How do 8-track multitracks work?

[DefenderOfRock]

Hello everyone.

I am an cassette-based recording enthusiast and I am outgrowing my current Tascam 4 track. I am looking to upgrade to a Tascam 424mkIII, the 464, 488, or maybe even the 238 (if i could figure out how to work the i/o with my mixer). I was wondering how the 8-track recorders work. I had previously supposed that only 4 tracks could be recorded onto a cassette tape.

Thanks in advance for any help you can give me.

Carl

 

[DigitalSmigital]

I have the 424 mkIII and the 464 Portas, they are great, but both are four track recorders. I don't know if you got the numbers right in your question, but I think you meant the 788 Digital Portastudio? That's an eight track, Carl. But it's not cassette-based.

I don't think there is an eight track cassette, the heads would be to small to get a good signal printed to tape without bleeding over.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

There are 8-track cassette multitrackers.... the Tascam 488 is one of them.... Yamaha also used to make one...

The 4 tracks are split in half -- so 1/16" per track....... doesn't do wonders for fidelity at that width, though....

 

[Mark7]

No, there were cassette based 8 track recorders made.

To wit:

The Tascam 238 (Rackmount)

Tascam 488 MK I

Tascam 488 MK II

Tascam 688 Midistudio

Yamaha MT8X

 

[Stress Release]

I had the Tascam Syncaset 238 and when the transport wears out, which it will, you will not be able to get it fixed at a reasonable cost. You'd be better off investing in a digital portastudio. The 788 is a great choice for the money as compared to any other 8 track machines that are even capable of recording more then 2 tracks simultaneously. Once you have ventured from the analog world into the digital domain you may never wanna go back.

 

[DefenderOfRock]

Thanks for all the replys so far guys!

So whats the difference between the 424mkIII and the 464. Is one better than the other?

Also, if the 424mkIII and the 464 are 4-tracks, then what are those extra two channel strips for? Can they be recorded onto also, making it kindof a "6-track"?

I have tried both the digital world and the analog world, and I prefer the analog. Digital is just not my cuppa joe, and I hate comuters with a vengance. Hehehe. Analog is pure sweetness and fun to record with too.

Thanks a ton again!

Carl

 

[A Reel Person]

The 464 is only available used, on the Ebay market. The 424mkIII is still available as new, from the stores.

The 464 is a true 6x4, 4-buss mixer matrix, allowing any of 6 inputs to be routed to any of 4 trax, simultaneously, and records 4 trax at a time, max.

The 424mkIII is a 6x2 mixer matrix, and in buss mode will only record 2_pairs of 2, [1/L, 2/R, 3/L, 4/R], or 4_direct_mode recording, which bypasses the mixer section entirely, [1_input: 1_track], and Direct mode does not isolate the direct inputs from the BUSS assigned inputs, [a functional drawback]. It will, however, record 4-trax-simul, max, but the functional side of the mixer limits how the 4-trax get assigned.

So, on balance, the 464 is a "better" machine than the 424mkIII, just based on features. They are both 4-track cassette machines, though.

Last note, is that the 464 is LCD-menu functions, and the 424mkIII is a flouro-luminescent display.

The 464 is better in function than the 424mkIII, and the 464 allows you to do more complex front_end mixing and track assignment than the 424mkIII.

Good Luck

BTW, the 488 and 488mkII are respectable enough cassette 8-track Portastudios, but they both only record 4 simultaneously, and both with true 8x4 4-buss mixers.

The 238 has a full 8-simul-record capability, but requires an external mixer.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

I have tried both the digital world and the analog world, and I prefer the analog.

Sorry Carl, portastudio analog doesn't really represent "the analog world".... only a very small lo-fi part of it!

 

[DefenderOfRock]

Hey, thanks for the help Reel. Much appreciated.

Ill try and go for a 464 or 488 (eBay, of course!). The good 238s are out of my budget range for the most part. I gotta buy (bid on)preamps, compressor, eq, enhancer and multi fx too!

And what I meant about liking the "analog world" is that I have gotten much more enjoyment and satisfaction recording on cassette mediums than with computers and hd machines. And whats wrong with a little lo-fi?!

Thanks... again!

Carl

 

[A Reel Person]

If you go the way of the 488, stick with the mkII, because it has better features, overall, than the 488[std].

The 464 is pretty topline in cassette 4-track Portastudios, unless you'd consider the Tascam 246, which has all the full functionality as the 464, less the LCD screen, and plus more traditional old_style VU_meter design. Check out the 246 vs the 464, if you have time! The 246 is a front_leading favorite among vintage Portastudio enthusiasts.

Let me take a moment to also mention the Tascam 388, a 7" reel "Portastudio" on 1/4" tape, 8-tracker, with full functioned 8x8x2 mixer, that records up to 8-trax-simul. It's a real gem, and is the top of the heap in true Tascam Portastudio designs. Being 87lbs, however, Tascam wouldn't dare call it a "Porta-", so it's named the "Studio 8". It's well worth checking out, and will be a huge advancement over cassette Portastudios, in features and sound quality. DON'T buy any 4-track or 8-track cassette Portastudio, without first considering the 388, which can be had at Ebay bid prices similar to the bid prices of many 4-trackers, depending on the day.

There's Ebay as a research resource, as well as many in_depth reviews of the 246 & 388, here on HRcom. [Less reviews on the 464 here, cause it's overall a less popular & lesser sold unit, for some odd reason].

Anyway, that's the scoop for now! Good Luck!!

/DA

 

[cjacek]

Once you have ventured from the analog world into the digital domain you may never wanna go back.

I once ventured from the digital domain into the analog world and will never go back!

Daniel

 

[cjacek]

Sorry Carl, portastudio analog doesn't really represent "the analog world".... only a very small lo-fi part of it!

Sorry Bear, but even though the cassette tape is lo-fi it's still, according to its very definition, ANALOG. Carl is right.

Reel to reel machines, or ones YOU consider "true analog", are basically cassette tape decks on steroids. The same basic concept applies to both. As for theses not sounding alike is a question of fidelity and not whether it is analog or not. One is hi-fi and the other is lo-fi. Both are Analog.

Daniel

 

[cjacek]

And what I meant about liking the "analog world" is that I have gotten much more enjoyment and satisfaction recording on cassette mediums than with computers and hd machines. And whats wrong with a little lo-fi?!

Thanks... again!

Carl

No need to explain to us "ANALOG heads". We know exactly what you mean. Digital folks are the ones who don't get it. Lo-fi is cool and so is hi-fi. Both sound sweet, are fun and easy to play with.

Daniel

 

[cjacek]

Welcome back to the board Dave! (A Reel Person)

Daniel

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Sorry Bear, but even though the cassette tape is lo-fi it's still, according to its very definition, ANALOG. Carl is right.

In a technical sense, yes... but when most engineer's talk about "the analog world" they are talking about true hi-fidelity analog recorders, not portastudios.

It happens frequently that novices/rookies come up with likening their portastudios to the 4-track machines the Beatles used -- ie "Hey, the Beatles used 4-trackers for Sargeant Pepper's...!" Safe to say - there's no comparison between the 2!!!

 

[cjacek]

In a technical sense, yes... but when most engineer's talk about "the analog world" they are talking about true hi-fidelity analog recorders, not portastudios.

It happens frequently that novices/rookies come up with likening their portastudios to the 4-track machines the Beatles used -- ie "Hey, the Beatles used 4-trackers for Sargeant Pepper's...!" Safe to say - there's no comparison between the 2!!!

Yes, very true.

Daniel

 

[DigitalSmigital]

I don't think there is an eight track cassette, the heads would be to small to get a good signal printed to tape without bleeding over.

My sincerest apologies to all the 488 enthusiasts out there. I am neither an electrical engineer nor a TASCAM guru, I'm sure it is a fine machine!

When using my 4 track Portas, I do alotta solo stuff, putting bass, guitars, keys, drums, vocals for demo purposes. This means a lot of bouncing, usually externally from 424 mkIII to my 464. Even for a simple song. This certainly compromises signal quality. Would the 488 be an answer to my single-generational bounce?

I can't justify the expense of moving up to a 1" R2R just now...

 

[blewgrass]

great thread

Hi folks.. I'm an analog sound lover, stuck in a digital world... I, like many above me in this thread, long for a machine that can deliver 2" analog tape sound in the palm of my hand at a reasonable cost....

I have used a 234 tascam machine with amazingly sweet results... but this stuff was primarily 2 musicians doing a Gillian Welch/Rawlings duo sound...

I now have a DA 38 and a TMD 1k mixer and the pci/822. my bandmates like the sound of the 234 over the digital system... and... I do too...

part of it is my technical stupidity... can anyone recommend some reading for me? I have some nice tube preamps and things to fatten up my signal...

what should I do?

I hope to frequent this board and learn, learn, learn!

steve

 

[songsj]

Can't really offer any reading suggestions but maybe a little insight. i'm 47 years old and have used analog tape machines since I was 18, Everything from Tascam 16 track to the 424MKII
cassette machines. I recently bought the 788 and have gone digital. I have done a lot of recording in large digital studios but this is my first crack at engineering digital. The people I've talked to have told me one of the secrets to great digital recordings is great analog input signals. Another thing us tape guys have to get used too is the fact that digital is much quieter and every little thing sticks out. [ we call them gremlins ]. Things you might not notice on tape may jump out at you in the digital world. [ I think it has something to do with the noise floor ] It could be anything from a pick hitting the pick guard to a squeaky chain on a bass drum pedal. I like to think of recordings as kind of 3 dimensional. you have your frequency response or range, your left /right stereo field, and then what I call the biggness or kind of like the depth of field would be in a photograph. In the analog tape world we used to say that the cassette machines had pretty good fidelity and were pretty quiet but the recordings sounded kind of squashed. Imagine if you were a trio [ lets say violins ]
and you were playing in a semi circle with your chairs about
5 feet from the circle center. Everything would sound pretty tight blended and balanced. Now if you moved the chairs back to about 12 feet from the circle center and played the same parts
it would be the same music but would probably sound and feel different. This is kind of what happens when you go from analog
to digital [especially cassette porta's to digital ] It's not a bad thing just something a person needs to be aware of. Things that
rarely bothered me on analog tape are now at times a major concern. [ like a little fret buzz on a guitar or bass. ] I'm not trying to scare anyone away from digital, I love it and will never go back to tape. We just need to unerstand it is a different type of recording and make it work for us. [ Just my 2 cents ]

 

[blewgrass]

digital over analog

hmm....

I just recorded my first goof off on cakewalk through my TMD 1000 and everything seemed ok... the monitoring on the tmd1k was fine... now to figure out how to play it back on some speakers... the good news is that everything seems to be functioning correctly! yeay!

now it's time to read the manual

i'll post my update..