wanting to get a tascam 244: help me understand the digitization process

[christiandaelemans]

hey, young dude 18 year old here in love with the idea of recording music on analog gear. i’ve been playing around on a digital fostex vf80, and while it’s cool, it doesn’t have the tape sound i know i truly want. so, here comes the tascam 244. i know about the tape out plugs on the back, as well as the various line outs and aux outs. but i’m not sure how exactly they work.

here’s what i’m wondering: how does one complete a mix on the machine, bouncing, panning, eq, all of this, sounds good in the phones, etc. take THAT audio and then put it into a computer. all in one go, as it sounds through the phones.

i know that if you use the tape out RCA plugs, you’ll get prefader tape tracks without the effects of eqing. this isn’t what i want, i want to mix and master inside the machine and then pull out the entire mix at the same time (as to avoid drifting if i were to do it in parts).

do i utilize line out rca plugs for this? or aux plugs? and if i wanted to do everything in the tascam 244, and then pull that tape audio out onto a computer in one go, do i need an interface?

i don’t own a tape machine yet, and i’m still in the early phases of understanding how this stuff works exactly, so i apologize if the answer is right in my face or if i’m understanding information wrong.

 

[spantini]

From reading the manual, it looks like you take the Line Outs to whatever you want to send the mix to. Could be monitor speakers, or you could run those to 2 Inputs of a USB audio interface to get them into a computer. (DAW or whatever).

Here's a manual :

 

[christiandaelemans]

From reading the manual, it looks like you take the Line Outs to whatever you want to send the mix to. Could be monitor speakers, or you could run those to 2 Inputs of a USB audio interface to get them into a computer. (DAW or whatever).

Here's a manual :

thank you! this is also a dumb question, but let’s say i’ve just finished with song 1. everything is great, i’ve let the mix record into the interface and onto my computer.

now how do i start song 2? with tape, do you need an entirely new reel put into the machine to start a new song, or do you need to delete the pre-existing tape and put new stuff over it? on the fostex vf80 you can open and close programs willy nilly. what’s the equivalent on tape?

 

[jpmorris]

thank you! this is also a dumb question, but let’s say i’ve just finished with song 1. everything is great, i’ve let the mix record into the interface and onto my computer.

now how do i start song 2? with tape, do you need an entirely new reel put into the machine to start a new song, or do you need to delete the pre-existing tape and put new stuff over it? on the fostex vf80 you can open and close programs willy nilly. what’s the equivalent on tape?

Tape is a thin strip of recording media. The signal is recorded to it only as the heads move over it in record mode, so you'll only use up what you need. It's not like it's recording to the entire tape at once.
A typical cassette used in a multitrack should have 30 minutes of recording time, or 15 minutes if it's running at double speed. If you record a 3 minute song, the first 3 minutes of the tape will have that song and you'll have, say 27 minutes or so left on the tape.
Nothing forces you to start recording from the beginning of the tape, so for the next song, you'll just have to fast-forward past the first song and use the empty space after it.

 

[PorterhouseMusic]

No knock on the OP because I get it that he's young. But it's just so odd seeing that explanation of how tape works. My oh my how times have changed.

 

[christiandaelemans]

Tape is a thin strip of recording media. The signal is recorded to it only as the heads move over it in record mode, so you'll only use up what you need. It's not like it's recording to the entire tape at once.
A typical cassette used in a multitrack should have 30 minutes of recording time, or 15 minutes if it's running at double speed. If you record a 3 minute song, the first 3 minutes of the tape will have that song and you'll have, say 27 minutes or so left on the tape.
Nothing forces you to start recording from the beginning of the tape, so for the next song, you'll just have to fast-forward past the first song and use the empty space after it.

i know the tascam has a zero return function. can that be set where i want on the tape? like i play the tape until i hear the song end, and i can set a new zero? or do i gotta manually rewind every time and either listen to the song end or memorize the time it ends and go back to it every time.

 

[jpmorris]

i know the tascam has a zero return function. can that be set where i want on the tape? like i play the tape until i hear the song end, and i can set a new zero? or do i gotta manually rewind every time and either listen to the song end or memorize the time it ends and go back to it every time.

The tape counter basically counts how far the tape as moved. It's not an absolute position and it's not always accurate either. If you zero it at the start of the tape, you could write down the position for the start of each track, but those numbers will only be valid if you reset the counter at the beginning.

For example, if you reset the counter at the start of the tape, wind it halfway through and put in a fresh tape, the counter won't know about any of that and it'll still be reading the halfway point. With an electronic counter you could at this point reset it, put the first tape back in the machine and rewind - the counter would then start displaying negative numbers. (Or roll back to 999 on a mechanical counter).

All the return-to-zero function does is wind the tape until the counter reaches zero and then stop. If the counter's positive it'll rewind. If the counter's negative it'll fast-forward and it will stop at the zero point.

I usually set it to zero at the start of the song I'm working on , and use RTZ to get back to the beginning when overdubbing.

EDIT: It's perhaps worth mentioning that one of the big reasons people got excited about recording and editing on computers was because you could instantly jump to a position in the audio rather than having to wait until the tape has been spooled to the position you want.

 

[Sideprawn]

Hey! Also a young dude 18 year old here in love with the idea of recording music on analog gear! What I do is make a "Master Cassette" with a separate tape deck (one with a RCA line in), where you do all the stuff need be with EQ and all that onto the cassette. Then using an audio interface with 2 inputs, plug the RCA (with an RCA to 1/4 inch converter) into the two inputs, then play the master cassette with the new tape deck while recording in Reaper. (You'd also have to do some technical stuff to change the input device to a stereo input and other techie junk on your computer i believe). Then your good to go!

P.S.
Share with me some of your music when ur able to get them digitized, I'd love to hear it!

P.P.S
Just read the other reply's. U should prolly follow them instead lol.

 

[christiandaelemans]

Hey! Also a young dude 18 year old here in love with the idea of recording music on analog gear! What I do is make a "Master Cassette" with a separate tape deck (one with a RCA line in), where you do all the stuff need be with EQ and all that onto the cassette. Then using an audio interface with 2 inputs, plug the RCA (with an RCA to 1/4 inch converter) into the two inputs, then play the master cassette with the new tape deck while recording in Reaper. (You'd also have to do some technical stuff to change the input device to a stereo input and other techie junk on your computer i believe). Then your good to go!

P.S.
Share with me some of your music when ur able to get them digitized, I'd love to hear it!

P.P.S
Just read the other reply's. U should prolly follow them instead lol.

i already made an album that’s out on most/all streaming services called “stay awhile” by the homekeepers, was all recorded with an iphone mic (like the one you use for camera recording on the camera app) and editing using bandlab. it sounds pretty decent for what it is in my ears, literal iphone video, but by god ACTUAL tape sounds like the dream. i’d listen to the “stay awhile… less” version of the ep cuz it sounds a little more shitty in a neat way. it’s the version without any weird “tape master” settings or anything, just the raw tracks and bandlab presets on top of them.

 

[sweetbeats]

No knock on the OP because I get it that he's young. But it's just so odd seeing that explanation of how tape works. My oh my how times have changed.

Yeah I was thinking the same thing, like absolutely not a dis at all, and it was bound to happen, but the opposite of how many reacted to “random access memory” recording when digital came along and these pictorial explanations in manuals of early digital recording equipment showing how it’s different than tape…here we have the opposite…fascinating.

 

[sweetbeats]

So, @christiandaelemans, I’m not sure I totally follow…are you wanting to mix the project on the 244 and just transfer that stereo mix to the computer, like using the computer as a master recorder, or are you wanting to transfer the four discrete tape tracks as well as effect returns and any other processing to the computer? If the former, yes just use the LINE OUT jacks which should be the same mix you hear on the headphones and transfer those two channels to the computer through and interface while mixing on the 244…literally using the computer like a stereo master recorder. If the latter it’s a bit more complicated, depending on the effects you are using…you may need a small external mixer to accomplish the task, and you’ll need an audio interface with more than four simultaneous inputs…the total number depends on how many effects channels you are running on top of the tape tracks.

 

[christiandaelemans]

So, @christiandaelemans, I’m not sure I totally follow…are you wanting to mix the project on the 244 and just transfer that stereo mix to the computer, like using the computer as a master recorder, or are you wanting to transfer the four discrete tape tracks as well as effect returns and any other processing to the computer? If the former, yes just use the LINE OUT jacks which should be the same mix you hear on the headphones and transfer those two channels to the computer through and interface while mixing on the 244…literally using the computer like a stereo master recorder. If the latter it’s a bit more complicated, depending on the effects you are using…you may need a small external mixer to accomplish the task, and you’ll need an audio interface with more than four simultaneous inputs…the total number depends on how many effects channels you are running on top of the tape tracks.

i want to do the former, i want to basically record everything that will exist in the final recording on the machine and take that stereo mix straight into a computer without adjusting things outside of the box. i will use effects but i’ll use the send and receive RCA ports inside the machine as i record, versus adding them in post. thanks for the explanation! it was probably staring me right in the face on a manual somewhere, but online i only ever saw the tape out RCA route of taking recordings to a computer.

 

[rob aylestone]

Its worth noting that working with limited track count is a totally new way of working for many established recordists who are younger. Youtube, for example introduces new people to techniques and sort of labels them ‘rules’. Destructive and non destructive processes are rarely explained properly. If you accept that you will be bouncing and premixing, then thinking about processing and EQ needs experience of getting it wrong. With multitrack, you rarely have to plan. Or at least plan properly, but if you use 4 or even 8 tracks you must do it properly. Does that string synth need reverb when you record? If so, how much? By the time you finish it could be too quiet, too loud, too blurred by reverb, too obvious by the lack of it. That takes time to discover from your mistakes. You've chosen a difficult path, I’d strongly suggest you dont jump in too deep, too early. Even things like finding your own record levels. They're unique to you and your music. Learning how many red lights are ok, and on what sources? We've lost those skills with analogue, so you have to work them out yourself. Even things like meters that dont tell you everything. As in snares that dont tickle the meters, but synths that look louder than they are!

 

[Papanate]

We've lost those skills with analogue,

How have we lost those skills - I grew up on Tape - and all of it’s problems - and it’s greatness - but I wouldn’t go back to it for all the Tea in China - but I could very easily - it’s not even remembering - most of my skill set with Tape has been imprinted in my brain for a long time.

 

[christiandaelemans]

Its worth noting that working with limited track count is a totally new way of working for many established recordists who are younger. Youtube, for example introduces new people to techniques and sort of labels them ‘rules’. Destructive and non destructive processes are rarely explained properly. If you accept that you will be bouncing and premixing, then thinking about processing and EQ needs experience of getting it wrong. With multitrack, you rarely have to plan. Or at least plan properly, but if you use 4 or even 8 tracks you must do it properly. Does that string synth need reverb when you record? If so, how much? By the time you finish it could be too quiet, too loud, too blurred by reverb, too obvious by the lack of it. That takes time to discover from your mistakes. You've chosen a difficult path, I’d strongly suggest you dont jump in too deep, too early. Even things like finding your own record levels. They're unique to you and your music. Learning how many red lights are ok, and on what sources? We've lost those skills with analogue, so you have to work them out yourself. Even things like meters that dont tell you everything. As in snares that dont tickle the meters, but synths that look louder than they are!

i love the archaic nature of making my own music. i’ve never been someone who wants to have genius level of “i can do anything and everything the way i want it” when making my music. my music is simplistic in nature, with drums, bass, guitar, vocals that are double tracked and maybe a tambo. i also love the feeling of making music solo and learning how to make a machine work FOR me, learning it’s limitations and catering to them. it’s a process. music is both a sonic pleasure and also a window into its recording process. i love when i hear an album and the sonic picture it paints can make you imagine a dude playing everything in the same room while the tape is rolling. it’s cool.