Cd644/788

  • Thread starter Thread starter sloom
  • Start date Start date
sloom

sloom

New member
Anyone knoww where I can find one of these SCSI2 devices? I have the 788, and it would be very handy to find the CD-ROM- or other Tascam-approved storage device to extract tracks from the 788 with, for use on my PC editor.

Thanks for any offerings... :cool:
 
Thanks!

Indeed! I'd just been to ebay. Huh...
I'd also seen it on "ioffers.com", but couldn't seem to get registered. Anyway, I bought the thing. Thanks for the link!

The 788 does indeed sound pretty darn good, we recorded a very sparse Hank Williams number the other night, and it came out great! Apparently, nothing but 'desired signal' when you're finished recording. I do know what you mean about the menus thing, though. That's a real pain, frankly. I have to keep going to the manual to find the channel strip! But once you get through all that, you of course stop thinking about it, I guess. Getting better.

Now, I'd like to find a good, solid, rack-mount cassette 4-track! I have a Yamaha MT1X I got in trade for some artwork I did, but that's not really it, though it's gas to play with. Needs a new belt, so it's sitting for now.

Allright, Reel, thanks for your time!
 
Sure!

............................ ;)
 

Attachments

  • Tascam 234c.webp
    Tascam 234c.webp
    42.4 KB · Views: 20
Ah-Hah! That's what Aaahhhm talkin' about. I need to save up for one of those. How much does such an item typically sell for, thou bragging sod!?

You lie in wait to do this, don't you? :p

I dig this idea because it sits in a rack, and doesn't take up lots of desk-space. I have an M-30 mixer, which I'm thinking would be a good match-up for a jig like this.

I have been known for saying I'd never go digital- but I have ("Hi; my name's Sloom, and I'm a... a traitor". "Hi Sloom... Hi Sloom..."). Got my reasons- most of which landed awkwardly in my lap- and I'm satisfied they're justified... but tape needs to exist! It's too- Right- to be lost, and I think I'm missing something I know from when I first became aware of recorded music, and later became a musician. There are many contributors to my disdain for modern pop offerings, and it's possible that the general sterility of digital is one of them. So next, a tape machine.

Thanks for the pin-up...
 
Whew! You said a mouth full!

Y'know what, I have maybe half a dozen digital recorders too, and though they do what they do pretty well, almost every one of 'em has some sort of glaring design deficiency. Whether that's in max-# tracks recordable simultaneously, number of inputs, mixer features or mixer routing functions,... there's not one of 'em that I've not been somewhat disappointed in. That goes for digital unit's I've bought, or maybe some I haven't bought.;) Even the 788 disappointed me in the mixer section, (no internal bussing of inputs), but that's probably another post.

Of the several digital recorders I own personally, the Yamaha MD8 is the most highly equipped and capable machine in the stable. However, there are numerous analog setups I have that blow that whole field away. The Tascam 388 or M30 & 38, for example.

When it comes to analog/digital debates, it's primarily about what you're looking for in a recorder, and what features you may value over others.

F/I, the 788's a fine unit on most fronts, but there are still other little things I see as lacking, which in no way invalidates the value of the 788 as a Portastudio. It's just one person's opinion. Digital shines most brightly in respect to editing. Analog, on the other hand, is well known for it's simplicity, ease of use and robust sound quality. Again, that's only my opinion.

Ah, so,... to each their own & YMMV. Sorry for the cliches.

If you're using the 788 often, it's definitely worth getting the matching CDR, as it's almost essential. (Getting back to the primary topic).

PS: The M30 is the basic & ideally matched mixer to the 234, as would be the M308/312/320. I'd consider the 234 & M30 as a very nice system!

Good luck
 
Last edited:
Ahem,... yes.

I almost forgot to mention a v-nice cond Tascam 234 sells for around $125-$150 on most days.

Yes, I do lie in wait for opportunities to post cool gear pics,... mostly to support some techincal point or other,... but sometimes just for it's own sake!!
 
Gosh,... not to overlook that...

the M30 mixer would serve nicely as a front end to the 788! That obviously solves the "bussing" issue that I find so unappealing about the 788, that's for sure!

Anyway,... cheers!
 
A Reel Person said:
the M30 mixer would serve nicely as a front end to the 788! That obviously solves the "bussing" issue that I find so unappealing about the 788, that's for sure!

Anyway,... cheers!
Click to expand...

Ah, that is interesting. And I did a sound comparison test: Ran a mic into the input of the US-428, into the PC (Cool Edit); Then I ran the same mic into the PC via the M-30. I had to go again through the 428- it was my soundcard- but anyway, the sound going in through the M-30 was markedly better than only through the 428! Next recording thing here at the house, I think I'll bring up the M-30.

I actually used a Studiomaster mixer- a little 12/2 thing, for the last recording we did here at the house, a real bare-bones rendition of a Hank Williams tune. The Studiomaster "Logic 12" has phantom power, and I was using an AT4033a and a Studio Projects B-3 mic, so I panned 'em L & R in their channels on the mixer and went out the mains L & R to the 788 as mono tracks. Sounded pretty dang good- the room needs a treatment, but it was a take. Now I could wish the M-30 had phantom, but I'll stop! :p

There's a book by a guy named Peter Lawrence Alexander called "How to Make a Demo Quality Recording in your Bedroom". In it he gets into the concept of analogue signal flow, and how to 'find the channel strip' in your desktop DAW (like the Roland, Fostex, Tascam dig units). The book spends a lot of time (most of it) focused on the digital realm, mostly software and MIDI/Audio scenarios. But he does get way into the fact that the small digi recorders have the signal flow hidden inside the small format. The technology that affords all the loaded-in FX and 'mastering' features wreaks havoc on the sensibilities at first. There's your menu complaint. Makes me crazy, too.

Anyway, that 234 definitely sounds like my next acqusition! Time to go searching, thanks again for the heads-up! I'm now psyched, and that's bad. So I'll go calm down. And as far as the "lying-in-wait" for the posting of gear pix, I have no problem with it. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top