244.

The amount of required gain will be determined by the sensitivity spec of your microphone in use and by how loud the talent is playing into it. Mic'ed guitar amps, acoustic drums, horns, acoustic rhythm guitars and rock singers will require little gain from the pre-amp and therefore introduce little to no hiss or self noise issues. Quiet singers and soft acoustic guitar parts will require more gain and more of a need for the consideration of more sensitive microphones and/or cleaner pre-amps.

What exactly are you recording?

Cheers! :)
 
For my part, I like to use the insert jacks and outboard pre for phantom power when using a condenser on my 464, if for no more reason than you get to buy those cool insert cables!

I know this sounds wierd, but this is fascinating reading. The 244 has no dbx switch? Who knew? The 464 and later models have on/off switches, and later still, the 424 had on/off/sync.

Do impart upon us the reasoning of those engineeers at TEAC, oh Ghostly One! Was the then-new NR technology so impressive that they simply couldn't envision needing a switch?
 
Do impart upon us the reasoning of those engineers at TEAC, oh Ghostly One! Was the then-new NR technology so impressive that they simply couldn't envision needing a switch?
Click to expand...

I believe their thinking at the time was that because midi was in its infancy, coupled with the fact that most users wouldn't want to sacrifice 25% of their tracks to a sync track and the fact that the machine would be one noisy bugger without it, that they left out a bypass switch for the dbx.

I would assume too that most of their previous customers who owned the 144, which only had Dolby B noise reduction wanted something more substantial in the way of noise reduction.

It was probably more the moaning and crying of the analog purists and elitists who cried for the freedom to make noisy recording if they so choose that brought the dreaded switch into being?

So much for progress!

Cheers! :)
 
the recordings that i'd be doing on the 244 are relatively quiet and stripped down in terms of what is being recorded (vocals, guitars) so I would probably need the trims up quite high if i wasn't using an additional preamp. I've recorded music for various plays in the past with a 688 which involved string sections, flutes, pianos, brass etc... and i was always really happy with the sound quality i got out of the 8 track, but in those examples i used preamps, compression and various other outboard stuff. Unfortunately whilst working on the last project there was some sort of electrical surge when someone plugged in an aux cable and the circuitry for tracks 1 & 2 seems to have been damaged because anything recording on those two tracks now sounds distorted and weak in signal. It's proving an absolute nightare finding someone who can repair it. Has this ever happened to anyone else?

With the 244 i can use a rode nt3 which can take battery power and so phantom power isn't a problem. It would be nice being able to run directly into the 244 and so if anyone familiar with this 4 track does not think the use of an external preamp is necessary then that's what i'd rather do. Thanks
 
sugarbeet tom said:
the recordings that i'd be doing on the 244 are relatively quiet and stripped down in terms of what is being recorded (vocals, guitars) so I would probably need the trims up quite high if i wasn't using an additional preamp. I've recorded music for various plays in the past with a 688 which involved string sections, flutes, pianos, brass etc... and i was always really happy with the sound quality i got out of the 8 track, but in those examples i used preamps, compression and various other outboard stuff. Unfortunately whilst working on the last project there was some sort of electrical surge when someone plugged in an aux cable and the circuitry for tracks 1 & 2 seems to have been damaged because anything recording on those two tracks now sounds distorted and weak in signal. It's proving an absolute nightare finding someone who can repair it. Has this ever happened to anyone else?

With the 244 i can use a rode nt3 which can take battery power and so phantom power isn't a problem. It would be nice being able to run directly into the 244 and so if anyone familiar with this 4 track does not think the use of an external preamp is necessary then that's what i'd rather do. Thanks
Click to expand...

The 244 is a 4 track unit and would yield better quality of sound than the 8 tracks on the 688. That alone should tell you that 4 tracks will be better for cassette than 8. When you're dealing with the 244 and 246 etc, which are the BEST 4 track portastudios of all time, you're getting the BEST what can be done with a cassette and with its limited space of the portastudio concept. All the parts are of quality and will not disappoint. There's really no point in exteral preamps. Why don't you get some 57's for all your work ? These sound amazing on guitar, vocals and pretty much everything else and you won't need that much trim. Plus, what's a tiny bit of preamp hiss when and if it occurs ? I think it adds nice character to an already nice tone of the 244.

Daniel
 
thanks. When you say 57's i assume your referring to shure sm57's. I've got a couple of those already which i use on electric guitars and certain types of percussion. When i first started recording i used these mics for recording pretty much everything but I did find that in order to get a good signal you had to turn the trims up pretty high. I like the NT3 because I think it's a good step up from a 57. I actually only recently bought the 244 and it hasn't arrived yet so it's good that people are saying good things about it. I had a 464 about 5 years ago but in terms of sound quality i personally thought the 688 was better. Thanks for all the info.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top