Tascam Portastudios sound/pre amp differences

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisWaz
  • Start date Start date
C

ChrisWaz

New member
Can anyone describe (in their humble opinion) the differences between the sound and preamps of the older Tascam Portastudios -- 246 and 244 -- vs. the "newer" 424 models. I love some of the recordings that I heard made with the 246 and 244 and am looking to buy one. THANK YOU.
 
I think the most likely person that would be able to give you an informed opinion would be Dave (Reel Person) because he has new and old portastudios and uses them frequently. But really the only way to run a truly helpful test would be to record the same exact stuff (with all the same instruments, etc.) through both units. Unfortunately, most people don't usually do this.
 
I thought they were basically the same unit, except that the 246 has 2 extra channels in its mixer section.
 
Yes re: 244 and 246. But I'm wondering how these compare to the 424's.
 
My friend,...

Having a very long & detailed response error out twice,... I'll try to form a concise reply in moments. Your question on the face of it seems very simple, but the answer is not so simple.

There are many factors and feature set similarities & differences that impact the overall resultant recorded sound quality.

It's a very small & subtle difference you're trying to discern, analyze and describe. They are both highly capable families of recorders which are equally as capable of making clear, dynamic, kickass recordings.

With no supporting details (use your imagination for now), I believe the 246 gets the overall edge. I appreciate that you'd value my opinion & that I've given a lot of thought and detailed analysis and response to your question. To try to summarize very quickly, knee jerk style, is really not fair to either product family.

I will further summarize that attention to detail, quality & era of the base components & design/build give the 244/246 a subtly richer and cleaner end-product recording, but not necessarily that the imprinted signal on tape would be starkly different between the two families, probably would be virtually the same, but each family of recorders develops other aspects of the overall sound quality in other parts of the signal chain. You start with the preamps, but it doesn't end there. However, a Portastudio is a self contained product which we can analyze certain features as parts of the black box.

If I were to have to choose one right now on the spot, it would be a very difficult decision, but I benefit from the hindsight of actually A/B'ing recordings from the products you asked about. I know what I hear more intrinsically than I'm able to describe in short order. It only seems like a snap judgment here, but it's not. Bearing in mind there is no "right" answer to questions like this, it's more of an opinion question, but I believe my ears are acute enough to discern what I hear in respect to the question.

I hate losing posts on the fickled internet. Sometimes there's no "undo" function for your issue.

A quick & dirty answer: The Preamps: given that one is XLR which theoretically gives you a lower noise floor, especially with longer cable runs, if you factor the XLR(F) to 1/4"(M) transformer adapter use with the 244/246 family, the differences are virtually nil. However, (summarizing), the 244/246 might be described as "cleaner" and "warmer" or "richer", where the 424mk preamps might be "brighter" or "more accurate" (flatter) but with a very slightly higher tendency toward hiss if they're driven harder. This of course is totally glossing over the other parts of the mixer, heads or signal chain. Additionally, the OL LED provided on the 244/246 gives a slight edge in proper gain staging, which is critical in the preamp stage as well as the downstream signal chain.

This is a heavily edited reply. The more I type, the more it turns to mush.

Maybe more later...
:spank::eek:;)
 
Last edited:
The glory of that might be that

I might be able to explain & summarize better by having to think & write it out many times over, as yet TBD.
:wtf:
 
The other ideas summarized:...

EQ: I think the 244/246 has the better 2-band sweepable EQ vs. the 424mk's 3-band/2-fixed/mid-sweepable EQ. A 2-band sweepable EQ enables you to dial in on the sweet spot(s) of different instruments better, vs. the tendency of 2 fixed bands beyond a certain point to possibly be adding mud to the mix rather than clarity.

Mixer: I think the 244/246 mixer has less hiss and less crosstalk, incl. more isolation between the buss section and the cue section in the headphones. The patch points are by far superior on the 244/246 mixers.

Transport: Either is good. I'd not sweat this feature. Both are belt driven and fairly stable, but the 244/246 has a slightly larger flywheel. Larger would be more momentum and stability.

Heads: I believe the 244/246 vintage recording head would likely have a better build quality, as well I believe (at least the 244) had a reverse phase relationship between the track elements in the head to minimize crosstalk. I've also verified this by swapping recorded test tones between families of machines. I believe Tascam abandoned that reverse track phase head arrangement when they woke up one day & moved into a "let's be compatible" mentality. So, the 244 (& family) head/amp section has less crosstalk in theory & I believe also in reality (listening tests). However, in turn I think the 424mk's head might have more overall sensitivity, being a more matured design of the coils, which might exacerbate the crosstalk. Keep in mind we're talking about miniscule amounts of crosstalk. I don't have the spec sheets in front of me.

I don't want to portray either unit as "bad" comparing to the other sounding "good". They both sound good.

Features: I think the 246 being 4-buss (mixer section) trumps the field under discussion, pretty much for that reason alone. If you don't understand that now, in a fairly short time you will.

Other Features: The 424mk series has some very sophisticated transport functions that the 244/246 can't answer for.

Other: The 244/246 are fully self-contained, as well as the 424mk2, but the 424mk3 has the inline power module that often gets separated from the mixer unit, which is undesirable. I also think that a Portastudio should be a one piece solution by definition, and a separate power module spoils the pristine nature of that idea, but maybe I'm nit picking there. Alternately, the inline power module design isolates the noise generating elements of the power supply from the R/P & mixer sections better, and also requires less shielding in the design of the audio electronics. However, the 424mk3 without it's power module is useless.

The 246 only lacks XLR inputs, but in many respects might be considered "best" Portastudio that can make the "best" recordings, however any sonic anomalies the others might have in comparison, or might not measure up (I think) should be regarded as very minor and subtle differences. It's not like night & day.

As with any feature that can help make sound recordings better, maladjustment can also make the sound worse, so there's a whole other post about how the features are applied and brought to bear on the source. That speaks to the techniques & skills of the user. A post maybe for someone else or another day.

Just because I might say atm the 246 is the best one, it's just an overall opinion & doesn't imply the other ones aren't good choices, but they are each a different flavor of hardware with slightly different featues. They are all good machines that can make high quality recordings. Any sound quality differences would be very subtle.

:spank::eek:;)
 
Last edited:
The 246 is my choice for best portastudio ever. I had the first protastudio, the TEAC 144 for a while. Then the 244 and finally the 246 the year it came out. After the 246 I noticed a little less quality in newer models over the years. The catch is that finding a 246 in excellent condition is more of a trick than finding a 424 MKII or MKIII in excellent or even new in box condition. I bought my 246 new and it's in like-new condition. I like to say "Smithsonian Condition." I've always babied it and kept it under a custom dust cover when not in use. The build quality, design, attention to detail and sound quality of the the 246 is outstanding. My only real complaint is the absence of a 10kHz shelving EQ in addition to the two semi-parametrics. I wish they had fit that in somewhere somehow.

The 246 has many new features over the 244 besides two extra channels, so between those two models I'd go with the 246, which obviously I did.

I've run the 424 MKII through its paces, but have never auditioned the MKIII. And I've used other models from other companies like Fostex, Yamaha, etc. The 246 just nails it for the most part, head and shoulders above any other 4-track on cassette I was familiar with back in the day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top