Tascam M520 Story...

[maurice.marion]

Update: I've gotten the unit to work! I'm able to run signal through all 16 channels and route them to buses 7-8 which feeds to the stereo out, and the EQs all work. Sounds great. Feel free to ignore my previous two posts (unless of course there's something in either of them you particularly want to respond to.)

Basically the issue was that I jumped the gun on patching everything up with the buses and the patchbays before making sure the basic routing worked with all the jumpers in exactly right. I should've known better and started with the basics first .

My two remaining issues:

1. I'm getting this persistent buzz out of the stereo master A output (also get the same buzz when I directly route the output out of PGM buses 7-8). File attached to show it. It's not a problem during louder sections of songs honestly, but it can definitely be heard during quieter sections, and it's not a cool vibey hiss or anything like that but a pretty ugly buzz. Any idea where that might be coming from/what might be some steps to troubleshoot or resolve it?
2. I'd love to resolve my remaining question about trying to do parallel compression if I can... I was messing around a bit and I do see that I can separately route, say, some stereo vocals to both buses 5-6 and buses 7-8 simultaneously and both end up going out of the output of the Stereo Master A. So why not just run the SNDs of buses 5-6 into an outboard stereo compressor and run the output of the compressor back into the RCVs of the buses 5-6, so now both the compressed vocal and the uncompressed vocal are going to the stereo master output? Am I missing something there? Seems straightforward, no?

 

[sweetbeats]

Update: I've gotten the unit to work! I'm able to run signal through all 16 channels and route them to buses 7-8 which feeds to the stereo out, and the EQs all work. Sounds great. Feel free to ignore my previous two posts (unless of course there's something in either of them you particularly want to respond to.)

Basically the issue was that I jumped the gun on patching everything up with the buses and the patchbays before making sure the basic routing worked with all the jumpers in exactly right. I should've known better and started with the basics first .

My two remaining issues:

1. I'm getting this persistent buzz out of the stereo master A output (also get the same buzz when I directly route the output out of PGM buses 7-8). File attached to show it. It's not a problem during louder sections of songs honestly, but it can definitely be heard during quieter sections, and it's not a cool vibey hiss or anything like that but a pretty ugly buzz. Any idea where that might be coming from/what might be some steps to troubleshoot or resolve it?
2. I'd love to resolve my remaining question about trying to do parallel compression if I can... I was messing around a bit and I do see that I can separately route, say, some stereo vocals to both buses 5-6 and buses 7-8 simultaneously and both end up going out of the output of the Stereo Master A. So why not just run the SNDs of buses 5-6 into an outboard stereo compressor and run the output of the compressor back into the RCVs of the buses 5-6, so now both the compressed vocal and the uncompressed vocal are going to the stereo master output? Am I missing something there? Seems straightforward, no?

1. That sounds like digital noise…I need a lot more information though. What model monitors, and exactly how are they connected to the M-520? What cable type and what outputs? Have you tested other outputs? STEREO B? Input channel direct outputs, etc.? Basically I want to know if you have the noise issue globally on any output from the console or if it truly is limited to the outputs you’ve noted? Do you hear it in the headphones connected to the M-520 headphone jack? Do you have an adapter so you can connect your headphones directly to a pair of RCA output jacks? I have an adapter like this and it’s very helpful for testing and troubleshooting. It’s two male RCA connectors to a single female TRS connector.

2. No, not missing anything…that’s one way to do it. I was in the middle of composing a longer reply to your other two messages and was going to tell you if you want to sum the PGM groups on an M-500 series console you do it using the monitor mixer and using either the STEREO A or B outputs as your two-track master recorder feed. What’s not as ideal about this is there is additional circuitry and amp stages when you sum this way on an M-500, so there is inherently more noise and distortion. Whether or not you can hear is the question and whether or not, philosophically, that matters to you. STEREO A is intended to be the control room feed, STEREO B the “studio” feed for the talent in the tracking room. But you can use them however.

 

[flyingace]

@maurice.marion That's great news!! Congratulations!

On the buzzing, I concur with Sweetbeats, sounds like digital noise. Lots of variables but when I connected my keyboard (I have vintage synths) mixers from the other side of the room to my console, I had that kind or buzz and used a Hum Eliminator with balanced 1/4" TRS cables. Buzz from that input was gone!
Then when I had my Roland Juno X connected to my computer (iMac) via USB I have the hum again. Thankfully when I use my current USB interface I don't have any buzz but I also have Morley Hum Eliminators on my power conditioners that the interface and monitors are plugged into. No more buzz.

Sweetbeats testing is WAAAY more scientific and better process or elimination, my solution just happened to work, if not, I'd have likely been here asking too!

Again, welcome to the M-520 family, I'm sitting at my mine in my studio as I type this, listening to music via computer, which I run through channels 19 & 20, with a little EQ, and patched through SND/RCV to my BBE Sonic Maximizer (don't care what the haters say, I love the sound of it).

Look forward to learning more about how you're using yours, I learn all the time new ways to use this versatile console!

 

[pattarginkom]

Hey all, I wanted to jump into this thread because its fresh and we're all active in it.
I bought a Tascam M520 last October as I was moving into a new recording studio space. My buddy gave me a drafting table to set it on - which works so perfectly - and I've spent the last few months following sweetbeats forums and reading the manual and setting my studio up.
I also had a thread with sweetbeats and RFR and jpmorris helping me figure out some decisions with what tape machine I should acquire. I ended up with a TSR-8 - that is now finally synced up to a 688 via the MTS-1000.
Here's the latest thing I've been working on with it.



this is my first test where I used the program outs from the M520 - which have two outs per PGRM - to send PGRM 1 and 2 to tracks 1 and 2 on the 688 and the TSR-8.
This seemed a good enough test to verify the sync was working - but what I did not expect was to get this amazing flange sound from the identical tracks on two machines.

I work part time at a very nice hybrid recording studio, and when the engineer saw this video he told me this means that the sync isn't fully matched up - faulty - recommended switching master and slave - But honestly I'm leaning towards 'close enough', and having this flange as a secret weapon.

Happy to re-engage with this community and see it is still thriving. I LOVE the m520 !

 

[sweetbeats]

Hey all, I wanted to jump into this thread because its fresh and we're all active in it.
I bought a Tascam M520 last October as I was moving into a new recording studio space. My buddy gave me a drafting table to set it on - which works so perfectly - and I've spent the last few months following sweetbeats forums and reading the manual and setting my studio up.
I also had a thread with sweetbeats and RFR and jpmorris helping me figure out some decisions with what tape machine I should acquire. I ended up with a TSR-8 - that is now finally synced up to a 688 via the MTS-1000.
Here's the latest thing I've been working on with it.



this is my first test where I used the program outs from the M520 - which have two outs per PGRM - to send PGRM 1 and 2 to tracks 1 and 2 on the 688 and the TSR-8.
This seemed a good enough test to verify the sync was working - but what I did not expect was to get this amazing flange sound from the identical tracks on two machines.

I work part time at a very nice hybrid recording studio, and when the engineer saw this video he told me this means that the sync isn't fully matched up - faulty - recommended switching master and slave - But honestly I'm leaning towards 'close enough', and having this flange as a secret weapon.

Happy to re-engage with this community and see it is still thriving. I LOVE the m520 !

Hey nice to hear from you.

Cool setup. Cool tune too.

So which is the master…the 688 or the TSR-8? Hands-down it should be the TSR-8, but regardless you will *always* get some of that comb-filtering effect you hear as flanging if you record and reproduce identical tracks to two analog tape machines…so I wouldn’t go assuming there is a problem…chase-lock wasn’t invented to sync identical tracks on two different machines. If you had differing tracks on the two machines you’d never know slight millisecond variations due to normal mechanical variances in the performances of the two machines. So I say don’t sweat it. Generally, use the TSR-8 as your master. If you like the comb-filtering effect then use it and don’t let anybody tell you it’s not “correct.” Sounds cool to me.

 

[pattarginkom]

Hey nice to hear from you.

Cool setup. Cool tune too.

So which is the master…the 688 or the TSR-8? Hands-down it should be the TSR-8, but regardless you will *always* get some of that comb-filtering effect you hear as flanging if you record and reproduce identical tracks to two analog tape machines…so I wouldn’t go assuming there is a problem…chase-lock wasn’t invented to sync identical tracks on two different machines. If you had differing tracks on the two machines you’d never know slight millisecond variations due to normal mechanical variances in the performances of the two machines. So I say don’t sweat it. Generally, use the TSR-8 as your master. If you like the comb-filtering effect then use it and don’t let anybody tell you it’s not “correct.” Sounds cool to me.

The TSR-8 is the master currently. I'll share some photos in this forum of my rig. I have to pb64 patchbays on both sides of the M520. its still not enough! lol
Love the work flow and routing available on the M520.

Have you ever had any success in modding yours? It appears that 'upgrade' thread had dropped off suddenly many years ago.
I've been considering picking up another m520 for upgrading channel strips and having backups. Just curious on any input on modding the M520.

 

[flyingace]

Have you ever had any success in modding yours? It appears that 'upgrade' thread had dropped off suddenly many years ago.
I've been considering picking up another m520 for upgrading channel strips and having backups. Just curious on any input on modding the M520.

Hey, great tune and the flange sound would be cool but I'd hate it if it was always on. Maybe Sweetbeats suggestion about not being identical tracks... worth experimenting.

I, too, love my M-520 so much that when I saw one come up on FB Marketplace for free, I jumped on it. Turns out it was donated to a highschool without a power supply and they didn't know if it worked or not. I plugged my power supply into it and it's all working perfectly, sans some cleaning of pots and sliders. I put it in storage as my backup. Hope you find one for such a good deal for the same reason!

 

[sweetbeats]

Have you ever had any success in modding yours? It appears that 'upgrade' thread had dropped off suddenly many years ago.
I've been considering picking up another m520 for upgrading channel strips and having backups. Just curious on any input on modding the M520.

I never did any modifications to mine when I had it. I think it was 2010 when I sold it. I’ve had a couple M-512s since the end that I repaired and re-sold, but didn’t do any modifications…just got them running and driving 100%. I have a box of M-500 spares…one or maybe two 4-channel input module assemblies and a master section, but I’ve not messed with those at all…keep them around as spare parts donors for the Tascam M-__ prototype console.

I think modification considerations should be backed into by asking the question what problem do you have with the stock performance you are hoping to “improve”?

An opamp does not define a circuit block. The performance is the sum of all the components of that circuit block. So one has to be realistic about what gains are even possible by changing opamp. And then you have to be careful to add decoupling caps on the power pins of the opamp to mitigate potential oscillation. And you have to monitor the current demand of the new components compared to the stock parts to make sure you don’t demand more than the power supply can provide. So, again, what problems do you have with the M-500 you are hoping to address?

 

[flyingace]

A minor project but glad I completed it today. In a small studio, space is everything and being able to push my chair under the console saves a lot of room. I originally had a sliding keyboard shelf but the ergonomics were all wrong typing and mousing so low. I don't use the computer and console at the same time as much, either one or the other, so I built a shelf that would sit up on top of the sliders that would house both the extended keyboard and mouse. Works great!!

 

[flyingace]

BTW, I took this cool photo of my M-520 to use as my iMac background screen. If anyone wants it, this is the full res version.

 

[maurice.marion]

@flyingace @sweetbeats Jeez, this forum is so supportive and knowledgable it's so amazing haha — one of the last places on the internet with pure Good Vibes... @flyingace your desk looks sooo sick. Gorgeous, and love how your keyboard so perfectly fits over the faders

Sweetbeats, I'm going to save you the trouble of helping me troubleshoot, as I've figured it out myself after you pushed me in the right direction with your hunch about it being digital noise. You were 100% right. After some arduous troubleshooting, I pinpointed the culprit to be the Scarletts: they were creating a ground loop when other electronics like my monitor were plugged into the same USB to USB-C dongle... I'm going to order two of these hum eliminators, one for each Scarlett, and hopefully that will solve the problem.

(The dongle is this guy... MacBook-M520 hybrid users beware!)

I may circle back if I have any other routing questions as I integrate my patchbays into the system in the next few weeks, though I think I pretty much understand what I need to now! If I don't run into issues there, I'll be sure to circle back to post some results of how the mixes turned out! Can't thank you both enough @flyingace and @sweetbeats! Be easy

 

[flyingace]

@maurice.marion That’s great! Yes, we have quite the wonderful community here. I have learned so much from this thread and from @sweetbeats, we are lucky to have him and so many others here willing to help!
I look forward to helping and conversing with another M-520 user!

 

[EkoStudio1974]

Um...wait, again.

Make that 8 of the orange stripe fader knobs, and one of the channel selector switch knobs.

Peeled all the stickers/labels off and checked the physical function of all the switches, knobs and faders. One buss assign switch is stuck latched. The aux master faders are smooth but have a lot of resistance. This goes for the stereo master faders as well. All the stacked pots are also smooth but have a lot of physical resistance.

Aside from the above mentioned issues, everything is there and functional.

This is a cool console...big VU's, with the ability to patch external signals direct to the buss 1 - 8 meter...so much simultaneous control in a compact frame with the stacked pots...feature-packed.

Any thoughts on what sort of application one would use to patch external signals direct to the buss 1-8 meter?

 

[sweetbeats]

Any thoughts on what sort of application one would use to patch external signals direct to the buss 1-8 meter?

It just gives you flexibility to monitor anything. Any of the outputs of the console, or anything coming into the console that’s line level. Or even signals not going out if or coming into the console…it’s a nice feature.

 

[sweetbeats]

It just gives you flexibility to monitor anything. Any of the outputs of the console, or anything coming into the console that’s line level. Or even signals not going out if or coming into the console…it’s a nice feature.

Tascam made a standalone meter unit, the MU-40, with 4 VU meters. The M-500 console has essentially an MU-80 built in.

 

[Mark7]

A minor project but glad I completed it today. In a small studio, space is everything and being able to push my chair under the console saves a lot of room. I originally had a sliding keyboard shelf but the ergonomics were all wrong typing and mousing so low. I don't use the computer and console at the same time as much, either one or the other, so I built a shelf that would sit up on top of the sliders that would house both the extended keyboard and mouse. Works great!!

View attachment 126074
View attachment 126077

Great screensaver

 

[flyingace]

My only complaint in using my M-520 recording with condenser mics that I don’t want to run through outboard preamps for phantom is that they put the damn 48V phantom switch on the back of the unit!! would have been so convenient to have a switch on the channel strip!! WHY? ugh. Other than that, I absolutely love the versatility and the warm sound I get through my very loved M-520…
On that note, are there any mods or other solutions that might make that easier to select phantom power when needed on whatever mic channel I want to use to record?

 

[RRuskin]

If you a

My only complaint in using my M-520 recording with condenser mics that I don’t want to run through outboard preamps for phantom is that they put the damn 48V phantom switch on the back of the unit!! would have been so convenient to have a switch on the channel strip!! WHY? ugh. Other than that, I absolutely love the versatility and the warm sound I get through my very loved M-520…
On that note, are there any mods or other solutions that might make that easier to select phantom power when needed on whatever mic channel I want to use to record?

When using an outboard preamp, you should route it through either a line in or accessory receive. Not only will the signal path be cleaner but phantom is then a non-issue whether on or off.

 

[flyingace]

If you a

When using an outboard preamp, you should route it through either a line in or accessory receive. Not only will the signal path be cleaner but phantom is then a non-issue whether on or off.

That’s what I do, I bypass the built-in mic preamps when using my outboard preamps with or without phantom power BUT the M-520 actually has some pretty great sounding mic preamps and I love using them with dynamic mics for sure, but even with condenser mics… but that brings me back to what I posted about the inconvenience of the phantom switches being on the back of the unit instead of on the channel strips up front.

 

[RFR]

That’s what I do, I bypass the built-in mic preamps when using my outboard preamps with or without phantom power BUT the M-520 actually has some pretty great sounding mic preamps and I love using them with dynamic mics for sure, but even with condenser mics… but that brings me back to what I posted about the inconvenience of the phantom switches being on the back of the unit instead of on the channel strips up front.

Mine have always been set and forget. 1st 8 channels are always dedicated to drums.