Tascam 34B vs TEAC A3440

[Monkey Allen]

@MA: I overlooked your location, so I do understand about availability & prices when it comes to these vintage units.

Sure, you can use modern mixers- they would be convenient to hook-up your equipment to. You can download just about any Operating manual, whether its for a Yamaha, Mackie and so forth and look at the connections diagram that are typically shown within them to see what-gets-connected-where, etc..

However, modern mixers are usually more-suited to recording onto laptops/music software and only just a stereo mix. A vintage mixer, like the 2A/MB-20 was designed to record onto a 4 track multitrack, because that was the technology of its time. Thus, its has 4 channel assign buttons. Everything is arranged very neatly, and easy on the eye, the 2A/MB-20 has a sloped panel with 4 large upright VU meters, and those channel assign buttons are also seen on other larger Teac/Tascam mixers, such as the M-30, which does not have the sloped shape, but thats not really a big deal, other than basic ergonomics. The M-208 you mentioned was made later after the 2A was discontinued, and considered to be a 'higher' model, the one above the M-106 in the product line, but neither one has Upright meters, so unless someone likes that, I usually have to prop a book under my M-106 to be able to see the meters as easily as they are on the 2A/MB-20.

Just to clarify, I simply mentioned the 2A/MB-20- being that you acquired an A-3440, to point out, its the actual matching mixer. Unless you intend to get into
very complicated recording schemes, the 2A would be a very decent mixer to start out with. Its not like you are locked into using it forever. As I said, the 4 channel assigns
make things very straightforward, and the MB-20 manual shows how to make the connections between the mixer, meter, and recorder.

I have not had any issues with my 2A that have soured me as it apparently did to RR. I have no interest in any ongoing negative debate with someone of an opposing opinion, so I leave it at that, and you can decide for yourself when you're ready on which mixer would work best for you & your A-3440.

Thanks. I don't know what I want or need really. In my home studio DAW setup I record each track one at a time and mix ITB. Very standard one man show modern method. Or simplistic. The aim with the 3440 was to try to start doing the core of songs...drums, bass, rhythm guitar on tape and then to transfer those tracks into the DAW and more or less finish the rest of the song ITB. Yes, it probably sounds dumb. But there's no rules to any of this.

There's also the possibility of bouncing on the 3440 itself once or twice and adding more tracks to free tape tracks. There's even the possibility of recording on all 4 tracks of the 3440, transferring 3 of them into the DAW, leaving, say the drums or the rhythm guitar on the 3440 and recording 3 more tracks to tape and then sending them to the DAW. Making 7 tape tracks. With single clap/ click/ snare hit markers establishing (like a clapper board) the start and end points I can adjust whatever discrepancies in timing there are in the DAW capture of the tape playback and possibly sync them. Again...arguably stupid...and not authentic 4 tracking...but that's fine. I'm not The Beatles.

Another use for the 3440 was to do complete, simple 4 track songs or songs with one bounce. And to just send those 4 tracks into the DAW and mix in the DAW. Given this method I wouldn't need a mixer at all. I guess.

You're referring to RR about negative debate? I'm not debating myself. I admit I don't really know what I need or want and I'm not anti anything or negative. I'm just a home studio guy with many, many limitations trying find a sound.

By the way...I see those 2A mixers are quite simple and can be found from Japan for something like 5 or 6 hundred AUD plus a little shipping. Plus there's Tascam M-06 ST 6 channel Vintage mixers fully refurbed in Australia for around $450AUD. They have some VU action.

​

 

[BeatleFred]

Thanks. I don't know what I want or need really. In my home studio DAW setup I record each track one at a time and mix ITB. Very standard one man show modern method. Or simplistic. The aim with the 3440 was to try to start doing the core of songs...drums, bass, rhythm guitar on tape and then to transfer those tracks into the DAW and more or less finish the rest of the song ITB. Yes, it probably sounds dumb. But there's no rules to any of this.

There's also the possibility of bouncing on the 3440 itself once or twice and adding more tracks to free tape tracks. There's even the possibility of recording on all 4 tracks of the 3440, transferring 3 of them into the DAW, leaving, say the drums or the rhythm guitar on the 3440 and recording 3 more tracks to tape and then sending them to the DAW. Making 7 tape tracks. With single clap/ click/ snare hit markers establishing (like a clapper board) the start and end points I can adjust whatever discrepancies in timing there are in the DAW capture of the tape playback and possibly sync them. Again...arguably stupid...and not authentic 4 tracking...but that's fine. I'm not The Beatles.

Another use for the 3440 was to do complete, simple 4 track songs or songs with one bounce. And to just send those 4 tracks into the DAW and mix in the DAW. Given this method I wouldn't need a mixer at all. I guess.

You're referring to RR about negative debate? I'm not debating myself. I admit I don't really know what I need or want and I'm not anti anything or negative. I'm just a home studio guy with many, many limitations trying find a sound.

By the way...I see those 2A mixers are quite simple and can be found from Japan for something like 5 or 6 hundred AUD plus a little shipping. Plus there's Tascam M-06 ST 6 channel Vintage mixers fully refurbed in Australia for around $450AUD. They have some VU action.

​

 

[BeatleFred]

I was referring to RR, in his comments above mine where he mentioned his opposing viewpoint on the 2A.

I think if you can appreciate a vintage recorder like the A-3440, you would probably appreciate a vintage mixer to go with it as well, though I am twisting anyone's arm to get one. I just happen to like it, and think its a good starting point for anyone who does not need anything over-complicated and can handle the basics of 4 track recording. But not all 2A's come with the MB-20 meter bridge, which is very useful to have, so given the choice, its better to acquire one that comes with the 2A. There are quite a selection of Tascam mixers, the M-06 is a bit limited, but I have an M-1516 in my collection, made in the early-mid 90's that can easily handle an A-3440. The smaller version of it would be the M-1508. The nice thing about these units is you wont get a hernia lifting/carrying them, by that point in time, they were getting lighter, so if you happen to see any available, thats a very decent model to consider.

 

[Monkey Allen]

I was referring to RR, in his comments above mine where he mentioned his opposing viewpoint on the 2A.

I think if you can appreciate a vintage recorder like the A-3440, you would probably appreciate a vintage mixer to go with it as well, though I am twisting anyone's arm to get one. I just happen to like it, and think its a good starting point for anyone who does not need anything over-complicated and can handle the basics of 4 track recording. But not all 2A's come with the MB-20 meter bridge, which is very useful to have, so given the choice, its better to acquire one that comes with the 2A. There are quite a selection of Tascam mixers, the M-06 is a bit limited, but I have an M-1516 in my collection, made in the early-mid 90's that can easily handle an A-3440. The smaller version of it would be the M-1508. The nice thing about these units is you wont get a hernia lifting/carrying them, by that point in time, they were getting lighter, so if you happen to see any available, thats a very decent model to consider.

Cheers, thanks again. Sure I'd like a vintage mixer of some kind. In Australia such things aren't as common as in the States or Europe or Japan I guess. And when they do come up they carry a hefty cost. Especially these days. From what I gather the vintage stuff used to be almost given away. Kind of like vinyl records in the 90s where CDs just took over, generally. It may be sacrilege but if I end up with a mixer it'll probably have to be a modern Yamaha MG16 or something.

 

[BeatleFred]

Cheers, thanks again. Sure I'd like a vintage mixer of some kind. In Australia such things aren't as common as in the States or Europe or Japan I guess. And when they do come up they carry a hefty cost. Especially these days. From what I gather the vintage stuff used to be almost given away. Kind of like vinyl records in the 90s where CDs just took over, generally. It may be sacrilege but if I end up with a mixer it'll probably have to be a modern Yamaha MG16 or something.

As I mentioned, just download a copy of the Yamaha op manual and see if it seems compatible for your needs. It will be fine for computer recording, whereas a vintage mixer would be better suited for a vintage open reel multitrack.

 

[TalismanRich]

Remember that those old 70s Tascam mixers like the Model 2 don't supply phantom power, even the Model 5, which has XLR inputs vs the 1/4" inputs of the Model 2. That means using either battery powered electret and dynamic mics, or buying phantom supplies or extra preamps if you want to use today's condensers. Back in the day, we only had Shure 57s and 58s and Senn 421 so the Model 5 worked great with a Tascam 80-8 or 3340.

If I was trying find something to pair with a 3340, I would be looking for a basic 4 buss mixer. Years ago, I bought a Yamaha MX12/4. You have 4 sub outputs and 2 main outputs, and it's been great for feeding a pair of PA speaker and sending a clean feed to a recorder. At one point I came close to grabbing a MG24/14 but the by that time, I had no need for the extra channels.

 

[sweetbeats]

I personally would not spend money on a Model 2 series mixer. @BeatleFred I know you like ‘em, so please receive this as my opinion and nothing more. I appreciate they are a period companion to the A3440. That’s pretty cool. And the fact they are basic in features can be a real benefit for somebody that doesn’t want or need more features, or finds more features a challenge. But for the market price they are at these days? I don’t get it. I just don’t. They are noisy, limited, and have relatively low headroom. Not all contemporary or more contemporary compact mixers are without mix groups. Lots of small-format modern mixers have 4 busses. I’d take this one all day long if I was looking for something to mate to a 4-track:

https://ebay.us/m/soWei2

Well-built, features to grow into, main buss and two sub groups, inserts. HPF, channel kill switches, PFL, phantom power, and enough channels to have for input sources and multichannel returns, can use the AUX buss for tape cue…there are even compressors on input channels 1-4. All for $125USD. These are much easier to find, again they are well-made, are still basic enough to not be overwhelming, but have everything you need for proper multitracking and mixing; a great little mixer. That’s just one example.

 

[Monkey Allen]

I personally would not spend money on a Model 2 series mixer. @BeatleFred I know you like ‘em, so please receive this as my opinion and nothing more. I appreciate they are a period companion to the A3440. That’s pretty cool. And the fact they are basic in features can be a real benefit for somebody that doesn’t want or need more features, or finds more features a challenge. But for the market price they are at these days? I don’t get it. I just don’t. They are noisy, limited, and have relatively low headroom. Not all contemporary or more contemporary compact mixers are without mix groups. Lots of small-format modern mixers have 4 busses. I’d take this one all day long if I was looking for something to mate to a 4-track:

https://ebay.us/m/soWei2

Well-built, features to grow into, main buss and two sub groups, inserts. HPF, channel kill switches, PFL, phantom power, and enough channels to have for input sources and multichannel returns, can use the AUX buss for tape cue…there are even compressors on input channels 1-4. All for $125USD. These are much easier to find, again they are well-made, are still basic enough to not be overwhelming, but have everything you need for proper multitracking and mixing; a great little mixer. That’s just one example.

That mixer is from around 2012. So, would I be silly to assume the current iterations...the Yamaha MG12 and the 16 would do as good a job? In your opinion.

 

[BeatleFred]

The Yamaha mixers look like a good choice. As I always do first, I go straight to the online Op manual, and check how well the manual is written and the overall connection diagram- both of which are fine in the MG124C.

My question based on a quick glance at the diagram: if this mixer was substituted in place of a 2A/MB-20, how would the A-3440 connect to it so that All 4 tracks can be recorded onto simultaneously? I only see one pair of group outs. As with virtually all modern-day mixers, I only see 2 tracks recorders, so it would be fine with something like a Tascam 32 or 22-2 etc.. but since the recorder is a 4 track, I am interested to know- despite the Yamaha being less noisy and so forth- how does it make multitrack recording & channel assigns easier or better vs the 2A/MB-20?

 

[sweetbeats]

@BeatleFred Just use the group 1-2 outs as well as the main stereo out for four discrete feeds…this is no different essentially than what you would be doing with the Model 2 series, just using the assign buttons and pan controls to fully utilize the four main output channels. You still have two AUX busses for cue feeds during tracking, OR alternatively as multitrack feeds, which the Model 2 does not have. On the 12 channel model I would use channels 1-6 for sources, and channels 9-12 as multitrack returns during overdubbing. The Yamaha mixer has more output busses than the Model 2. Plus it has insert points on some of the inputs which, in a pinch, can serve as direct outputs. The Model 2 series mixers are very, very basic. The Yamaha mixer has everything the Model 2 series has plus much, much, much more functionality. And, again, that’s just one example. There are many contemporary compact mixers that have suitable functionality for four-track recording well beyond the Model 2 series. Again, not saying the Model 2 series isn’t a perfect solution for some folks, it’s just with the sonic performance and feature limitations along with the inflated market value, it seems to me there are many better options. I gravitate toward Yamaha based on my own experience with how they are built, how they perform/sound, and generally a great features per cost ratio. So that’s where I looked first.

@Monkey Allen sure you can use the current product line, I was just trying to identify a more cost-conscience option.

 

[BeatleFred]

Thanks for the info, SB, yes- looks like the Yamaha has many features, I imagine the latest version if someone wanted a new unit would be the current MG12XU, 4-buss.