begginng on a 4 track recorder

[Rokket]

Oh, I don't know . . . I've got a 424mkII (2002, about $400.00), and a Boss
BR-532 (2003, about $400.00), and the Boss is superior, both sonically and
and technically (by that I mean in their construction). I've owned a few Porta Studios, and they simply don't last. The cassette medium is God-awful for music reproduction. The Porta studios had their place in time, but that time has come and gone. Nicity, with a stock soundcard, a few cables, a Behringer UB-502, and some free or cheap software (think Magix, or the light versions of popular stuff) you can make recordings on the computer that are going to be more useful (and better sounding) than cassettes. The fact of the matter is that "hype" did not kill the cassette multi-trackers--their bad sound did. (In comparison to other, newer media--you know what I'm talking about.)
This post might seem familiar. Its basically a rehash of one that I got involved in a while ago, with the same contours--a recording novice wonders if his cassette tracker is the way to go, and instead of others being frank about this, it quickly devolved into what is no doubt going to happen soon, right here. So, before we start throwing the shit around here, a few points:

1. I'm not surprised that digital has not "equaled or surpassed" analog portable's envious 25 year run, because digital hasn't been around for very long. Trust me, when the last Porta Studio cassette multi-tracker is either in the Smithsonian or languishing on E-bay (no takers for an excellent condition 424 at $25.00), the digital age will be the, uh, rage.
2. The "recording industry" does survive by selling stuff. Twenty five years ago, it was Porta Studios (cassette), now its Porta Studios (digital).
3. I've seen other posts in and around here about the wonders of ancient analog stuff. That's fine! If you want to believe that cassette multi-trackers are somehow better that their digital counterparts, that's cool. If you want to believe that the way to learn is to suffer and struggle with a piece of equipment like the MF-P01, go ahead and think that, but . . .
4. . . . Nicity, this is for you if you're still with me. Do like one of my bandmates did, and put your MF-p01 on the closet shelf. (Yes, he really has one and it is indeed on the shelf. He's got the unit that is a couple steps above yours, and he recorded a couple of demos with it--not bad, for a sketch-pad kind of thing.) Do what I suggested above--I think you already have the computer, so you're 9/10's of the way there. Send more posts if you're unsure on how to hook up the gear. Buy some mics, etc., and get rolling, so to speak, in the wonderful world of computer recording, because its the future, and the future is now.

That being said.... dealing with latency issues and crashing harddrives as well as other problems I've seen posted and complained about over the last 4 years I've been here, I'd still rather get a nice digital multitracker and record to it. Then download the tracks to my pc and mix them there.

Look at the Fostex MR-8 for simplicity (and real faders and knobs), or go with a higher end MR-16HD/CD. Or Tascam DP-02.

If you absolutely have to, then go the computer recording route. I'll let others point you in the right direction with interfaces (some call them sound cards) and what you will need to get it done there.

 

[TimN]

Agreed; I was speaking to analog cassette multi-tracking. There is simply no reason to use them anymore. I still use the Boss BR-532 (digital). However, my computer has never crashed whilst running music software (in over 3years). (A Dell Dimension 7200 series.) I know these things do happen, but its really not a major issue anymore. Also, increasingly you are seeing mixing consoles with USB and Firewire capability--analog and digital have always been intertwined, and this will continue. I mention this for those who need to mix and "have fun" outside the box. I certainly like mixing down and around on a console, but its mostly not practical.
One more thing. A few years ago, our group recorded some tracks on the above mentioned 424 MK111. The guy singing recorded his voice on a single track, though there was some leakage. He died a little over a year ago, and when I finally decided to go through some of the old cassettes, I found the "demo" (at the time I still foolishly believed that this was a finished product, maybe, hopefully) with his voice on it. I bounced the track down to the computer, and inserted it into the new song, and now he is singing in the background on the 24 track song. It required some heavy-handed editing (Wow and flutter on the Tascam are quite bad), but it worked.

 

[A Reel Person]

Okay, my friend. That's fine. We'll just have to disagree.

Actually, I like your idea about DAW recording a lot. Most people do it that way and are very happy with it. Sound quality can be outstanding. There's no reason a person with a computer shouldn't at least try it.

I'd just not condemn cassette in the same way you would. I feel very differently about it, and subjectively I think I've often gotten very good sounds from the 4-track cassette format. I've not had too many technical issues, per se, and I obviously like the format very much. I don't think it's strictly a starter's format to be graduated from, but most people seem to view it that way. I view 4-track recording as a discipline unto itself. However, no one on this thread classified the MF-P01 as anything more than a scratchpad recorder. I've had other Tascam Portastudios that I'd say were good sounding and robust machines. I'm sorry your experience was otherwise.

I'm not trying to state my opinions as fact, but to try to infer from my opinion that AFAIC the 4-track cassette Portastudio is still a fun and viable recording medium, tho' cassette itself is a dead technology.

If people want to record, they should avail themselves of whatever medium or method they can. Recording to 'puter seems like a slam dunk for most people, but there are still a great number of different formats out there, still shaking themselves out in the recording scheme of things.

Thanx

 

[rayc]

I love my 4 track. I USE my 4 track. I import my 4 track tracks into cakewalk & stuff around in there.
BUT
I love my 4 track - there's simply no reason not to try it at the price.

 

[Dani Pace]

I've invested quite a bit of cash into a digital recording set up which I really like (once I got used to the differences in digital recording) for the ease of editing and low noise. However I must admit I've had more fun with a $95 (used from a pawn shop) Yamaha MT 120 four track tape recorder, and made a few decent recordings on it too.
Recording is recording, no matter what medium you use. The important thing is to make the best recordings with whatever medium you have to work with, whether it is a simple tape machine or a super computer loaded with tons of software.
Four trackers haven't died, they have just transformed into stand alone digital recorders. It's the same idea, just a different technology, and some don't record any better than their tape predecessors.

 

[nicity]

I didn't know people still posted in this thread, well i'm back after a long absence, and I;ll say that I did have fun with that 4 track till it stopped working alltogether. Made a couple decent demos out of it. Now I'm mostly Digital, only because it's cheaper right now.