Back to Analog - Questions

[fstrat76]

My Tascam 38, which I originally purchased with an M-35 mixer in 1985, I sold in 1994. I needed 16 tracks at the time and bought 2 black-face ADATs and a Tascam M-2600 24 channel mixer.

After recording with the ADATs for a bunch of years, I went all digital with a Tascam FW-1884 hooked up to various Macs running Logic Pro. Great stuff considering the space constraints I now have.

But something was missing. Maybe it was the sound, maybe the fun factor, I don't know. So last month I bought a Tascam 38 off of eBay. It was in mint condition.

I'm sure to no ones surprise, the unit arrived damaged in shipping. The feet were bent or pushed into the bottom, the capstan belt was disintegrated and rubber was all over inside. The left hub was low. It took a beating. Sad.

Luckily, the pushed in foot at the bottom pushed into an empty area on the frame and did not damage the circuit boards or other frame parts.

So I got the unit adjusted and its now in working condition. I baked some old tapes (Ampex 456 and 3M 226 and 996) and they played perfectly on the unit. I transferred some tracks into my DAW and was absolutely amazed at the sound quality I got even 20 years ago. I mean, its comparable or maybe even better than some of the stuff I did on ADATs or all digital.

Now I want to hook all my analog gear back up and start using it as well as my DAW and such. I cleaned up my M-35 and I'm thinking about tracking and hookup scenarios, and even thinking about digging out the huge M-2600 24 channel because it has phantom power (which I need).

The FW-1884 also has phantom power and I suppose I could route the insert send to the 38. Or I could buy a phantom power supply and hook up directly to the M-35, then on to the 38.

What I'm wondering is what others have done to maximize use of the analog equipment and tie it into a DAW. I don't have the cash for anymore outboard analog gear so for more than 8 tracks I'll be mixing in the box with Logic Pro I guess.

Does anyone have suggested hookups? Track on the 38, transfer to DAW, or track to DAW and mixdown on the 38? Or Both?

Should I bother setting up the monster M-2600 or just stick with the M-35 (or FW-1884).

I'm looking for your ideas or how you might go about it.

Also, I'm looking at getting some new ATR tapes. Does the 38 need to be re-calibrated for these tapes?

I've learned a ton already from this forum and looking forward to getting back to analog!

Thanks!
--Mike

 

[sweetbeats]

Yes you'll need to recal for ATR tape and AFAIK the 38's bias amp circuitry will not properly bias ATR tape. I say "properly" as many use that tape anyway but Teac did not design the 38 or other 1/2" 8-track decks (and others) of that era for the bias requirements of that tape. Any reason you aren't looking at the equivalent tape for which Teac designed the deck (i.e. RMGI SM911)?

The 38 is not a mixdown deck, and if you track to the DAW you are likely to miss out on all the good analog "stuff".

I suggest tracking to the 38 and either mixdown or dump to the DAW.

Also if it were me I'd be getting out that 2600 and doing side-by-side comparisons between all three pre's and see which one fits best.

 

[SteveM]

I transferred some tracks into my DAW and was absolutely amazed at the sound quality I got even 20 years ago. I mean, its comparable or maybe even better than some of the stuff I did on ADATs or all digital.


Thanks!
--Mike

I never noticed any noise difference in mixes (hiss or otherwise) between my 38 and Roland digital workstation.

 

[fstrat76]

Any reason you aren't looking at the equivalent tape for which Teac designed the deck (i.e. RMGI SM911)?

No reason at all. I was just reading some info on the RMGI's and saw some complaints as to the quality of the tape, so that's why I started to look at ATR. I'm guessing its a "VHS vs Beta" war kinda thing, so I'm not opposed to trying and using the RMGI SM911. So what you're saying is that I won't need to re-cal at all with the SM911?

Also if it were me I'd be getting out that 2600 and doing side-by-side comparisons between all three pre's and see which one fits best.

Yeah, I thought about bringing that M-2600 out. I really don't have much room for it. I thought the M-35, by driving it harder, might give me more of that warmer sound as I read the M-2600 has a more clean or pristine sound. Probably opinions of course, but the M-2600 is 10 or more years newer than the M-35. Doesn't hurt to give it a try.

 

[lo.fi.love]

No reason at all. I was just reading some info on the RMGI's and saw some complaints as to the quality of the tape, so that's why I started to look at ATR. I'm guessing its a "VHS vs Beta" war kinda thing, so I'm not opposed to trying and using the RMGI SM911. So what you're saying is that I won't need to re-cal at all with the SM911?

The quality issues occurred only while RMGI was getting started. The trick is to buy tape from a known and reputable company - buying from a popular company virtually insures you against accidentally purchasing any tape from RMGI's "shaky" period. US Recording Media seems to be a favorite around here, or maybe it's just my favorite.

The ATR vs. RMGI battle seems to be more of a Ford vs. Chevy argument than anything else. Some would argue that ATR makes a better product; I have no opinion on this. Personally, I use SM911 because all of my decks were designed to use Ampex 456. Your deck, the 38, was designed to use Ampex 456.

 

[sweetbeats]

If you know that your 38 was setup for the 456 equivalent, you won't need to recal, but if its been awhile it wouldn't hurt as things drift and yours clearly had a rough trip . Regardless you should check the bias. SM911 and 456 are bias compatible but there are always sliught variations, even between different batches of the same make and model of tape. Plus, again, it had a rough trip.

 

[fstrat76]

If you know that your 38 was setup for the 456 equivalent, you won't need to recal, but if its been awhile it wouldn't hurt as things drift and yours clearly had a rough trip . Regardless you should check the bias. SM911 and 456 are bias compatible but there are always sliught variations, even between different batches of the same make and model of tape. Plus, again, it had a rough trip.

What kind of anomalies might I encounter if I try recording on a new tape with an incorrect bias? Will I notice high frequency loss or something else, or will there be subtle differences?

Also, a place local here wants $170 to calibrate/align. I don't know if that's reasonable considering I have not been in the analog arena for about 15 years.

 

[Victory Pete]

What kind of anomalies might I encounter if I try recording on a new tape with an incorrect bias? Will I notice high frequency loss or something else, or will there be subtle differences?

Also, a place local here wants $170 to calibrate/align. I don't know if that's reasonable considering I have not been in the analog arena for about 15 years.

I have tried to align my TSR-8 to ATR, It was not designed for anything other than 456. I had the trimmer pots all the way up and I couldnt get the levels to reach 0db. I now use 911 and I think it sounds even better than 456 ever did. As far as using different tapes with your machine, If your 38 is still relatively set up for 456 and you record with ATR, 499, or 900, these are all high bias tape, You will have too much treble and not enough bass. This is called underbias. I bought 499 in 1995 to use on my TSR-8 thinking it was "better tape" and it recorded all treble with no bass. I think that price for alignment is fair as long as they take the time to make sure everything is calibrated accurately. I have been doing my own machines now and I find you have to go through the machine methodically to get the best alignment. I have invested about $2000 in test tapes and test equipment, so In my opinion $170 is fair. Good luck
VP
VP