Eternal Newbie question

  • Thread starter Thread starter BillyFurnett
  • Start date Start date
Thanks Ghost (Font)...


Man It's a bitch trying to figure this stuff out without a mixer! :)

Although more times than not I do record all parts myself, but for that I just use my keyboard drums via sequencer or a horrible old boss machine, but on that I'd just do left and right tape or main outs, so my questions were in terms of tracking live drums with a drummer.

Let me ask you this... With your 38, do you usually sub mix your drums OR capture it on 6 seperate tracks, then mix and bring it back onto two tracks??

I'm excited about trying it on 6 seperate tracks!!
I'm actually looking forward to fighting off bleed over between the mics!! (LOL)

Do you think I should be experimenting on my 38 using my old porta 2 as a piss poor mixer for now??

I guess if I recorded/monitored a track at a time, then mixed down with my Aux returns as two in's I could get 8 channels through my Porta, then out to two channels L&R to CD-R.
It'd sound like a bucket of ass on a $50 tape, but it'd be possible no?
 
I guess you could jury rig your Porta 2 to be a stereo input mixer to the 38 but with the prices of great used boards out there, why bother? Make a concerted effort to win an auction on e-bay or check out a local retailer or local trader paper and do it properly, with a dedicated mixer that will allow you to track, monitor and mix-down.

As for the idea of recording the drums on six discrete tracks on the 38, you could do that I suppose but it's kind of a waste of time and tape to do that effectively on an on-going basis.

You might want to consider perhaps 4 track of tape for drums like the kick on 1, snare and hats on 2, stereo overheads on 3 & 4. That way, you'd have some basic control of the drums if you didn't do it well on the stereo mix I described above.

If you used up six track just for drums and then wanted to bounce that to 7 & 8, you'd have no tracks left over for a bed rhythm instrument, like a guitar or keys.

It might be better in the long run to learn how to get a good stereo only track on tape as a first generation without a bounce so that you could have six left over for the rest of the band.

Digital audio allows for multiple bounces without much or any generational loss but analog is less forgiving of a bounce.

Eight tracks might seem like a lot if you only had four before but 8 is still not a huge number to work with so it's best to learn track economy early and you'll end up with a better sounding recording as a result.

Make any sense to you?

Cheers! :)

FM
 
Yes it makes sense thank you very much.

Yeah I hear you on the Ebay tip, but right now the mixer budget I had scraped together has been diverted to replace the guitar I just lost in a flood. (My amp didn't know how to swim either!)
I have shows I'm commited to this month so bye bye mixer.
( I get a free 38, then lose my other gear..Figures!!)

I agree (No doubt) that being able to get a first generation stereo sub mix onto two tracks is a mandatory skill I have to gain, but since it'll ALL be new to me I'd like to try six seperate drum tracks mixed out and back to two just for the hell of it one time. ( In my previous post ) I meant to say once I mixed the 1 to 6 down to 7 and 8 I'd record over 1 to 6 with the rest of the instruments. I'm sure it'll sound like a mess, but I like to experiment. :)
 
Sorry, but here's a new question for you guys that ISN'T tape/mixer related. (What do you mean "Thank God!"?? :) )

Ok.
I've been playing acoustic guitar through a P.A. ( Soundhole humbucker & Powered mixer) in place of an amp (Which is good enough FOR NOW..., well, Sort of ! ) but since vocals are ALSO going through the P.A. I really can't hijack the bullshit little graphic EQ. (And oh brothers do I need it!!) Sooooo, what I'd like to know is...
Can I go into a little practice amp (To utilize it's EQ) then from it's headphone out into the P.A's 1/4 in without frying anything???
Or is this not specific enough info to tell?

(BTW The environment isn't conducive to mic-ing the practice amp .)

Thanks guys :)

P.S. I have a "Date" to check out that 312 mixer Tuesday... I hope it's a love connection!!!
 
The headphone jack isn't the ideal way of getting a signal into an other mixer or amplifier but if it's all you've got to work with, give it a try at a lower volume first and gradually raise the level until you are getting acceptable gain for the receiving amp.

If you are going to buy a small amp for this purpose, try to get one that has a normal line level output as well as a headphone jack for private listening.

Cheers! :)
 
( As Always) Thanks Ghost.

Can you possibly imagine a worse guitar set up than what I'm playing through right now?? (LOL)


(Completly unrelated: )
I've been enjoying the Studio Covers.com site lately...
WOW what a wealth of interesting info!!!
 
Ok guys,
It feels like that 28 days later movie in this section of the bbs.

Hello... Anybody out there?..out there?.out there?

:)
 
BillyFurnett said:
Hello... Anybody out there?..out there?.out there?

:)
Click to expand...

I stop by once a day to feed the pigeons. Beyond that, life goes on.

Keep the faith Billy and keep us posted on that M312!

Cheers!:)
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

".. Keep us posted on that M312!"

----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOL- Be careful what you ask for Ghost.
:)
 
:( Update on the 312 is that I let my band mates talk me into replacing my guitar before getting a mixer because they are sweating these upcoming shows. (I'm such a sell out! lol)

In the good news department:
Among the old sticky 456's I was given I found a way newer tape that works and makes my machine run like a dream. :)

:)
 
Well, at least by waiting for your M312 battle ship to come in, the prices will keep falling!

Who knows? If you wait long enough, you might find one where the guy will pay you just to take it off his hands!

Jilted lovers and spouses often sell things like this never knowing the true value of them so, don't loose faith.

Cheers! :)
 
Thanks for the encouragement Ghost.
( I know my board is out there somewhere waiting for me.)


Here's a few questions for you (To help me bide my time):

1. Does the 312, 32o and 520 have phantom power?

2. Any major differences besides increased channles from the 312 to 320?

3. What's the 520 like? (I could dig one of those!!)

Billy :)
 
The TASCAM M308B/M312B/M320B models have the phantom power.

The M320B has 10 VU meters, as opposed to the regular 6.

The TASCAM M520, I believe would have phantom pwr, but I can't verify that. It's s much higher-end mixer than the M300 Series.
 
The M520 and M512 both have phantom power.

Consider it confirmed! :D

2. Any major differences besides increased channels from the 312 to 320?
Click to expand...

The size and the weight!! or was this a trick question??

Cheers! :)
 
Tascam 500 Series mixers have an external power supply unit!

Make sure yours has one, when you bid!
 
BillyFurnett said:

3. What's the 520 like? (I could dig one of those!!)

Billy :)
Click to expand...

It's basically like.............................................really nice, if you can find one for sale. They are harder to find on the used market because they were more expensive and not as many were sold to begin with.

The 500 series basically offered an 8 buss architecture and 3 band parametric eq as well as a test tone generator and phono inputs for your Technics SL1200 Mk II! Radio stations kind of liked and needed that feature, which is who TASCAM originally pitched that series to as potential clients when it was introduced back in the early 80's.

Cheers! :)
 
I have a genuine talent for missing the obvious!:(

Thanks ARP/LTU!:)
 
Ahh cool. (Thanks Ghost)

I haven't seen the 512 Yet, but hell, I'd settle for a 30 or 35 if I can get one cheap.

( I thought alot more people from Tascam would have showed up here... (Sigh) So many Bbs', so little time. :) )
 
Well, if it wasn't for ARP/LTU showing me the way to this site, I wouldn't have found it either!

I will call him Moses from now on!:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top