Tasacam 244 questions

[RFR]

Early on I did a lot of stuff on a 246. I would imagune it being similar to the 244.

I don't remember specifics, but remember it to be an extremely versatile and simple to use machine.

It's only four tracks for God's sake.
A half an hour messing with it, even without a manual, is adequate time to figure it all out.

 

[fat_fleet]

No, it's not.

Yes it is.

Only to those who cut their teeth on input-to-track architecture, the dumbed down design format found in digital, where supposedly "input-side" mixing is irrelevant due to theoretically unlimited track count. (i.e., fix-it-in-the-mix philosophy). In input-to-track architecture, inputs usually correspond to their numbered recording track, and/or one input may only be assigned to one track at a time. That's the rule in the majority of digital based recording setups, Porta or otherwise.

Sorry, I don't have any strong "analog vs digital" leanings (more of a writer and a player than a techie) but I would suggest the "input-to-track architecture" you describe is not unique to the digital domain and goes back a little further than the last 15 years. For example, I started out on a Tascam 234, and subsequently owned and used a Fostex X-15, a Yamaha MT2X, two more 234s, a Porta-02, and most recently a 424mkiii. None of them had on board front-end mix capacity (that I was aware of), and so I've never expected it from a 4-track tape deck. To me it's unusual in that I've seen more decks without it than with it.

No, it doesn't.

Hm, maybe I could have phrased that better.. But mixing out front, you're stuck with your decisions. I get how premixing six mics to two tracks can be critical when you're dealing with track restrictions, but with a simple stereo pair guess I don't see the point of limiting yourself by pre-panning anything.

This is basically correct, with a caveat, that being a failure to recognize the difference between channels and tracks.

Inputs, EQ, Aux Sends and Pan are part of the mixer subsystem, which in the case of the 244 mixes from 4-inputs to 2-(output) channels, aka 2-busses, aka stereo-L/R. The L/R mix from the mixer side feeds the 2-simul recording capablility of the 4-track recorder side of the Portastudio architecture.

In your this scenario, both Input Channels are assigned (thru Pan) to Track 1.

The 244 mixer is a 4x2 (stereo) mixer, albeit a good one in a small fomat. It mixes from 4 inputs (Tape/or Mic-Lineto 2 Busses. That's all it does.
Buss Left from the mixer feeds only Tape Tracks 1 and 3.
Buss Right from the mixer feeds only Tape Tracks 2 and 4.
You may have Channels 1 and 2 plugged with inputs, and you may have Tracks 1 and 2 armed to record, but if you pan Mixer Channels 1 and 2 hard left, they essentially feed ONLY Tape Track 1.

The mixer channel does not equal the tape track in this architecture, but they work together inside the box.
A combination of which tape tracks are armed to record and Pan settings on the mixer will determine which tracks get recorded.
Once the 4 tracks are laid out on tape, the Pan controls in the final mix determine the spread L-R of the 4 tape tracks to the outside world.

I hope this info offers clarity and not confusion to the design and operation of the vintage 244, which is generally regarded as a fine unit.

Thanks, that's basically what the manual says. It does indeed look like a "fine unit". Sorry if I did not convey that effectively, I was just surprised by the input mixing.

Much unlike digital, tho'...

Whatevs, Pepsi vs Coke..

 

[4tracker]

This is patently wrong. [EDIT: however, the 4-simul setting does record to all 4 tracks simultaneously.]


Also completely wrong.

Hm, true. That's how I usually do it, but I think it goes back to the channel vs track you mention. I usually just plug the 1/4" input into the track I'm recording onto to keep things simple and linear, but you're right, you can actually plug into any input and route the signal using the pan knobs.

Thanks for answering the PMs. The phantom power issue is confusing. I'll write Rolls and ask them what's up.

 

[famous beagle]

Sorry, I don't have any strong "analog vs digital" leanings (more of a writer and a player than a techie) but I would suggest the "input-to-track architecture" you describe is not unique to the digital domain and goes back a little further than the last 15 years. For example, I started out on a Tascam 234, and subsequently owned and used a Fostex X-15, a Yamaha MT2X, two more 234s, a Porta-02, and most recently a 424mkiii. None of them had on board front-end mix capacity (that I was aware of), and so I've never expected it from a 4-track tape deck. To me it's unusual in that I've seen more decks without it than with it.

The 234 doesn't have a built-in mixer, so that doesn't apply. I haven't used the Porta-02 (I don't think), so I can't speak for that, but the 424mkiii most certainly has that capability. It, along with the 414, has the ability to record in direct mode (i.e., CH 1 input to TRK 1) or buss mode (i.e., CH 1 input to which track you want it depending on how you pan the input). In fact, you can see it right here on the front page of the 424mkiii manual in the Record Function section. Each track has a three-position switch for DIRECT, SAFE (no record), or BUSS (L for odd and R for even).

Hm, maybe I could have phrased that better.. But mixing out front, you're stuck with your decisions. I get how premixing six mics to two tracks can be critical when you're dealing with track restrictions, but with a simple stereo pair guess I don't see the point of limiting yourself by pre-panning anything.

You're misunderstanding this. It has nothing to do with mixing, really. You're not stuck with anything, any more than you're stuck with a single guitar on TRK 1 if you record it directly to it with the CH 1 input. All it's doing is giving you the option, for example, to use all four inputs (or even all six inputs on some machine) to pre-mix (not mix) a bunch of instruments onto one track instead of having to use an external sub-mixer for that purpose.

Once you record those 4 instruments (let's say it's a rhythm guitar, bongos, triangle, and shaker) to TRK 1, you can freely pan that track anywhere you want when you mix the song down.

Again, I don't know of any machine that allows direct-to-track recording and doesn't also allow buss recording. The only reason you'd need direct-to-track recording is if you're recording all four tracks at once. If you're recording only one or two tracks at once, then buss mode and direct mode will both accomplish the same exact thing.

The difference is, again, when you want to premix something. Let's say you're tracking a drum kit with 4 mics and you want them to be on a stereo pair of Tracks 1 and 2. If your machine didn't have a buss mode, you'd have to use an external mic mixer to do this because you would have four mics that need to be mixed down to two channels. So you'd plug your four mics into it and adjust the panning/level of each, then send the two L-R cables out of it and into the CH 1 and 2 inputs of your 4 track.

With buss mode, though, you don't need the external mixer at all to accomplish the same thing. You just plug the 4 mics into the CH 1-4 inputs, adjust the level and panning, and set TRK 1 to record buss L and TRK 2 to record buss R. Same exact result, but no external mixer needed!

 

[A Reel Person]

Sorry for generalizing a bit too much.

I'm aware of the X15, Porta02, etc., being channel-to-track assignment. Thank you for the relevant response.

Pre-mixing and buss assignment are moot points in the digital era, I think was my point & hence the (almost) lost concept of input-side mixing. However, I still see a high utility in putting a mixer in front of a recorder. No offense intended.

Just to reinforce the concept that the 244's a 4-input mixer that mixes to 2 outputs (L-R/stereo/2-buss), and the recorder section records either 1, 2 or 4 tracks simultaneously, but not 3. The mixer may vary each input between Buss L and Buss R. Buss L assigns to Tracks 1 & 3, and Buss R assigns to Tracks 2 & 4.

When you record up to 2 tracks simultaneously, the recorder is in Buss mode, which get's it's inputs from the L/R busses of the stereo mixer. When you record to 4-Simul, the recorder switches into Direct mode, where each numbered mixer channel assigns exclusively to it's like numbered tape track.

To record a stereo track, flip both Rec Funct levers to the left (or both right), assigning to tracks 1 & 2 (or 3 & 4, respectively), then use the mixer to vary your inputs however you'd like between buss R and L, and therefore tracks 1 and 2 (or 3 & 4 if the levers are both to the right).

If you want any input exclusively on it's own track, pan hard to that side. L= 1 & 3 and R= 2 & 4, unless of course you switch to 4-simul, then use the numbered input for the track.

Sorry if I overstated my case or was redundant.

 

[sweetbeats]

Just to spin off of something Beagle said, the 234 DOES have a basic built-in 4x2 mixer, but only on the output side; it is a monitor mixer for cue mixes but can also serve to execute basic mixdown of the 4 tracks to stereo. I just wanted to toss that out here...Beagle is right when he states "The 234 doesn't have a built-in mixer...", because this thread is all about the front-end mixing at the tracking stage. The 234 does have individual unbalanced mic amps, one for each track, and individual line inputs, one for each track, but each input is directly tied to its corresponding numbered tape track (input #1 goes to track #1, etc.). So the 234 can function as a standalone device since the individual inputs have level controls, but for any summing or bussing of sources you would have to have a mixer in front of the 234...the 244 has this functionality onboard, which is what we are talking about...and I mean no offense but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around why there is any debate going on in this discussion...summing and bussing of sources at the tracking stage has been a mainstay of the process since somebody came up with the brilliant idea of being able to mix and sum multiple mics or other sources onto a mono recorder...decades and decades ago. And the naming and control conventions have been fairly universal since the early 70s if not before, and are reflected on the control surface of the 244 and many, many other devices. I think...I think I'm thinking too hard.

 

[fat_fleet]

The 234 doesn't have a built-in mixer, so that doesn't apply. I haven't used the Porta-02 (I don't think), so I can't speak for that, but the 424mkiii most certainly has that capability. It, along with the 414, has the ability to record in direct mode (i.e., CH 1 input to TRK 1) or buss mode (i.e., CH 1 input to which track you want it depending on how you pan the input). In fact, you can see it right here on the front page of the 424mkiii manual in the Record Function section. Each track has a three-position switch for DIRECT, SAFE (no record), or BUSS (L for odd and R for even).

I had a feeling the 424mkiii could do something like that, which is why I added the "that I was aware of" caveat. FWIW it seemed pretty flexible for a consumer level deck.

You're misunderstanding this. It has nothing to do with mixing, really. You're not stuck with anything, any more than you're stuck with a single guitar on TRK 1 if you record it directly to it with the CH 1 input. All it's doing is giving you the option, for example, to use all four inputs (or even all six inputs on some machine) to pre-mix (not mix) a bunch of instruments onto one track instead of having to use an external sub-mixer for that purpose.

Once you record those 4 instruments (let's say it's a rhythm guitar, bongos, triangle, and shaker) to TRK 1, you can freely pan that track anywhere you want when you mix the song down.

Again, I don't know of any machine that allows direct-to-track recording and doesn't also allow buss recording. The only reason you'd need direct-to-track recording is if you're recording all four tracks at once. If you're recording only one or two tracks at once, then buss mode and direct mode will both accomplish the same exact thing.

The difference is, again, when you want to premix something. Let's say you're tracking a drum kit with 4 mics and you want them to be on a stereo pair of Tracks 1 and 2. If your machine didn't have a buss mode, you'd have to use an external mic mixer to do this because you would have four mics that need to be mixed down to two channels. So you'd plug your four mics into it and adjust the panning/level of each, then send the two L-R cables out of it and into the CH 1 and 2 inputs of your 4 track.

With buss mode, though, you don't need the external mixer at all to accomplish the same thing. You just plug the 4 mics into the CH 1-4 inputs, adjust the level and panning, and set TRK 1 to record buss L and TRK 2 to record buss R. Same exact result, but no external mix

Sorry, can you be more specific about exactly what I said that you're arguing with??
I suspect we're hung up on semantics.