The Ever-Popular "Which Reel-to-Reel Should I Buy?" Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter troutmask
  • Start date Start date
T

troutmask

New member
Hi,

So, after considering picking up a Tascam 238, I decided to go ahead and start looking at getting more serious about working with tape -- i.e. moving to reel-to-reel.

I'm looking for recommendations, especially since my experience with reel-to-reel units is pretty limited. I admittedly don't know enough about the format to know exactly what I need, but here are some of the things I'm looking for from a reel-to-reel

I'd like to find a unit with a low noise floor, as I'd like to work without noise reduction (if feasible), mainly because I'd like to be able to push the tape a bit without having to worry about modulation problems from the noise reduction system
I'd like to find something that sounds good when tracking a hot signal, or at least doesn't sound like garbage
I'd like to find something that has synchronization capabilities and can be used to chase a DAW (so I can later dump the tracks to the DAW for a mix)
An eight track unit would be best (unless there's a four-track reel-to-reel out there that offers sync capabilities), since that seems to offer the best tradeoff between the number of tracks, tape width and tape cost.
And ultimately, I'd like to find something in reasonably good condition for $500 or less.

(I don't know if I'm asking for too much here in terms of capabilities...I just know that, unless I get a Tascam 388 or something, I'll have to match the machine with a mixer which will also increase my costs)

So obviously, I know I'm not going to get a "great" machine with constraints like that, but it is my hope that I can get something good, at least, especially since a lot of people seem eager to dump reel-to-reel units nowadays.

Can anybody offer me any advice here? I'd appreciate any thoughts that people might have on this.

Thanks in advance
 
Well, indeed, you should be looking at the 388. Yes, you can push the tape into the red a bit with the noise reduction off and it still will sound good (but that's subjective). I guess one can't have everything that you list for $500 but the 388 comes bloody close. Make sure you either do a local deal, drive out to pick it up or have it palletized or crated and shipped freight. Otherwise it will get damaged. They're very difficult to pack right and very damage prone so check previous history (even if local) if it was ever shipped.
 
cjacek,

Do you know of a recording that I can listen to that will give me a general feel for the basic strengths and weaknesses of the 388? The only thing that I've heard through it was part of Primus' "Suck on This", and I didn't like the sound of it...though since that is a live recording, they probably weren't working with the best setup either.
 
Well, I'm glad you asked that. IMHO, the absolute best way to get a feel for the 388's sound is to listen to Dave's stuff, aka A Reel Person. He's the real deal. He's got several 388 songs posted on his soundclick page (and at least one with noise reduction turned off). He also doesn't use any external boxes like compressors, reverb etc... It's pure 388 and mics so you get a better sense on how the 388 sounds. In fact, Dave was instrumental in me getting started with all this analogue stuff, and that includes the 388. There's tons of stuff there (about 9 pages) so scroll and go from page to page and find those 388 tracks:
Music page of Davemania - MP3 music page on SoundClick
 
Here's a couple I found for ya:
SoundClick artist: Davemania - page with MP3 music downloads
SoundClick artist: Davemania - page with MP3 music downloads
SoundClick artist: Davemania - page with MP3 music downloads
SoundClick artist: Davemania - page with MP3 music downloads
SoundClick artist: Davemania - page with MP3 music downloads

All pure 388 by A Reel Person. The last one has the dbx turned OFF. Still sounds great to me. In fact, I recall commenting one time to Dave that the one without noise reduction sounded particularly nice. Anyway, those 388 sessions are some of my favorites.
 
Remember that you lose a track for sync, sometimes two, depending on how much crosstalk there is. I've never tried a 388, but the Fostex A8 was terrible for that (it was also 1/4" 8-track) and the 7th track was basically unusable - I'd either hear the timecode, or the audio in the 7th track would damage it.

Getting the DAW to chase the tape will be much, much easier as well as a regular MTC sync unit will do.
Having the tape act as a slave is relatively easy with TASCAM decks, since there are TASCAM sync units out there which will do this easily enough, once the correct cables have been built.
What a lot of people seem to do is forget about sync completely and line the tracks up in the DAW.

1/2" 8-track is probably your best compromise between cost and sound quality and there are a number of TASCAM machines which do this as well as the Otari 5050-8.

1" 8-track is basically the format if you don't want noise reduction, but it doesn't come cheap and slaving an Otari, Studer, MCI or whatever to a DAW is liable to be expensive and difficult as well.
 
Thank you everyone for the 388 sound links. It definitely seems like a pretty capable machine, and it is one that I will certainly consider.

Jpmorris, I wanted to follow up on your post...you specifically mention 1" tape as being the format if I want to work without noise reduction. If I did decide to go this route, what sort of prices would I be looking at, and what models should I be looking at?

And in regard to finding a machine with sync capabilities, that is a bit important to me. A few years ago, I decided to digitally remix a project that I had recorded on a 414mkII using multiple tapes. Even with reference points in the recording, getting things reasonably in sync was...a pain I'd rather avoid again (that's part of my reason for preferring to have the tape machine chase the DAW -- that way it will hopefully accomodate for any stretch issues between multiple tapes).
 
are you sure you need to chase a daw or vise versa?

there are so many ways to work with a hybrid setup;

what kind of music would you be recording?

And how elaborate are the arrangments?
 
troutmask said:
Jpmorris, I wanted to follow up on your post...you specifically mention 1" tape as being the format if I want to work without noise reduction. If I did decide to go this route, what sort of prices would I be looking at, and what models should I be looking at?
Click to expand...

I can't recommend one personally, because I've never had one. Machines I've heard of which come in this format include:
Ampex AG440-8
Studer A80
Otari MX70
MCI JH110
3M - M23, M56, M79
Soundcraft 381
Brenell Mini-8

The MX70, most versions of the JH110, some versions of the A80 (probably after 1971) should be able to accept external capstan control. The M79 needs to be modded before it will work with a Lynx MK1 timecode unit, I don't know if that's a general rule. I have no idea about the Brenell or Soundcraft decks.
The AG440 won't, as far as I know.

Note that apart from the Brenell and arguably the Soundcraft, all of these are cooker-sized machines intended for use in a professional studio - the AG440 for instance was used on King Crimson's first album. I can't speak for how much they cost, though I believe briank on the forum has a JH110-8, see if he has anything to say about it...

If it were me I'd probably try to score an MX70 since I believe those are the most recent machines which came in that format. Other machines like the Studer A8xx might have had guides and headblocks for 1", but generally they would be in 2" 24-track format.
 
Zorf,

I'd really prefer to have the tape chase the DAW. I haven't fully decided whether I want to do analog or digital mixes yet, so having that capability would allow me to (in theory, at least) sync multiple tapes to the DAW by printing the same timecode to each, thus (hopefully) eliminating any detriments from tape stretch.
As for the type of music that I'll be doing, well, here are links to my two most recent releases:
Kevin Loy | Plain Sleeve | CD Baby
Kevin Loy | "Throw Money" | CD Baby
This isn't everything that I do, but a few examples.

Jpmorris,

I looked at a few of those on eBay, and...wow. Nice looking machines, but more than a bit out of my price range...and probably a bit too big for me to realistically consider. Thanks for the recommendations, though.
 
troutmask said:
Zorf,
I looked at a few of those on eBay, and...wow. Nice looking machines, but more than a bit out of my price range...and probably a bit too big for me to realistically consider. Thanks for the recommendations, though.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Like I say, 1/2" 8-track is probably the best compromise. Machines to look for in that format are:

Otari 5050-8 (This is much smaller than the cooker-sized ones), Look for a mk2 or mk3. The original one came in two halves, transport and electronics - I wouldn't put money on that version being able to sync.

TASCAM TSR-8, TASCAM 58. I think there might be a TASCAM ATR60-8 as well, I'm not sure.
The TSR-8 is a 2-head deck, but it absolutely can chase timecode given a TASCAM sync unit such as the ATS-500 or MTS1000 Midiizer. You will probably need to build the Accessory-2 cable yourself or have someone else build it. I use my TSR-8 with DBX personally, other people seem to be happy without.

The 58 is a 3-head deck, and AFAIK it does support sync as well. I believe it has a direct-drive capstan as well, which the TSR doesn't. Be aware that its cheaper sibling - the model 38 - is pretty common and a nice workhorse, but it cannot chase timecode. That goes double for the 80-8, in its original form it is actually synced to the mains frequency, and cannot even do varispeed (or be shipped between 50hz and 60hz regions).

The only other machine I'm aware of it that format is the Revox C270-8. Those are pretty rare, though, and it's 50/50 if it can be synced or not. The A807 from which it is derived does have a synchronizer port, but may require in extra card internally, I have no idea.
 
Thanks for the additional info. And to the 388 owners, jpmorris posted this earlier:
Remember that you lose a track for sync, sometimes two, depending on how much crosstalk there is. I've never tried a 388, but the Fostex A8 was terrible for that (it was also 1/4" 8-track) and the 7th track was basically unusable - I'd either hear the timecode, or the audio in the 7th track would damage it.
Click to expand...

Has anybody ever noticed crosstalk issues, especially when dealing with timecode, when using the Tascam 388? I don't have a big problem with giving up an extra track to make sure my timecode signal is clean when necessary, I'm just more concerned about how the other tracks on the tape might be affected.
 
Checked out some of your songs.
Sound great.
They could easily be done entirely on an 8 track
Crosstalk: maybe a bit. For your kind of music, not so noticeable.
Besides, a few analog artifacts here and there add to the vibe.

'I knew her under her dress'
' a plastic ocarina bout five miles long'
 
zorf said:
Crosstalk: maybe a bit. For your kind of music, not so noticeable.
Besides, a few analog artifacts here and there add to the vibe.
Click to expand...

I think the worry is more that the timecode stripe may bleed through. Unless you're doing certain kinds of hardcore electronica you don't usually want to hear that:


(Taken from: SMPTE EBU timecode by Phil Rees )
 
Zorf,

Thanks for the compliment. For the stuff I'm looking to do now (I haven't finished writing new stuff yet, but I want to incorporate brass sections and/or string ensembles as appropriate, since I've done very little actual session work with either group of instruments), though, I'm thinking that I'll definitely need the flexibility that syncing to a DAW would provide.

And Jpmorris, since you guys are saying that I shouldn't have much trouble syncing certain tascams to chase a DAW, I'm not too worried about possibly having to give up two tracks on a tape to make sure my SMPTE signal is uncorrupted (or to make sure that my musical content isn't affected). The more that I look at the 388, the more that I like what the unit offers, though a friend of mine mentioned yesterday that I should also look into the TSR-8 (which follows up on jpmorris' earlier recommendation).

So I guess that will be my final question for this thread. Which machine do you think is better -- the Tascam 388 or TSR-8? Which one is more prone to having technical issues, and for which one will it be more difficult to acquire parts (if necessary)?

And Zorf, since you quoted a song from "Lick My Decals Off, Baby"...I really hope that album gets a decent reissue someday. I haven't heard it in years and really miss listening to it, especially the dynamite title track...."she stuck out her tongue and then the fun begun", heh.
 
The Tascam TSR-8 is one of my favorite decks of all time. The performance and features rival decks many times the price. Tape handling is buttery smooth. The onboard dbx noise reduction is well integrated and virtually artifact free. If you’re used to working with the 238 you’ll notice some similarities. The logic control used with the TSR-8 was developed during R&D for the 238. The 388 is one of my favorites as an all-in-one solution, going way back as well. With both units dbx noise reduction greatly improves the crosstalk figure so you won’t be as concerned with sync track bleeding. I‘ve never had to use a guard track when syncing either of these units. The trick is recording the sync track low… -7 to -10 usually does just fine. Also avoid recording percussion or anything with spiky transients on track 7.

I prefer and recommend the analog deck as master with the DAW chasing it using SMPTE/MTC. It’s generally less problematic and much cheaper. There are good arguments for doing it the other way, but I’ve never seen a synchronized system as stable and responsive as when the analog deck is master.
 
troutmask said:
So I guess that will be my final question for this thread. Which machine do you think is better -- the Tascam 388 or TSR-8? Which one is more prone to having technical issues, and for which one will it be more difficult to acquire parts (if necessary)?
Click to expand...

I can't speak for the 388 because I've never had one. I really do like the TSR-8, though - all my current recordings are done on these (sometimes two of them synced). I've upgraded to an MSR-24 now, and at some point I might look at getting rid of the slave deck, but I'm still using my first TSR-8 for vocals and copying them to the 24-track.

But I digress. Parts-wise the TSR-8 has the big advantage that the heads are the same as the model 38, probably the 48 and 58 as well. This means that you have a large pool of format-compatible machines and cross-compatible parts, at least where the heads are concerned.
Some parts are cross-compatible with the MSR-16, unfortunately the capstan system appears to be unique to the TSR-8, though.

In this area, the 388 has the disadvantage that the heads are unique to it and no longer made.
 
Are you saying the heads are still available for the decks you mentioned?
You could always have them relapped.
Besides, if they are in decent shape and the deck is set
Up correctly, it's not as if they wear out that fast.
If you used them every day, don't you think a set of heads would last
A couple of years or more?
 
zorf said:
Are you saying the heads are still available for the decks you mentioned?
Click to expand...
As far as I'm aware, yes - unless I bought the last one. Point is, even if they're not available new, parts machines which use that model of head are quite plentiful.

You could always have them relapped.
Besides, if they are in decent shape and the deck is set
Up correctly, it's not as if they wear out that fast.
If you used them every day, don't you think a set of heads would last
A couple of years or more?
Click to expand...

It depends on use patterns and what condition the heads were in originally. Keystone wear seems to be fairly common on these machines. If the heads are near mint, parts availability is liable to be less of a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top