help with reel to reel - teac 80-8 or tascam 38?

  • Thread starter Thread starter James John
  • Start date Start date
James John

James John

New member
Hi guys, i need some help with choosing an 8 track reel to reel. i've just joined the site and have been scouring the forums...im a little more clued up but still confused about what to get.
i've been looking at the teac 80-8 which seems good, although i've read that it is ac powered and so causes pitch changes after continued use, this is a bit of a downer. another machine thats possible is the tascam 32 - i assume its dc, so no problem with pitch changes? i've read that the 80-8 is built a bit more solid than the 32, so i guess there are less things to go wrong? another thing in the 80-8's favour is that it creates a warmer sound than the 32 - is this true? although in the 32's favour is that it's lighter, contains a pitch controller and spare parts are easier to get hold of.
can someone help me out as i'm just starting out with analogue recording and i don't want to fall flat on my face!
cheers, James

whoops - by 32 i think i mean a 38 (8 track)
 
Last edited:
8 track

I assume that you mean the 38 as that the 32 is a 2 track 1/4" mastering deck.

In the Tascam line you could select a 70 series 8 track, the 80-8, 38, tsr8, 48 or 58.

I'm sure that folks will chime in here. My choice would be between the 38 or tsr-8 (3 head vs 2 head) or to go with the 48 or 58 and deal with fewer spare parts at higher prices.

But then again I work on my own decks.

Regards
 
evm1024 said:
I assume that you mean the 38 as that the 32 is a 2 track 1/4" mastering deck.

In the Tascam line you could select a 70 series 8 track, the 80-8, 38, tsr8, 48 or 58.

I'm sure that folks will chime in here. My choice would be between the 38 or tsr-8 (3 head vs 2 head) or to go with the 48 or 58 and deal with fewer spare parts at higher prices.

But then again I work on my own decks.

Regards
Click to expand...


The 70 Series should be avoided at all costs. No support anywhere for that machine anymore. It didn't sound all that good when new either.
A good 80-8 without the vari-speed mod can last a long time. The motors are built like tanks and can be rebuilt. The 38 motors cannot be rebuilt and there are no more new ones to be had.
 
The 80-8 is a much more rugged machine, and, of course, because of this, much heavier if you are going to lug it around. I used an 80-8 as a location machine when it first came out and it served me very well. I had a castered Anvil case built to hold it and its DX-8 DBX units and used to haul it around in the back of a 1972 Datsun station wagon :eek:. I would never have attempted some of the things that I did with the 80-8 with the 38. The 80-8 had more head bump than the 38, so, in theory the 38 gave a truer sound. If you are going to leave the machine in a stationary location either one would probably serve you well. If you are going to move it around, go for the 80-8. Here sits my 80-8 hard at work. http://www.pbase.com/rking401/image/3371040 Nice shag carpet. :D

Rick.... I enjoyed the CD. Thanks.
 
this is my first post here ... hello all

i would choose the 80-8 over the 38 anytime, especially if you are going for more of a vintage sound ... the 38 sounds more modern.

i have an 80-8 and have recorded on a 38. i also have a 22-2 mixdown deck (same era as 32). the 80s Tascam stuff sounds good and is well-built, but it feels flimsy and does not have as much character to the sound. I would use a 3340S 4 track and bounce on it before i would buy a 38.

the 80-8 is a tank and a trooper. i have had mine for 3 years without any issues and i have never done any work to it. it is starting to get a little funny and probably needs a tune-up, but it still functions just fine. they are very well built and sound great.

that said, they are both tools and you can get a good sound out of either of them, maybe find the best deal that comes along, make sure the machine is in good shape and working properly.
 
thanks a lot for your help - have you ever had an issue with the ac power causing pitch change when the 80-8's been left on for a while??
 
I think I might go for the 80-8 - someone said its a single speed? is this 15 ips or 7 1/2 ips? one more question: im going to be recording a jazz-rock band in the summer holidays - lots of blaring hammond/leslie/fuzz bass etc. i'm really going for a 60's vibe recording technique (which is why im going analogue in the first place) and so my question is: would a dbx noise reduction unit hinder the 60's vintage sound?
 
15ips. dbx (you want dbx type I not type II) will not screw with the sound unless the machine and dbx units are not within spec. . Be advised that analog recording requires regular alignment and maintenance. At a minimum you will need an alignment tape, a signal generator, an o'scope, and the machine's manual. All bets are off if you are not willing to deal with these issues.
 
Apparently Dolby A came out in early 1966, so DBX is probably not going to make much odds. I don't know quite what style you're aiming for, whether it's capturing the performance or going wild with psychedelic tape effects (which will require several decks). While getting similar technology is useful, a lot of it comes down to being able to mimic the style of music itself.

If you are looking for psychedelia, it might be worth looking out for the following albums:
Kula Shaker - Peasants, Pigs and Astronauts (1999)
Dukes of Stratosphear - Chips from the Chocolate Fireball (1987)
...both of these are good examples of people setting out to try and reproduce a 1960s vibe in a more modern setting, most likely on 24-track machines (Kula Shaker recorded theirs on Dave Gilmour's boat, I've no idea what the Dukes used).

The 'Dukes' album in particular does a very good job, the only real problem I can spot being that they seem to have recorded the drums over multiple tracks. In the real thing you'd normally get the entire drum track in a single channel, or two if you were lucky and had an 8-track machine.
 
jpmorris said:
Apparently Dolby A came out in early 1966, so DBX is probably not going to make much odds.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what is meant by the above. The TASCAM 8 tracks were designed to give maximum performance with dbx I. A TASCAM built companion dbx unit was on option from the very introduction of the 80-8.
Dolby A was way too expensive to even be considered. For whatever reason, I am very grateful Dolby B wasn't part of their marketing strategy.
 
RRuskin said:
15ips. dbx (you want dbx type I not type II) will not screw with the sound unless the machine and dbx units are not within spec. . Be advised that analog recording requires regular alignment and maintenance. At a minimum you will need an alignment tape, a signal generator, an o'scope, and the machine's manual. All bets are off if you are not willing to deal with these issues.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm definately going analogue boyo - i've wanted to for about 3 years now! i understand about alignment tape - can i get this from RMGI? as i'll probably end up using RMGI tape. the manual is no problem, but what is a signal generator and o'scope? sorry about my ignorance.
 
If you take a look at the picture at the site that I posted above, the DBX unit that Tascam made for the 80-8 is "bolted" on to the deck right below the row of knobs. They called that unit a DX-8.
 
RRuskin said:
I have no idea what is meant by the above.
Click to expand...
You might want to look at it in the context of his question. He said he is setting out to try and create a 1960s sound.
From that basis, his question can be parsed as "Will noise reduction prevent me from getting a 1960s sound?" In some ways my comment was superfluous because you had already answered that, although the reasoning behind it wasn't really given.

DBX didn't come out until about 1970 IIRC, and the half-inch 8-track format didn't come out until 1973. However, Dolby A was available during the period he is attempting to emulate, though I can't say how widely-used it was at the time.

I'm not suggesting that he gets Dolby A. I'm not suggesting he gets a 1" 4-track machine or a 1" 8-track machine. I'm just saying that an 80-8 with DBX is not so far removed from the equipment of the time.
 
jpmorris said:
Will noise reduction prevent me from getting a 1960s sound?"
Click to expand...

doesnt using DBX stop someone from "saturating" the tape by pushing the meters beyond red? so wouldnt DBX prevent you from getting a more obvious "tape sound?"
 
Rickson Gracie said:
doesnt using DBX stop someone from "saturating" the tape by pushing the meters beyond red? so wouldnt DBX prevent you from getting a more obvious "tape sound?"
Click to expand...

dbx doesn't prevent you from printing hot it's just not a good idea to work that way. You can saturate the tape all you want but doing so defeats the purpose of using dbx (or any encode/decode nr scheme) at all. The system was developed so one could record with greater dynamic range without having to resort to keeping the signal in the tape's rather small s/n sweet spot. A lot, if not all, of us old-timers were more concerned with having a clean and quiet recording system than getting the "sound" of analog. That's all we had anyway and we were working around it's limitations.
 
I'm not suggesting he gets a 1" 4-track machine
Click to expand...
Actually, most '50's/'60's stuff was more than likely done on 1/2" 4 track machines. I was using an Ampex 350 1/2" 4 track when I started recording in the early '70's. That machine was from the '60's, and was probably the most common machine in the '60's. This is the one I used to use: http://www.pbase.com/rking401/image/3371002
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top