minimum loss patching for a tascam m512 mixer

[christiandaelemans]

hey y’all, posting again.

i’m about a week away from entering the mix-down phase of an album i’ve recorded at home. since i used an outboard preamp to record, the tascam m512 has had no input on the recorded tapes and so i feel as though i want to completely go crazy with digitizing the best possible audio quality on the final mixes.

i learned from a thread on gearspace that using the receive RCA inputs (usually filled by those black jumpers) as tape inputs will bypass the amplifier circuitry and give back a more pleasing signal, which i’ve tested and found to be true. in fact, even the manual for the m512 mentions this method for the best quality signal. but the question still remains: how do i want to digitize the final stereo 2 track??

i can either use the stereo master B outputs into an interface to digitize. OR, i can route all 8 input channels to busses 1 and 2, pan them hard left and hard right on the monitor section, and create the stereo image with the input channel pans and the PGM 1 and 2 outputs.

some of you folks know a lot more than i do about these boards and how they work, so i’d greatly appreciate some input.

TLDR: for maximum fidelity, should i digitize a mix on an m512 through the stereo master B output, or through PGM 1 and 2 after panning the 2 busses and feeding the 8 input channels through them?

 

[christiandaelemans]

okay so…. think i just answered my own post while researching. as expected, the resident expert in all things tascam M series related once again teaches me valuable information.

 

[rob aylestone]

I suspect that stereo master, is a good clue for where the designers expected the users to take the signal. In all the years I have been doing this kind of thing, the master outputs went to tape, then MD, or CD or DAT and now my preamp ins. I work on the principle that in the basic circuit diagram, the only differences in output are where the busses have individual output sections, each one optimised to a specific level - the old .7V or 1.4V levels, with either balanced or unbalanced outs to suit the devices. I never noticed ANY differences in quality - the only thing would be using the low output to drive the device expecting a hotter signal and having to add extra gain. The quality was the same but signal to noise a bit worse. However, that was very rarely an issue. None of the mixers I have ever owned had different quality at the various outputs. All I want is a recording of what comes out of the speakers. routing and panning to use individual outputs seems to me, to be totally pointless.

 

[sweetbeats]

The M-500 “STEREO” busses are not really intended for main summing…they are essentially the CONTROL ROOM and STUDIO outputs. To minimize the number of unnecessary amp stages I would use the RCV jacks for inputs, some to a pair of PGM groups, and feed the master recorder/computer using the PGM BUSS outputs. If you need more trim level coming into the M-512 I wouldn’t shy away from just using the TAPE IN jacks as designed. There’s only one amp stage additional there and it’s line level as opposed to mic level, and being able to trim the input and maximize the dynamic range is smarter gain staging than avoiding one low noise line amp stage only to have to boost another downstream and the noise at input with it. But the M-500 series design does not intent for you to use the STEREO A/B outputs to feed the master recorder. They intended for you to use a pair of PGM outputs and you monitor those via the STEREO buss.