TEAC A-3340S what mixer to use?

V

vihuela

New member
I have a TEAC A-3340S coming that I’ll be using for some multitracking at home (vocals and acoustic guitar). My only previous analog experience is with Tascam cassette format (I have a 424 mkiii). I believe I’ll need a mixer to listen back so the question is what do I get? Do I go in keeping with the unit like a Tascam M-30 or similar? Can I use a modern option like a Tascam model 16 and use it for other things as well? Any ideas would be appreciated.
 
The Teac 2A with the attached MB-20 meter bridge would be a good choice- it was the matching mixer to the A-3440 (1978-1983).

Of course, you could get other Teac/Tascam mixers with extra features, such as the M-30, but for starting out, the 2A/MB-20 is neatly laid out and not too complicated to understand the signal routing, and has four very clear pushbuttons to assign output busses for multitrack recording. The MB-20 meter bridge is very cool, I personally like upright 4 VU meters that are easy to see, whereas they are only two and lie flat on other mixers such as the Tascam M-106.

The only thing is no XLR connectors on the 2A, just 1/4", but can simply use adapters.
 
BeatleFred said:
The Teac 2A with the attached MB-20 meter bridge would be a good choice- it was the matching mixer to the A-3440 (1978-1983).

Of course, you could get other Teac/Tascam mixers with extra features, such as the M-30, but for starting out, the 2A/MB-20 is neatly laid out and not too complicated to understand the signal routing, and has four very clear pushbuttons to assign output busses for multitrack recording. The MB-20 meter bridge is very cool, I personally like upright 4 VU meters that are easy to see, whereas they are only two and lie flat on other mixers such as the Tascam M-106.

The only thing is no XLR connectors on the 2A, just 1/4", but can simply use adapters.
Click to expand...
The MB-20 is a worth while unit but I strongly disagree about the Model 2 and 2A. Their performance is subpar and is very prone to outside interference.
 
I have not had that issue, but no one is twisting anyone's arm, there are lots of mixers to choose from, I have an M-1516, M-30, MX-80, M-106, but I still like
the 2A/MB-20, thus its just a suggestion- he is free to decide what suits him best, but the 2A/MB-20 was designed to match with the A-3440 (or previous 3340)
and not super complicated to use as a recording mixer.
 
The biggest issue I would have with a Model 2a would be the lack of phantom power. The majority of my mics today are condensers. Even back when my buddy had his studio with a Model 5 /80-8 setup, there was no phantom. The mics were Shure 57s and 58s, Senn 421, and and EV.

Of course, that might also be part of the sound from those days.
 
Not a big deal to get an external phantom-powered mic preamp, such as ART Dual RP.
 
I would go with something like the Behringer Eurodesk SX3242FX Mixer used - lots more bang for your buck - and IMO way higher quality than the Tascam things.

​

 
No disrespect intended, but I disagree with that suggestion entirely…first, I don’t believe the OP is looking for or needs a 32 channel console…or even 24, 20 or 16. I believe the OP is looking for a more compact console. And my personal experience after years of taking these things apart, studying them, comparing them, repairing them and using them, I don’t consider Behringer products such as you suggested comparatively well-designed, well-built, reliable, or good-sounding.

Really any 8x2 mixer will do, or even less channels if there are any inline monitoring functions (like on the M-106). I do like a number of the older Tascam mixers…what you’ll find more often in older more full-featured mixers is maybe some inline monitoring features and more flexible input/output options. But the trade-offs are they may need more TLC or straight-up repair than something newer, and people are asking silly money for some of these things. Plus something like a Tascam M-308, for instance, has a relatively large footprint compared to a more modern compact mixer.

I don’t know what the OP’s budget is, but I still consider the Allen & Heath MixWizard series to be great bang for the buck…checks all the boxes as far as I’m concerned…properly designed, well-built, reliable, have direct outputs on the inputs (don’t sell this short…so many more contemporary mixers don’t have this or insert points, and if the mixer doesn’t have any submix busses you are really limited to interface the mixer with a multitrack machine if you don’t have direct outs), plenty of AUX busses (which could be used as mix busses for the 4-track), 4-band EQ with swept mid-bands, HPF, per-channel phantom, 100mm throw on the faders, flexible monitor section, sound good, not stupidly priced, can be rack mounted, steel chassis, nutted metal jacks and pots, vertical channel PCBs…this might be more functionality than needed, but will keep up as needs grow…I like that there are stereo input channels as well…great for stereo line sources or full-featured stereo returns for external effects if needed…I’m looking at the 12:2 line…if you get the 3rd gen WZ3 you also get onboard effects.

There are lots and lots of options to choose from across many manufacturers, but I think the above hits a sweet-spot.

The M-1500 series from Tascam have a lot of great features, but I don’t like the budget plastic build, or the lower headroom power rails, and very blah signal path. The Allen & Heath is in a completely different class on all fronts, is much newer, but still properly built (there is a lot of progressive “value-engineering” built into devices as you get more and more modern), and will last longer and sound better.

To the OP, regarding the current Model 12 from Tascam? Sure that’s an option, but unless you are wanting or needing the onboard digital multitrack recording or USB computer audio interface features, and maybe you are, you’d be spending money on features you don’t need, on a design that compromises the analog mixing features for the sake of the digital features. It does a bunch of things pretty well, but it leans toward digital recording and DAW interface than analog recording and mixing. It won’t interface all that well with even an analog 4-track recorder. I also have some concerns about its long-term reliability, which has some evidence basis. Again, referring back to my example of the Allen & Heath MixWizard 12:2 series, compared to the Model 12 you have much greater analog mixing and sound-shaping features, much greater flexibility to interface external gear including your 4-track, better build, higher reliability, better sound, etc., for a lower price.

So there you have my brain-dump on the matter.
 
vihuela said:
I have a TEAC A-3340S coming that I’ll be using for some multitracking at home (vocals and acoustic guitar). My only previous analog experience is with Tascam cassette format (I have a 424 mkiii). I believe I’ll need a mixer to listen back so the question is what do I get? Do I go in keeping with the unit like a Tascam M-30 or similar? Can I use a modern option like a Tascam model 16 and use it for other things as well? Any ideas would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
I started out on a 3340. For several years I used it without a mixer and plugged mics into the 1/4” inputs on the front. Then for mixdown TEAC made a little switch box with 4 slider switches that had Left, Middle, Right settings. This box had 4 rca inputs and two rca outputs. This went into my cassette deck and allowed me to mix 4 tracks down to two but panning was limited to these three switch settings. I made many recordings like this. Later I used a Tapco mixer that was a 6x2 mixer with pan pots…..I was in heaven…lol.

Any mixer with direct outs or 4 sub outs will work. A mixer with 16 in with 8 sub busses with stereo outs gives you lots of flexibility to record a band.
 
The box that was mentioned is the AX-20 mixdown panel which Teac made when folks back then did not
have a mixer yet, to try and make the mixdown process a bit more simplified.

Anyhow, its good to go back to the original post and re-read what his intentions are with his A-3340. To me, it sounds like he just wants to enjoy it as a hobby (same with me). Its not like there a band with a drummer that would need a whole bunch of mics going into a console and so forth. For just one guy by himself, wanting to do some basic recording/overdubs, the mixer does not have to be too complicated whereby you get dizzy just looking at it and trying to find where the modern-day tiny bargraph meters are on it- vs the ergonomics of a 2A/MB-20 that match nicely with the 3340, as it was meant for- everything is very clear from the VU meters to the 4 assign pushbuttons across 6 channels.

I just suggested, being he has a vintage A-3340, that when he considers mixers- he can start by considering which one was originally the best match- thus 2A/MB-20. If he finds it not to his liking, then he can move ahead chronologically to 80's and 90's Teac/Tascam products- as I mentioned previously, I have an M-30 and M-1516, and despite those, it did not compel to throw my 2A/MB-20 away in the trash as if it worthless. But for his needs, I dont think an M-30 is necessary unless he plans to make more elaborate recordings, and ditto the M-1516 which can be more useful with 8 track machines- I find it to be a good unit, have not had any issues, and if anything, I appreciate it lighter-weight construction, at age 61 and getting older, I dont want to risk a hernia trying to lift and carry it anywhere if I had to move it somewhere else.

Its not clear where he would be looking to buy a mixer, if its a vintage one, then I presume Ebay, in which case, its always good to get some background history and details from a seller, and hopefully buy one that was fairly well maintained (as my M-30 was).

One more thing to clarify on the 2A- there are usually no shortage of them on Ebay, and though prices for most things are higher than they were some years ago, a 2A wont burn a hole in the wallet to be a risky buy, but its really good to have the MB-20 attached to it, a 2A by itself would be a limitation. The MB-20 manual has the diagram and instructions on how to connect with the A-3340 (or 3440, etc)- just need some extra rca-rca cables and spend a little time doing the hookup.

Visually, side by side, a 2A/MB-20 & A-3340 would look great, especially if you like the visual appeal of 8 large illuminated VU meters when doing any musical activities at night (I have a vintage Sansui G-9000 amp, with the same meters, thus I have 12 of them :)

Anyhow, there are lots of choices, good luck and hopefully you find a good deal on a mixer that accomodates your recording/mixing needs.

(come to think of it, a smaller Tascam M-1508 (vs larger 1516) could be a good choice if you see any around that are well maintained.)
 
Last edited:
BeatleFred said:
The box that was mentioned is the AX-20 mixdown panel which Teac made when folks back then did not
have a mixer yet, to try and make the mixdown process a bit more simplified.

Anyhow, its good to go back to the original post and re-read what his intentions are with his A-3340. To me, it sounds like he just wants to enjoy it as a hobby (same with me). Its not like there a band with a drummer that would need a whole bunch of mics going into a console and so forth. For just one guy by himself, wanting to do some basic recording/overdubs, the mixer does not have to be too complicated whereby you get dizzy just looking at it and trying to find where the modern-day tiny bargraph meters are on it- vs the ergonomics of a 2A/MB-20 that match nicely with the 3340, as it was meant for- everything is very clear from the VU meters to the 4 assign pushbuttons across 6 channels.

I just suggested, being he has a vintage A-3340, that when he considers mixers- he can start by considering which one was originally the best match- thus 2A/MB-20. If he finds it not to his liking, then he can move ahead chronologically to 80's and 90's Teac/Tascam products- as I mentioned previously, I have an M-30 and M-1516, and despite those, it did not compel to throw my 2A/MB-20 away in the trash as if it worthless. But for his needs, I dont think an M-30 is necessary unless he plans to make more elaborate recordings, and ditto the M-1516 which can be more useful with 8 track machines- I find it to be a good unit, have not had any issues, and if anything, I appreciate it lighter-weight construction, at age 61 and getting older, I dont want to risk a hernia trying to lift and carry it anywhere if I had to move it somewhere else.

Its not clear where he would be looking to buy a mixer, if its a vintage one, then I presume Ebay, in which case, its always good to get some background history and details from a seller, and hopefully buy one that was fairly well maintained (as my M-30 was).

One more thing to clarify on the 2A- there are usually no shortage of them on Ebay, and though prices for most things are higher than they were some years ago, a 2A wont burn a hole in the wallet to be a risky buy, but its really good to have the MB-20 attached to it, a 2A by itself would be a limitation. The MB-20 manual has the diagram and instructions on how to connect with the A-3340 (or 3440, etc)- just need some extra rca-rca cables and spend a little time doing the hookup.

Visually, side by side, a 2A/MB-20 & A-3340 would look great, especially if you like the visual appeal of 8 large illuminated VU meters when doing any musical activities at night (I have a vintage Sansui G-9000 amp, with the same meters, thus I have 12 of them :)

Anyhow, there are lots of choices, good luck and hopefully you find a good deal on a mixer that accomodates your recording/mixing needs.

(come to think of it, a smaller Tascam M-1508 (vs larger 1516) could be a good choice if you see any around that are well maintained.)
Click to expand...
I still have mine all these years later. My 3340 needs service though….
 
BeatleFred said:
Not a big deal to get an external phantom-powered mic preamp, such as ART Dual RP.
Click to expand...
The Dual RP uses phantom power, which the boards don't supply, and they don't pass that power through. They are designed to boost dynamic and ribbon mics.

Yes, you can buy phantom supplies (figure $25 to $50 per channel).

But back in the day, you didn't have Ebay or Amazon to buy them. I don't ever remember seeing such available at the local music stores. Then again, back then you also didn't have your choice of a hundred different condenser mics on the shelf. Things are different than they were back in 1976. Most all AKG, EV, Shure and Beyer mics were dynamics with a few electrets. Neumann was the one of the few companies that were making condensers and they were quite pricey for the home market.

I've used my old Yamaha Mx12/4 for recording. A basic 8 mic input mixer with 4 sub groups that you could feed to the 4 tracks of the 3340, some basic EQ options, panning.

BeatleFred said:
The box that was mentioned is the AX-20 mixdown panel which Teac made when folks back then did not
have a mixer yet, to try and make the mixdown process a bit more simplified.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I've still got an AX-20. It came in handy when I had a old Hi-8 video camera that I was using to dump video to digital. I ran the single track to two inputs on the recording setup. It saved me having to wire up some RCA splitter cables. 50yr old tech that still works. :giggle:
 
Thanks for clarifying on the ART Dual. But I imagine an external supply can be used, is it just a matter of an XLR to TRS adapter connection to a 2A 1/4" input (as opposed to TS, which wont work at all)
 
TalismanRich said:
The Dual RP uses phantom power, which the boards don't supply, and they don't pass that power through. They are designed to boost dynamic and ribbon mics.

Yes, you can buy phantom supplies (figure $25 to $50 per channel).

But back in the day, you didn't have Ebay or Amazon to buy them. I don't ever remember seeing such available at the local music stores. Then again, back then you also didn't have your choice of a hundred different condenser mics on the shelf. Things are different than they were back in 1976. Most all AKG, EV, Shure and Beyer mics were dynamics with a few electrets. Neumann was the one of the few companies that were making condensers and they were quite pricey for the home market.

I've used my old Yamaha Mx12/4 for recording. A basic 8 mic input mixer with 4 sub groups that you could feed to the 4 tracks of the 3340, some basic EQ options, panning.



Oh yeah, I've still got an AX-20. It came in handy when I had an old Hi-8 video camera that I was using to dump video to digital. I ran the single track to two inputs on the recording setup. It saved me having to wire up some RCA splitter cables. 50yr old tech that still works. :giggle:
Click to expand...
+1 to the Yamaha…well-made, reliable, good bang for the buck…good performers and very affordable.
 
I tremble in my boots to cross qwertys with the redoubtable Mr Sweetbeats but I would like to put in a slight defense regarding Behringer mixers? My comments are directed to two such devices. The Xenyz 802 but mainly the Xenyx 1202.

For sure, the build quality is not up to A&H and the facilities limited. No direct outs, no inserts but for sound quality neither I nor my son can fault them and he also has an A&H ZED10 and tells me the two mixers sound just the same i.e. they neither add nor subtract from the input signal and his main recordings are of classical guitar.
In short the Behrry mixers are a very cost effective way to amplify microphones and other sources in a very transparent way.

The X 802 did sterling service years ago driving an M-A 2496 sound card. It has since been 'stuck' to my bedroom wall where it amplifies two mics in my garden then sends the signal around my house to finish up feeding a hard drive video machine. The mixer has done this 24/7 without fail for well over ten years!

One operational issue common to all the mixers mentioned here is that the LED meters almost all work to the OP level 0VU=+4dBu (about a volt rms) The tapes machines OP level is -10dBV which means the LED meters are of little use and controls are rather 'cramped'.

I had this problem with the 2496 and just put a couple of 10k pots in a tin close to the card's inputs and then lined things up so that mixer and DAW meters roughly agreed*

My point of all this is, don't deny yourselves of the use of a very handy device with good, low noise circuits just because of "a name"?

*Never perfectly because the ballistics are very different.

Dave.
 
Just to be clear, my comments about Behringer have nothing to do with “a name”, but rather substantial failures in near-new devices, poor-quality design and execution of internals when comparing Behringer products and the brand name devices they copied, and unacceptable sonic performance compared to alternatives. I’m not saying it’s all bad…not at all. But having a negative experience with four of seven products is not favorable, and that is my personal experience. I recommend them only carefully and selectively, and share my experiences with specifics. I’m glad your experience is better, Dave. I also don’t agree with their business philosophy or practices.
 
Last edited:
BeatleFred said:
Thanks for clarifying on the ART Dual. But I imagine an external supply can be used, is it just a matter of an XLR to TRS adapter connection to a 2A 1/4" input (as opposed to TS, which wont work at all)
Click to expand...
I believe the Model 2 mic inputs are unbalanced 1/4" jacks, not balanced TRS jacks. So you would need XLR to 1/4" TS. Again, if you are using condensers, then you need the external power supply, and then drop that connector down to the 1/4" input of the mixer. That's lots of extra bits just to keep around when there are slightly more modern mixers that will do the job. You'll also need to watch levels, since those inputs were designed for relatively low output mics.

The thing to remember is that if you know what you're doing, you can just about hook ANYTHING up and make it work. You could hook up a vintage U47 a U87 or Elam251 to a model 2. It's just a matter of how much fudging around you want to do soldering special cables, adding extra parts, and keeping everything from becoming a rats nest. But that wasn't the what the equipment was designed for. The folks buying a 3340 and a Model 2 were highly unlikely to have a Telefunken U47 sitting around! They might have a couple of Shure 545s, maybe an old 55 or an AKG D1000 to start with.
 
I agree 100%.

And yes Model 2 series is unbalanced 1/4” TS phone jacks. To connect a balanced mic and keep the signal balanced up to the mixer you need one of those female XLR to 1/4” male TS adapters with the transformer in it.
 
I think a Soundcraft 200SR would be a nice match, at least in terms of features. I'd prefer 12 channels over 8 so I could return effect to channels instead of aux returns, but one could get by with 8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top