Looking for a 4-track recorder... Need advice!

T

thefanbelow

New member
Hey everyone, I am an acoustic guitarist.. mostly do fingerpicking or light strumming just me my acoustic and some vocals. I currently have a shure 57, a mxl 990 and 991, a m audio pre amp and record on garageband... very modest gear. my music is more on the "lo-fi" sound as it sounds better IMO with more grit than studio polish. I have a limited budget, around $500 and was thinking about getting a new pre-amp because my 57 wont drive without hiss as the m audio has basically no gain and maybe a better condenser. i've been suggested a 4 track because my music has the sound (of course, completely different talent) of iron & wine, elliott smith, bon iver, neutral milk hotel.. stuff like that. curious what people would suggest, and what 4 track they think? i've been told a tascam 424mkii would be perfect for me. thanks. also, if anyone wants any reference, not to plug myself, but if you search "the circumference" on soundcloud, i'm there
 
I'm an acoustic guitarist as well and I think you might want to reconsider the Tascam 424mkii. In the first place, you'll be dealing with a machine that is now obsolete in terms of technology and repairability. In the second place, on the budget you indicate, you have so many more options.
I've been doing home recording for over 30 years and the problem with using a lo-fi setup is that that is the best sound you will ever be able to achieve. I've been using a Zoom R8 for the past 8 months and consider it one of the best purchases I've made. For more information, I recommend the review I posted on harmony-central.com: Recording & Production: Zoom R8: Swiss Army Knife of Multitrackers | Harmony Central
The rule of thumb is that when laying down tracks, you want to record the best signal you can. The Zoom has the capability to dither down the signal to a lo-fi quality in the mastering without effecting the basic tracks. Moreover, with built-in microphones and battery operation, it offers you options for field recording you won't get with the Tascam unit.
Plus, with a street price of $300, the Zoom will not only NOT bust your budget, but leave you some money left over for a good outboard pre-amp [PreSonus and ART both make some preamps which are good quality, yet inexpensive pre-amps] plus some beer and pizza money.
 
Thanks for the advice. This may be an ignorant question, so again correct me if I'm wrong. I assume that using this will allow me just to achieve a more limited sound than my DAW would allow? Let me rephrase if I am misleading. I am looking to get that lo fi sound without having to do it artificially through EQing, so if all the Zoom does is record my music at just a higher quality than a Tascam (but lesser than onto a DAW), but simultaneously does not have that lo-fi sound, what exactly is the advantage of this cause I can record into my DAW whenever.. I want that Springsteen "Nebraska" sound
 
I can't speak from personal experience, but I've heard the Tascam 424 is a beast... Also, the Tascam 244 and 246 are supposed to be amazing (if you can get one for a good price). In terms of a "4-track," I'm assuming you mean a cassette recorder? The 57 is a damn good mic for what you are looking to do...
 
Good questions. Without knowing which M-Audio pre you are using [and how old it is], I can't tell you if the resolution of the Zoom R8 is better or lesser quality than what you are currently using. I can tell you the Zoom offers four options for recording resolution: 16-bit, 44.1kHz [CD quality]; 16-bit, 48kHz; 24-bit, 44.1kHz; 24-bit, 48kHz [DVD quality]. I do know the current M-Audio MobilePre mkII offers 24-bit, 48kHz resolution so it would be the same as what is offered by the Zoom R8. So unless your DAW is capable of recording at 24-bit, 96kHz [blue-ray quality], I don't think you're can say the Zoom offers limited sound.
The problem is, as I indicated before, is that if you go for a lo-fi sound quality when laying down the tracks--that is all you are going to have. And if you are unhappy with the results, you have to start all over. The plus to recording high quality tracks and then dithering it down into lo-fi is that you can then actually test it to see if it works, and if it doesn't, you haven't lost anything. Plus you then have the versatility of exploring what I like to call "happy accidents."
I had such an accident about 8 years ago on a project--a song I had written which I had envisioned in a John Prine/Phil Ochs type of satire. But in the process of mixing, I had added a bunch of echo and wound up with a nice little rockabilly Carl Perkins sound that worked with the song and really [at least in my way of thinking] made it 10 times better.
The other negative is that, if you are like most of us, you don't have unlimited funds and can't use this purchase as a tax write-off, so $500 is a lot of money to be spending for what is essentially a one-trick pony.
 
I'm way with Yeshua here. First off it's not hard to turn something to lo-fi. But if you buy something that will only do lo-fi, the very second you want something better (and you will eventually) then you're screwed.
Also .... nowadays there's simply no reason to limit yourself to 4 tracks. 8 tracks is cheap as hell so you may as well go with that.
You'll still be able to lo-fi to your hearts content and when you outgrow that limiting sound ( and you will) you won't own a boat anchor.
 
Ignatius- said:
I can't speak from personal experience, but I've heard the Tascam 424 is a beast... Also, the Tascam 244 and 246 are supposed to be amazing (if you can get one for a good price). In terms of a "4-track," I'm assuming you mean a cassette recorder? The 57 is a damn good mic for what you are looking to do...
Click to expand...

Yeah I am just having so much trouble finding the 424 especially one that seems reliable and working. Are the 244/246 upgrades to the 424 or different types? ANd I mean cassette recorder. Would you recommend having 2 57's or just 1?
 
YeshuasFan said:
Good questions. Without knowing which M-Audio pre you are using [and how old it is], I can't tell you if the resolution of the Zoom R8 is better or lesser quality than what you are currently using. I can tell you the Zoom offers four options for recording resolution: 16-bit, 44.1kHz [CD quality]; 16-bit, 48kHz; 24-bit, 44.1kHz; 24-bit, 48kHz [DVD quality]. I do know the current M-Audio MobilePre mkII offers 24-bit, 48kHz resolution so it would be the same as what is offered by the Zoom R8. So unless your DAW is capable of recording at 24-bit, 96kHz [blue-ray quality], I don't think you're can say the Zoom offers limited sound.
The problem is, as I indicated before, is that if you go for a lo-fi sound quality when laying down the tracks--that is all you are going to have. And if you are unhappy with the results, you have to start all over. The plus to recording high quality tracks and then dithering it down into lo-fi is that you can then actually test it to see if it works, and if it doesn't, you haven't lost anything. Plus you then have the versatility of exploring what I like to call "happy accidents."
I had such an accident about 8 years ago on a project--a song I had written which I had envisioned in a John Prine/Phil Ochs type of satire. But in the process of mixing, I had added a bunch of echo and wound up with a nice little rockabilly Carl Perkins sound that worked with the song and really [at least in my way of thinking] made it 10 times better.
The other negative is that, if you are like most of us, you don't have unlimited funds and can't use this purchase as a tax write-off, so $500 is a lot of money to be spending for what is essentially a one-trick pony.
Click to expand...

Here are some specs for my pre. Resolution: 16-bit
Sampling frequencies (kHz): 8, 9.6, 11.025, 12, 16, 22.05, 24, 32, 44.1, 48 . Since I am working on GB I have had trouble getting that lo-fi genuine sound without boosting treble and making things just sound off, it all lacks that warmth and natural feeling that IMO a plug in cannot recreate. If you wouldnt mind going to the soundcloud I posted on my link and listening to the "honest hands demo" and telling me if you believe that has a lo fi feel.. it is a demo I recorded w/ no EQing and I believe its the closest I can naturally get to lo fi but still the guitar lacks that encompassing warmth. I do really appreciate the advice and will continue to look into making my music digitally more like that but I am still intrigued at least by the tascam.

Lt. Bob said:
I'm way with Yeshua here. First off it's not hard to turn something to lo-fi. But if you buy something that will only do lo-fi, the very second you want something better (and you will eventually) then you're screwed.
Also .... nowadays there's simply no reason to limit yourself to 4 tracks. 8 tracks is cheap as hell so you may as well go with that.
You'll still be able to lo-fi to your hearts content and when you outgrow that limiting sound ( and you will) you won't own a boat anchor.
Click to expand...

What do you recommend?
 
thefanbelow said:
What do you recommend?
Click to expand...
I don't ...... my recording rig has been the same for a number of years so I'm not up on what the latest models are.
I read about them but can't speak from experience so I'm useless for ya' in terms of a specific reccomendation.
But the Zoom R8 someone mentioned earlier gets good reviews and I know there's quite a few others.

Personally, I'd get together a list of stuff available in your price range and then do a thread listing the possibilities and let people jump in with "Don't get the XYZ, it's crap!" ... and ..... "I have a ZXY and it's awesome and has a lo-fi feature!"
 
You seem to have set your heart on a 4 track portastudio. They turn up all over places like ebay. At the moment, as an example, there's this one, this one, this one and this one. They'll all do what you're looking for.
It's obviously up to you. If all you're doing is guitar and vocals in a 'lo~fi' way, any 4 track should do.
I must admit, I never buy anything with resale value in mind. Any purchase I make is with dead money, that is, once I've bought the stuff, that's it, that money's gone. Forever. I haven't got time to pine after it. It was there to spend. I spent it ! It's like buying a bar of chocolate or a blank CD.
Home recorders are like winos and junkies in a way. When we want to buy 'the stuff' {ie, new gear}, we'll find the money. :D
 
grimtraveller said:
You seem to have set your heart on a 4 track portastudio. They turn up all over places like ebay. At the moment, as an example, there's this one, this one, this one and this one. They'll all do what you're looking for.
It's obviously up to you. If all you're doing is guitar and vocals in a 'lo~fi' way, any 4 track should do.
I must admit, I never buy anything with resale value in mind. Any purchase I make is with dead money, that is, once I've bought the stuff, that's it, that money's gone. Forever. I haven't got time to pine after it. It was there to spend. I spent it ! It's like buying a bar of chocolate or a blank CD.
Home recorders are like winos and junkies in a way. When we want to buy 'the stuff' {ie, new gear}, we'll find the money. :D
Click to expand...

as always I find myself in agreement with the grim reaper here ..... I don't even sell stuff I've bought because if I do the money's spent and I have nothing.

Thats's why i have a roomful of collectible gear.
 
thefanbelow said:
Here are some specs for my pre. Resolution: 16-bit
Sampling frequencies (kHz): 8, 9.6, 11.025, 12, 16, 22.05, 24, 32, 44.1, 48 . Since I am working on GB I have had trouble getting that lo-fi genuine sound without boosting treble and making things just sound off, it all lacks that warmth and natural feeling that IMO a plug in cannot recreate. If you wouldnt mind going to the soundcloud I posted on my link and listening to the "honest hands demo" and telling me if you believe that has a lo fi feel.. it is a demo I recorded w/ no EQing and I believe its the closest I can naturally get to lo fi but still the guitar lacks that encompassing warmth. I do really appreciate the advice and will continue to look into making my music digitally more like that but I am still intrigued at least by the tascam.

What do you recommend?
Click to expand...
But the treble boost is part of what makes it lo-fi--because back in the 60s, a lot of music was mixed and mastered in stereo and mono. The mono mixes always had the treble boosted to make up for the compression and lack of high end found in AM radio--since most music played on radio was played on AM and the boosted high end was necessary for the music to be able to cut through the static and bandwith noise. What we consider warmth is what came from playing back those records on a stereo system or the stereo mix that was cleaner and had a wider frequency response--restoring the low end and low-mids that were lost in the mono mix.
Now if you are simply wanting to restore some warmth to the recording process that is lost because of recording to a digital format and make it sound more "analog," you might want to consider simply adding a tube preamp into the signal chain before the interface, especially if you are using a condensor mic because condensor mics tend to behave a lot like the piezo transducers in undersaddle pickups and tend to boost the high mids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top