Tascam 38 - Can it work with modern mixers/mic pres?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoeT38
  • Start date Start date
J

JoeT38

New member
Hi All,

First post on here although I've read quite a few threads over the years!

I've recently bought a Tascam 38 - it's fully working and set up, I bought it from a professional technician and tested it all before bringing it home, etc.

However, before I can put it to use myself I need a way to record into it and mix/monitor out!

Any suggestions would be welcome - but I am particularly interested if the Tascam will work with a modern analogue mixer. I understand that it uses a non-standard (by current standards) voltage but I'm not really sure what this means in terms of compatibility.

In terms of what I'd like to be able to do:

Record onto four separate tracks simultaneously (eight would be lovely but not essential)
Power condenser mics
Monitor all tracks whilst recording and overdubbing (headphones and speakers)
Hear and mix all eight recorded tracks down to a master stereo - be able to adjust levels, panning, EQ, and preferably have an auxiliary send (for reverb) and amazing if it has some onboard compression.

I would really like to be able to mix the eight outputs from the Tascam through an SSL Big Six (I don't own one, and I'll have to sell a few bits - but it looks like it will fit the bill for the mixing/monitoring side if compatible) - would that work? I know it might be simpler to pick a mixer from the time (Tascam M30, etc.) but I can't find any available at the moment and the chances of getting a fully working one are slim. I'd much prefer to combine my Tascam 38 with something I know is just going to work out the box.

In terms of going into the Tascam - what do I need? Can I use my existing Focusrite Clarett 4pre purely as the mic pres to record with? On the way in I only really want to be able to set levels and power condenser mics - I don't really need all the features of a mixer on the way in (panning, EQ, etc.) - I'd rather apply all that once the signal is already recorded if possible.

More than happy to clarify anything if needed and thank you in advance for taking the time to read and consider.

Best,

Joe
 
From memory of my 38 days, the connections on the 38 are all RCA IN/OUTs - a pair for each track. I used mine with a Fostex 450 Mixer (no tape deck) which had 8 matching sets of RCA IN/OUTs. This SSL Big Six doesn't seem to accommodate the 38's connection requirements. There are lots of inserts though, and individual channel compressors.

Here's the 38's rear panel connections :

38 rear panel.webp



Here's a 450 Mixer like my old one. Notice the RCA Tape In/OUTs at the top of each channel - very handy for a 38.

 
Last edited:
spantini said:
From memory of my 38 days, the connections on the 38 are all RCA IN/OUTs - a pair for each track. I used mine with a Fostex 450 Mixer (no tape deck) which had 8 matching sets of RCA IN/OUTs. This SSL Big Six doesn't seem to accommodate the 38's connection requirements. There are lots of inserts though, and individual channel compressors.

Here's the 38's rear panel connections :

View attachment 144104


Here's a 450 Mixer like my old one. Notice the RCA Tape In/OUTs at the top of each channel - very handy for a 38.

Click to expand...
That's very helpful - thanks for pointing me at the fostex - that could be a good cheap option to get things started!

Almost certainly a silly question but is it not possible to use RCA to 1/4" jack cables to go from the outputs of the Tascam to the input of each channel of the SSL? Or will the voltage thing become an issue?

Best,

Joe
 
RCA to 1/4 would probably work but the SSL Big Six doesn't look like it's got enough inputs - on the rear, anyway - unless you combine the Analogue & Stereo for 8 total. You could run all 8 from the 38 into each channel's mic inputs, but then you're stuck for return outputs back to tape to complete the loop.

I'm just saying all this based on looking at the manual, so I couldn't say for sure it can't be done.

The 450 mixer has no effects, so you'd need some outboard units - Reverb & Compression anyway.
 
What “voltage thing” are you talking about? The 38 is standard -10dBv line level standard…nothing odd about it.
 
You’ve read about the two versions of line level. 0VU being .775v or the 1.2v +4dB level. However, the problem was also that the so called pro level was balanced, and the consumer level was unbalanced. The mismatch in level, was often recoverable by shoving the output fader a bit, but was made worse by not using a transformer to create the balanced connection, which if you just do the pin shorting thing - as in connecting pins 1 and 3 together, also drops the level. If you buy an oldie bit goodie big mixer, you might struggle to get enough output level.

A word of warning. The big mixers can be a world of pain. What are you like doing continual repairs? You will need spares and endless patience, plus in the setting up phase, lots of soldering to do, as lots of them do not have individual sockets like we do nowadays.
 
"As for the levels, you are right, the consumer and semiprofessional grade Japanese machines used -10dBV (0,3V) unbalanced in and outs, and 0dBu (0,775V) balanced ones. The modern mixers use other levels."

"I only turned it on and it lights up, I do not have any mixer yet nor any 2x Tascam DX-4D DBX, is there a non Tascam brand that might work ? Reading through the manual there are issues if the voltages are different, that I noticed also from other forums on the net."

These are from the Tascam forum but I've also read similar things elsewhere - the Tascam uses -10dBV (0.3V) for its ins/outs which is non standard in mixers now. But if I plug a modern mixer/preamps into the Tascam and the ins/outs voltages are not matched I'm not sure whether this will mean:

It works just fine and the voltage thing is not a big deal
It's a bit louder or quieter than it ideally would be
It doesn't work and no sound will come out
Components start blowing up, smoking, and catching fire
 
Keep in mind that these differences are a fader prod apart. a rise of 2dB is difficult for some people to hear as an increase or decrease. The usual 'rule' is that a device from that era with phono style RCA connectors will connect to any other similarly equipped device. In those days we had the european gear with their ins and outs around 15mV, the Japanese kits at between 300 and a volt, and the gear sort of worked. Most mixers in home studios had plenty of level available, so would drive the 'pro' level gear, and the pro level outputs would be either padded, or often just kept lower to drive the recorders that didn't need the higher level. Plugging in an old DIN equipped cassette deck was a bit quiet, as were guitars - but you develop ways to cope. Often DI boxes were handy ways to manage conversions.

Old kit goes bang sometimes. My fruitless reel to reel experience reminded me of that. A Ferrograph that had gunge leaked inside, a Revox that filled the room with smoke. A bit of lighting gear that went bang so loud we all jumped. Level problems can always be fixed with more gear, or bodges. Old mixers with plenty of inputs can have the line ins that are not sufficient for decent level through the +4 input shoved into mic level channels. If you get some great equipment, there are always ways. Apart from digital.
I bought a Yamaha generation 1 digital mixer, that Kate Bush had in her studio. It lit up like an aircraft control panel - amazing. It used other yamaha digital gear using DB25 connectors using a totally unique data format. It had three +4 inputs. They were the only ones I could use. It went into a skip as I tried for a year to give it away.
 
Okay so we’re just talking about the typical differences between -10dBv unbalanced and +4dBu balanced standards. No big deal. IMO most modern equipment interfaces fine with either standard…you don’t have to push the fader up if the load device has a trim or sensitive adjustment at the input, and most do, and are designed to accommodate the range that includes both standards.

To the OP one of the problems with most contemporary analog or hybrid mixing consoles is the are not designed around the intention of interfacing with an analog multitrack machine. The main feature missing is discrete outputs…if you have an analog 8-track machine then it is beneficial to have at least 8 outputs plus a main buss for monitoring, either mono summing outputs or direct outputs or a combination. Secondarily, analog recording consoles from years past often had the means of inline monitoring where there are dedicated TAPE inputs and you can flip those to be the input channel main input, or if the channel is monitoring a mic or line input there is a way to independently monitor the the tape sources while overdubbing. This helped reduce cost and device real estate by minimizing the number of channels needed (as opposed to needing a console with enough channels for your typical sources AND additional channels for your multitrack returns…that meant bigger footprint and typically higher cost…the Tascam M-308, for instance, has 8 input channels, but because there are 8 dedicated tape returns in addition to the 8 mic and line inputs, and an 8-channel monitor mixer AND inline monitoring using one of the AUX busses, you’ve got all you need with only an 8 channel console, to manage 8 sources and feed and monitor 8 tape tracks with full monitor mix control for the engineer AND separate cue feed for the talent…with just 8 main input channels…that kind of flexibility is pretty much missing from contemporary small format offerings). So, you just don’t typically see the necessary analog outputs or any kind of dedicated returns and/or inline monitoring faculties. This is because many of them have integrated computer audio interfaces, and “direct outs” go to the converters and your computer. Same with returns from the computer. Or if the console is smaller format and doesn’t have an interface onboard it’s more geared toward live sound and doesn’t have more than a main buss and maybe an alternate buss for summing, and no direct outputs. The SSL Big Six is a perfect example: 4 mono mic/line inputs, 4 stereo line inputs…no direct outs, a main buss and an alternate L/R buss. Of course there’s a 16x16 USB audio interface onboard and signal connectivity to/from that, but you’re going to be limited as far as getting signal to your 38 and back…you can expect lots of patching and re-patching and potentially having to work around listening to pairs of mono tracks/sources in hard stereo during tracking…PITA. Yes it has onboard dynamics faculties and some nice control room features for a little console, but honestly for $2-3K?! No way that makes sense for what you are primarily wanting to do with it. I’m also not a fan of everything modern that’s SMT tech, only because it’s a pain to service. Like, it’s not built to be serviced. The electronics industry didn’t shift to SMT tech because it benefits the consumer in terms of performance…yes, stuff is smaller and cheaper and that has consumer benefits, but manufacturers did it to make more money and sell more stuff and that’s in their primary interests. My Studer console is all through-hole construction, high quality components and build, gold-plated contacts in switches and connections…it’s 25 years old and works without a hitch and will outlast contemporary devices. This is not at all true of lots of “vintage” stuff, so I’m not trying assert “old is better”, but some old stuff is, and at least most old stuff can be serviced or was designed in such a way as to be serviceable.

I’ll have to look around some more to see if there is anything current in an analog console that’s suitable for 8-track analog multitrack applications that costs the same or less than the Big Six…there must be but I started at Sweetwater and *nothing* in the 287 products in “analog consoles” is really suitable.
 
This has been terrifically helpful so far - thank you to everyone writing back. I'll just jot down what I've got from this so far to make sure I've understood correctly:

A. The "voltage issue" seems to be how hot the signal is rather than an outright issue of compatibility and can easily be solved by adjusting gain/trim/faders - the Tascam should be able to work with pretty much most mixers as long as they have suitable connectivity and versatility for what I need them to do

B. Modern mixers would work, but because they lack discrete outputs for each channel something like an SSL Big Six would only work for taking the eight outputs, mixing/monitoring them, and summing them to a stereo master out. It would not be able to simultaneously record on and monitor out in the way that an old mixer with all the connectivity would be able to do.

So some of my options could be (and please feel free to correct any of this and suggest others):

1. Mic preamps with discrete outputs for recording IN to the Tascam, and something separate like a Big Six for monitoring/mixing.

2. An old mixer of the time (Tascam M30, 308, etc.) which can do everything in one (but finding a working one could be tricky).

3. Mic preamps with discrete outputs for recording IN, and another mic preamp and interface (something like a Focusrite octo pre) for taking all eight tracks out and into a DAW - where I can mix and monitor from there.

1 is preferred as the equipment would be readily available and working.
2 would be great if I can find the right thing and it works.
3 would be very versatile, and I could just run signals through the Tascam and keep recycling the same old tape - but it feels a bit like cheating and part of my reason for embarking on this whole experiment was for the experience of an analogue workflow - faders and all.

I'd welcome your thoughts on the above.

Best,

Joe


PS - I'd rather be making music than soldering if possible! I'm pretty handy with a lot of DIY but have no knowledge of electronic engineering so I'm keen to get things that work.
 
What about this scenario: Discreet preamps for getting signal into your 38. An 8X2 line-level mixer with foldbacks for monitoring the machine. (Plenty of Tascam & Fostex units are out there.) An 8 or more input Mackie or similar mixer for final mix downs to whatever device with analog inputs you choose.
 
RRuskin said:
What about this scenario: Discreet preamps for getting signal into your 38. An 8X2 line-level mixer with foldbacks for monitoring the machine. (Plenty of TASCAM & Fostex units are out there.) An 8 or more input Mackie or similar mixer for final mix downs to whatever device with analog inputs you choose.
Click to expand...
I've almost certainly not understood something - why do I need two separate mixers to monitor and mix? Why can't one mixer take the eight outputs from the Tascam, play that out through my monitor speakers, and also sum/mix out to a stereo master bus? Thanks
 
I think you're maybe over thinking this. Big full feature controls of both inline and separate designs usually have plenty of outputs. If the preamps in the big mixer are working properly and do a good job, you can use one of the pre-fade sends to route to the Tascam, and route the Tascam in via any of the possibilities, then listen to the results and see how it works? Keep in mind that few reel to reel users ever treat 0VU as maximum, and most folk push the levels anyway, so your Tascam output will probably be higher anyway. The beauty of big format desks is the increase in routing possibilities you get. Loads of these are in service with Tascams, Teams, Revoxes and other analogue kit - your missing 3dB or so is very unlikely to be a problem.
 
JoeT38 said:
I've almost certainly not understood something - why do I need two separate mixers to monitor and mix? Why can't one mixer take the eight outputs from the Tascam, play that out through my monitor speakers, and also sum/mix out to a stereo master bus? Thanks
Click to expand...
A totally complete recording console has many discreet functions in a single package. Mic preamps, eq, cue, effects mixes & returns, machine monitoring, & mixdown capabilities. The typical small-foot print mixer is not capable of all of this. The combination of something like a Tascam Model 1 line level mixer allows for an independent 8-track machine monitor that once installed, never needs to be repatched or reassigned. With the foldbacks patched to your main mixer's line inputs you have enough functionality to do a decent mix. When in the thick of production, the last thing you want is to have to constantly hit a switch, re-patch, or change a setting just to listen.
 
I agree with the above. I have a Tascam MX-80. This is an 8-channel mic preamp with phase reverse, pad and mute functions, and it is also an 8x2 line mixer. There are ACCESS SEND/RCV jacks (insert points) between the 8 mic amp outputs and the line mixer inputs. So I can connect the 8 mic amp outputs to, say, the 8 inputs on my 58, and connect the tape machine outputs to the 8x2 line mixer section inputs. Using the monitor mode switches on the tape machine during initial tracking and overdubbing, I can monitor any input and/or tape track in a stereo mix at the output of the line mixer section. It works. In a pinch. Would I want to do this routinely? No way. As soon as I want to or need to shape the sound with EQ or a need a HPF or LPF for something, or want to introduce send effects, or have need to create a separate cue mix for the talent, it’s either a repatching exercise or in most of the above examples it just can’t be done. Now…if you are just passing the signal to your DAW, sure you could have a basic mic amp up front, and connect the tape machine outputs to your computer audio interface. If the interface has at least 8 channels and latency free monitoring faculties you’re doing the same thing as I’d be doing with my MX-80 essentially. And likely you can setup send effects and monitor mixes and such in your DAW if you want, but you’ll have to deal with the latency. This may be more or less of an issue, but I for one do not like using a computer-based DAW for live or on-the-fly mixing. Yes I know contemporary hardware affords very low throughput latency, but it is not the same as the, for all intents and purposes, zero latency an all-analog signal chain guarantees, or even the more stout latency performance of dedicated digital hardware like a digital mixing console or standalone DAW. But if your tracks are going to end up in your DAW anyway, it may work great for you. You should try it. I’m just sharing my own personal opinion and preference. I’m a fan of printing *some* filtering (usually HPF on a number of different sources) and and doing *some* dynamics processing to tape. Flexibility and convenience are impacted when using something like the MX-80…and I don’t like repatching. I like latching buttons on the console and sweeping pots to route signal to the tape track or tracks I want to record. If you go the minimalist route, depending on the hardware you have or get, a patchbay might be a good idea to spare the wear and tear on your tape machine and other equipment’s jacks. The RCA jacks on the 38 aren’t known to be stout…solder joints are prone to cracking with a lot of or rough plugging and unplugging. It’s the same on my MX-80 and 58.
 
Hi Joe, I would like to make a couple of comments. Many mixers have 'inserts' such as this Tascam...https://www.gear4music.com/PA-DJ-and-Lighting/Mackie-ProFX12v3and-Analog-Mixer/6520?origin=product-ads&msclkid=20d80315f3641e3fa54865e7f28e5154&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=PLA%20Brand%20B1%20%7C%20Smart&utm_term=2332545199323347&utm_content=Brand%20B1
Now normally when you insert a TRS plug into such an insert the mic amp signal is connected to the tip (and off to your recorder) but the signal path through the mixer is broken and thus you can't hear anything! Easily fixed. Solder a link between tip and ring inside each jack at the mixer end.*

Thus you now have your 8 mic feeds to the tape machine. You will I suppose want to bring each track back to a mixer to, well MIX! To do that means either another, similar mixer or, as others have suggested, a much larger unit, possibly vintage and thus probably unreliable unless you can afford to have one expertly restored.

It IS possible to make a switch box that can interface with the mixer's inserts and give either 'send' to tape or 'return' for mixing but can I respectfully suggest you are not up to making such a thing?

On the subject of 'level exchange'? Yes, a nightmare but the same applies in the digital realm. The various manufacturers have not all decided what an interface should deliver for 0dBFS in the computer. In fact the internal levels in most mixers are at about -2dBu ~600mV and the recorder should I think handle that quite easily.

*The tape machine end plugs are RCA I think? You will therefore probably have to make those up yourself. Good practice! You won't get far in this recording lark without learning some electronics skills. Especially with analogue gear!

Cocked up that link. Try> https://www.gear4music.com/PA-DJ-and-Lighting/Mackie-ProFX16v3-16-Channel-Analog-Mixer-with-USB/3418?origin=product-ads&msclkid=ad0f7048f4d7101810ff16bafc63e303&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=PLA Brand B1 | Smart&utm_term=2332545199323347&utm_content=Brand B1

Also meant to say that, NOT for one moment denigrating tape machines! But the SSL Six is a very expensive, very high quality mixer and really total overkill for this application.

Dave.
 
Last edited:
Hi all,

Thanks very much for taking the time to write all these suggestions. They are going to influence what I choose to get for next steps. I'm going to see if I can borrow and trial a couple of things and see what works for me and then buy something. I'll keep you posted!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top