thinkin bout goin analog

  • Thread starter Thread starter seismetr0n
  • Start date Start date
seismetr0n

seismetr0n

New member
hey all, i was thinking about adding an analog machine to my digital studio,
i was just wondering if 1/4" 8-track is even worth considering, or should i save up and get something thats at least 1/2"

thanks
 
seismetr0n said:
hey all, i was thinking about adding an analog machine to my digital studio,
i was just wondering if 1/4" 8-track is even worth considering, or should i save up and get something thats at least 1/2"

thanks
Click to expand...

Points to consider (or 'half-broken Fostex A8 vs Tascam TSR-8'):

1. Tape cost. 1/4" tape is a lot cheaper than 1/2", and somewhat easier to obtain (since more people use it).

2. Crosstalk. The 1/4" format has more talk between tracks. This is particularly inconvenient when working with a sync tone on track 8.
Not only will the sync tone come through on track 7 when recording it, but if you later record something on track 7, it will swamp the sync track during the recording. Live stuff should be OK, but don't even think of laying down a sequencer-controlled track on no.7 because it just won't work.
You don't get this problem very much on the TSR-8, and in every case so far I've been able to get it to read the sync tone by adjusting the levels on the sync box.

3. Parts. Tascam parts seem to have better availability than Fostex parts.

4. Weight. The Fostex machines are a lot lighter, and the R8 even has a handle to carry it with.

..of course, not all of this applies if your 1/4" machine in question is a Tascam 388.
 
seismetr0n said:
hey all, i was thinking about adding an analog machine to my digital studio,
i was just wondering if 1/4" 8-track is even worth considering, or should i save up and get something thats at least 1/2"

thanks
Click to expand...


I suggest that you don't. Once you get an analog system running you may find that it addictive.
 
The Tascam 388 is always worth considering. It's a real joy to use. Just about everybody here who has one seems to love it to death.

1/4" sounds great. 1/2" sounds better, but 1/4" will take you where you want to go.
 
Great, great advice guys! I'd say get yourself a nice TASCAM 388. It pretty much beats out any other 1/4" 8 track machine. The 388 is the only thing I'd consider for this type of format. Plus you get a superior mixer as a bonus! :D Like the guys mentioned, 1/4" tape is dirt cheap compared to 1/2" but 1/2" is cool too. ;)

~Daniel
 
thanks for all the advice, so 1/4" is o.k. then (thats about all i can afford right now)
i was worried about bleed/crosstalk, i used to use a tascam 424mkII and i noticed bleed when i cranked the inputs...

so now we get more advanced....
theres been a couple votes for the tascam 388.. ok.
what about a fostex r8? ..
anything in particular i should avoid?

and now a chain question....
since i'm going to go onto cd (eventually) which chain would you recommend?
A. 8-reel-8a/d-master-cd
B. 8-reel-2reelmaster-a/d-cd

any other options?

thanks for all your help
 
secondary quick question on the 388.. how long is the record time on a 7" reel?
thanks
 
seismetr0n said:
secondary quick question on the 388.. how long is the record time on a 7" reel?
thanks
Click to expand...

Depends on the reel. With 456 or 406, you get 1200' of tape. With 457/407 it is thinner so you get more, usually 1800' IIRC.

You can convert from feet to minutes by multiplying the length by 12 (into inches) and then dividing by 15 (15 ips = seconds). Then you divide that by 60 to get minutes. I usually leave a minute of blank tape at the start and end for safety. You could probably reduce that if you splice header and tail onto the tape.

As for machines, I have heard good and bad things about the Fostex R8. but avoid the A8.. they are very old now and getting it serviced up to spec will probably cost a lot more than it is worth. I'm not sure of any commercial recordings using the R8, but the E16 (which is the same but 1/2" and 16-track) is highly acclaimed and was used in many low-to-mid end studios and commercial recordings. The older B16 was used by Bill Nelson on most of his albums, IIRC.

*EDIT: the math should be right now*
 
...

Run time on the 388 is 33 min. for 1200'/reel, and 48 min. for 1800'/reel. The 388 runs at 7.5 ips. It has full master/slave sync capability on SMPTE sync, using a sychronizer and the large 36-pin Elco connectors.

The Fostex series of 1/4" 8-track reels run at 15 ips, so record time is less, accordingly. (Appx. 16 min/1200' & appx. 24 min/1800'). The Fostex Model 80 and R8 are (Master/Slave) plug-compatible with synchronizers, but the A8 is not.

1/2" 8-track is definitely a more robust sounding format than 1/4" 8-track, at about 3x the tape cost. 1/4" 8-tracks sound decent, considering it's a budget format.
 
Last edited:
FWIW- I now have 1/2" 8 track and a 1/2" 16 track. The 1/2" 16 has the same track width as a 1/4" 8. Its a Tascam msr-16.

Only had the msr-16 for a few days, but my initial observations are:

1) With dbx NR engaged, there isn't a stunning difference in the sound of the two machines. Wihtout noise redux, the 1/2" 8 does sound better. I'd say noise redux is a must for a 1/4" 8.

2) If you're already acustomed to the convenience of digital recording, having only 8 tracks is kind of a shock. Its a good shock, though, and gets you thinking a bit more creatively.

3) With NR, there is a difference in sound with the 7.5 (low) and 15 (high) speed settings on the 16 track. Its nice to have the option- low to save on tape and high for better quality. Or just to have to different sounding options. Slower doesn't sound worse, just a different EQ curve to take into account. I don't know if the 1/4" 8's have variable speeds, but it kicks butt.

4) A 3 head machine will give you the option of getting tape saturation directly into your daw if you have the hardware I/O for it. Send a track out to the tape deck, record it, run the play head output back into the DAW. Depending on your software you'll have to account for the delay, but its not hard. Can't be done with a 2 head machine that I know of.

Anyway, I'm really happy I have a couple digital and analog options now. And I *strongly* second evm's warning that its addictive. :D

Take care,
Chris
 
Wesleymino said:
The Tascam 388 is always worth considering. It's a real joy to use. Just about everybody here who has one seems to love it to death.

1/4" sounds great. 1/2" sounds better, but 1/4" will take you where you want to go.
Click to expand...

Yes, my 388 is the coolest thing I've ever owned, great machine but extremely heavy, I wouldn't get one shipped. The sound I've been getting lately is just phenomenal. Mp3s coming soon! :)
 
seismetr0n said:
hey all, i was thinking about adding an analog machine to my digital studio,
i was just wondering if 1/4" 8-track is even worth considering, or should i save up and get something thats at least 1/2"

thanks
Click to expand...

No. Get a 1/2" machine. Don't look back. 1/4" is consumer, 1/2" is prosumer, 1" and above is pro. Machine quality goes in same order with maintanence and durability/sound best for pro units. Very reasonably priced these days (like beta video machines) in the dead days of analog.
 
A Reel Person said:
Run time on the 388 is 33 min. for 1200'/reel, and 48 min. for 1800'/reel. The 388 runs at 7.5 ips. It has full master/slave sync capability on SMPTE sync, using a sychronizer and the large 36-pin Elco connectors.

The Fostex series of 1/4" 8-track reels run at 15 ips, so record time is less, accordingly. (Appx. 16 min/1200' & appx. 24 min/1800'). The Fostex Model 80 and R8 are (Master/Slave) plug-compatible with synchronizers, but the A8 is not.

1/2" 8-track is definitely a more robust sounding format than 1/4" 8-track, at about 3x the tape cost. 1/4" 8-tracks sound decent, considering it's a budget format.
Click to expand...

Pretty much agree. But, 7.5IPS is like taking a 1 shot gun to a shootout. Why would anyone do it?

15IPS minimum with dolby C is best.
 
seismetr0n said:
hey all, i was thinking about adding an analog machine to my digital studio,
i was just wondering if 1/4" 8-track is even worth considering, or should i save up and get something thats at least 1/2"

thanks
Click to expand...
I know I'm just some stranger on the internet chimming in but I wholeheartedly suggest taking the next step and getting the nicest machine you can afford (whatever that may be). I should have bought mine years ago but blew to much time listening to the masses state over and over about all sorts of BS "drawbacks" to analog. A tape machine is such a beautiful, simple thing that automatically just has that sound.
 
quarterinch said:
I know I'm just some stranger on the internet chimming in but I wholeheartedly suggest taking the next step and getting the nicest machine you can afford (whatever that may be). I should have bought mine years ago but blew to much time listening to the masses state over and over about all sorts of BS "drawbacks" to analog. A tape machine is such a beautiful, simple thing that automatically just has that sound.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more! :)
 
o.k. youve convinced me i need a 1/2" min., but now i'm wondering if a 16 track 1/2" would be o.k.,
now with a 16track 1/2" i really only have the same quality as the 8-track 1/4" right?
the quality of the larger tapes is really because of the larger heads right?
just checkinbg, thanks for all the help so far.
 
seismetr0n said:
o.k. youve convinced me i need a 1/2" min., but now i'm wondering if a 16 track 1/2" would be o.k.,
now with a 16track 1/2" i really only have the same quality as the 8-track 1/4" right?
the quality of the larger tapes is really because of the larger heads right?
just checkinbg, thanks for all the help so far.
Click to expand...

Not any 1/2" tape machine will do 'cause 16 tracks on 1/2" has THE SAME track width as 8 track on 1/4". No difference.

Additionally, you'd be looking at the large 10.5" reels of 1/2" tape (only) which can get quite expensive vs the 1/4" reels which can be large or small size. The rest, I'm not sure what you're trying to ask tho. :confused:

~Daniel
 
Quality comes from, among other things, the amount of tape for each track.

So all other things (like the deck's electronics) being equal a 16 track 1/2" is about the same quality as a 1/4" 8 track. A 1/2" 8, having about twice the track width of a 1/4" 8, is going to give you better quality.

So, yeah, you have it right.

In the grand scheme of things, though... I'm not sure how much it matters. My 16 track 1/2" sound pretty good to me so far. Its technically not Major Label Pro, but then neither is the rest of my gear. Neither am I! :) All things in perspective it sounds fine as long as I'm not trying to go for extreme tape saturation- too much crosstalk.

-Chris
 
Yeah, just like Chris said and also I'd make an appeal to you to not completely pass on the 1/4" 8 track or 1/2" 16 track formats. It'd be cheaper, a nice introduction to Analog and also your only limit to making relatively "pro" sounding tunes would be your recording techniques and talent. This "budget" format will get you very good sounding results that you may be surprised at. Don't pass it by. Hey, if you wanna sink your teeth into a more robust format then by all means do it but don't think you'll sound pro by way of that alone.

Shit, I would love to get me a 1/2" 4 track or 1" 8 track but most of those machines are very old (or very expensive if restored), are A LOT more beat up 'cause they appeared in major studios and also would require costly servicing. Not only that but tape costs would be prohibitively expensive, not to mention availability of the machine and parts and head replacement.

See, that is the many reasons I chose TASCAM .... for its relative ease of getting one in good to low use condition, parts support etc etc ...... and it will get you a nice analog sound headache free. Is TASCAM a "compromise" ? Maybe, maybe not but I can live with it. ;)

In the totality of it all, most of the semi-pro machines, in the hands of a talented musician and recordist, will get you very far indeed and may I say that most listeners won't care if it was done on "pro" or "semi-pro" gear.

~Daniel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top