8track to 4track

[pehjott]

when i record like 4 tracks on my tascam 488 mkII (tracks 1-4) and put that cassette into a tascam 464 unit, is it able to play those 4 tracks (when i'm in high-speed modus of course)?or do i have to record on track 5-8 on my tascam 488 mkII so that the 464 plays them?

thx,paul

 

[sweetbeats]

I can't remember if 488 recordings are backwards compatible to the 4-track decks (234, 244, 246, 414, 424, etc. etc. etc.) I know you can play the 4 track recordings on the 488. Try tracking to tracks 1, 3, 5, and 7, OR tracks 2, 4, 6, and 8. The tracks are staggered on the 488, the odd ones at one position and the even ones at another position. The Tascam 8-track cassette decks feature circuitry to the sync the tracks. They did this to reduce crosstalk due to the close proximity of the heads. Yamaha followed suit.

Do you have the manual to your 488? I haven't got my copy of the manual handy at the moment but maybe I'll look at it later if you don't have one and you get stumped.

 

[A Reel Person]

Mmmmmm...

The head configuration between cass. 4-tracks and cass. 8-tracks is not a good match. The split head configuration of the 488 puts an inherent time -phase gap between even and odd tracks. I think it's a noticeable difference that would destroy the basic integrity of the recording overall, either by putting 4-track tape into an 8-tracker or vice/versa. Some styles of music might mask this inherent flaw somewhat, but I don't think by what I've heard it's a usable technique to do so, borne out by my own quick experimentation. By the book any by my ears it's not compatible. Not to say it's a "flaw" outright, it's inherent in the two designs, but the two formats when mixed would present a flawed outcome.

Still, you could try it experimentally either way and it wouldn't hurt anything.

 

[A Reel Person]

The tracks are staggered on the 488,... The Tascam 8-track cassette decks feature circuitry to the sync the tracks. They did this to reduce crosstalk due to the close proximity of the heads.

There's no circuitry to compensate for the delay between even and odd tracks.. The simplicity of the matter is the staggered track's signals are written and read back in staggered fashion by the same head, and thus there is no internal delay on this format in standalone mode. Split-head's not a design to reduce crosstalk, though that's a huge side benefit of it, but it's simply a means of physically squeezing 8 tracks onto such a tiny strip of tape. Given the dimensions of the tape and heads themselves, a split head arrangement was invented specifically for this format. FWIW, I'd say it works pretty well!

 

[A Reel Person]

...

I'd say the dub-transfer method is what you'd use to transfer signals from a 4-track to 8-track cassette, or vice-versa, to preserve the integrity of the phasing of the tracks. It's an extra generation of dubbing, but it's the "best" solution when considering this question.

 

[A Reel Person]

See...

See in the center/left of this diagram the differences between the 8-tr/8-ch and 4-tr/4-ch TASCAM head configuration, (A) and (B), respectively. This picture explains perfectly why the even/odd tracks on a cassette 8-tracker are inherently out of phase, and why if you traded tapes between your Tascam 4- and 8- trackers would result in a phasey mish mash of sound. However, as I said before, some styles of music might mask the phase problem somewhat, but not enough to make swapping tapes between these machines a viable technique.

That explanation glosses over the issue of azimuth and head alignment which would throw another variable into the mix as to why this technique (in OP question, above) won't work. The alignment tolerances are very tiny and most critical to success of these formats.

 

[pehjott]

what a pity...well at least it worked for me playing and mixing a 4track-cassette in my tascam 488, but i have no 4 track anymore (but soon will get one again) to test it out.I will tell you how it worked