Tascam Porta Two Ministudio 4 Track Analog Cassette Tape Recorder AS IS/Power On | eBay I think the secret is there’s something musical about multitrack where you have to jump into the song
jump into the song speaks a thousand words. a great post by GHOST. also forget finding someone to repair / fix the problem. reconnect with the bud from back in the day who had love for the format and save money. not a tech person but someone who knows what he / she is doing.
i have ampex 457 i think it is. one opened but unused and two still in the wrapper. i can send one to someone for free if you use this format as i want to contribute to the forum. let me know. on another note i remember a reel to reel digital tape i saw on EQ or another mag. anyone know what that was ?
Probably 456. Everyone was using that in the late 70's-early 80's. Went through miles of it on my Tascam 80-8 in my basement studio.
Im afraid I don't have any budget info for you, the last reel of 1/2" tape I bought was around $120. Don't know of new machines only 'like new'. The Ampex Atr can be configured for 4 track and are still being restored by Atr Services. I went to an alignment seminar there a few years ago, impressive place and they make tape there too. Service Menu | ATR Services
No. No market for cassette 4 or 8 tracks. There is a market for analog professional multi-tracks though. Hundreds of big studios are using old analog 2 inch 24 tracks. But no one has made a new one since 1995. No new parts either. People think analog is making a comeback. Nope. Turntables yes. But new cassette and reel to reel? Forget it. I believe there is one company making a new quarter inch half track machine. But they ain't cheap. And it will be inferior to pretty much all the Studer, Stephens, Ampex, 3M, Tascam, Foster and Otari 2 track reel to reel machines that came before it. Ahhhhh.....bad news. All production of professional analog multitracks stopped in 1995. And production of DASH machines stopped in 2002. DASH tape stopped in 2006. The only engineers I know who are still recording on DASH (Sony 3348HR was $250 000 back in 1993. $5000 good condition on EBay today. Whatever you do don't buy one. Nooo!) multitracks are brothers CLA and TLA. For reasons which I won't bore you with here. Hint: They really hate Pro Tools. We had this same discussion on Gearlust. When this one very young engineer said, "Someone could produce a low cost matience free analog multi-track." we fell on the floor laughing. An analog 2 inch 16 track like the Ampex ATR-116 (rare only maybe 90 sold) is a beautiful machine with a sound no DAC could touch. But....these beasts require constant matience and alignment and the ATR series more so. Good luck getting parts! Many big studios are still recording on analog machines but they are all used. The most popular is the Studer 827: At 15 ips: 30 - 20 000 hz +-2db 70 db signal to noise ratio 'A' weighted 68 db signal to noise ratio unweighted wow and flutter 0.04% rms At 30 ips: 40 - 24 000hz +-2db 72 db signal to noise ratio 'A' weighted 70 db signal to noise ratio unweighted Wow and flutter 0.027 % rms Back in 1989 (I believe....could be 1987.???) this machine was selling for $35 000 U.S. The average price for a 2 inch 24 track was between $30 000 and 35 000. But that was 27 years ago. If a company came out and started to make new analog multitracks they would have to be as good as a Studer 827 or the Otari MX-80 which go used in good working condition for $10 000 USD or less. Any new 2 inch 24 track machine would sell today for no less than $100 K. And I am being optimistic here! More likely $150 000. And who is going to buy a new machine for even $100k when old classics like the: Ampex ATR-124 (only 80 sold!), ATR-116, Studer 827, Otari MX-80 and others are selling in good workable condition for peanuts? But I am talking about cassette multitracks? Ahhhh, that's even worse. Back in 1993 they were many Japanese companies that were making cassette decks. And they kept pushing the envelope. Finally you could get Professional reel to reel performance out of a cassette! (laughing quietly). But no one is making state of the art cassette record and playback heads anymore or first class tape transport systems. Another small problem. Dolby labs no longer will give out licenses for Dolby A, B, C. And no one is making DBX Type 1 or 2 either. Dolby Labs still might be issuing out licenses for Dolby SR as it used on analog multitracks. Don't know about Dolby S for consumer use. No one is making quality parts needed to make even a so so cassette 4 track let alone one that is superior to the porta-studios of old. Analog tape machine technology is dead. And as been for a while now. The last new cassette deck I purchased was a Sony deck in 2007. It had Dolby B and C. Dolby HX Pro. And it could record with Type 2 and 4 tape. Still have and it still works. And my God an actually top end. New developments in analog tape technology came to an end 24 years ago. When you speak about the technology of today it's all tape less. The days of motors, tape transports and whatnot are over. They are some exceptions like JRF Magnetics who make 2 inch 8 track heads stacks to fit on 2 inch 24 track machines, Head relapping (when your heads get all worn and crappy), head replacements, reel to reel test tapes, etc. But they are not the norm. I had some idea to make the ultimate 8 track cassette way back when. First run it at 7.5 ips. Dolby HX pro - now that there is an actual top end. Metal tape. Use either Dolby C or Dolby S. DBX works great with half inch tape running at 30 ips. Hell...You won't even know it's there. But not on 1/8 inch cassette tape running at 1 7/8 inches per second. The only thing slower is VHS tape that runs at half that speed. And that's on the SP mode! If you want really want that good old cassette 4 or 8 track sound I have an idea. Go on Ebay and other cursed places and look for a Fostex 1/4 inch 8 track with Dolby C. Or if you feel real adventurous there is always the Fostex 1/2 inch 16 track especially designed to work at only 30 ips. A 1/4 inch 8 track has the same track width as a 1/8 inch cassette 4 track. I think...Let me know dear members if I ahhh...Screwed up the math here.
They stopped making DASH tape in 2006. And yet brothers CLA and TLA are still recording on Sony PCM 3348HR. Where are they getting the 1/2 inch DASH tape from? Yes, agreed. I tell people over and over again: I don't care if you are buying it from your Mother, always, always, always get a head report. A engineer friend of mine purchased some 3M two inch 24 track from a "friend" who swore that the heads were in great condition. I told him to ask for a head report. No one ever listens! When he got it he asked me to look at it. The edge tracks 1 and 24 were gone. Completely useless! And more than half of the tracks had head gaps opened up. I said, "Get your money back. This guy lies to you." Too late.
Especially those nice JRF Magnetic 2 inch 8 track heads. My Uncle has three of those. These 2 inch head stacks are designed (for us) to go on a Studer 827. Nice. Separate time code track and everthing. All three Studer 827's with the JDF Magnetics 2-inch 8-track heads synchronized together get you essentially 6 inch 24 track sound. This allows us to remix from a badly damaged / SSS tape but still in analog and without losing any quality. Weather that's a 2 inch 24, 16 or 1 inch 8 track tape we keep it in analog but never lose any sound quality. So all of the copies are 6 inch 24 track. And we mix from there. It's like mixing from the original analog tape. Pro Tools is good but mixing 24 tracks of PCM 24/176.4 is not the same as mixing from a perfect analog copy recorded on what is in truth an analog 6 inch 24 track. Some engineers have said it's overkill. "Why not lock up two good quality 2 inch 16 tracks?" You will lose quality that's why.
If a DAW isn't your thing and it doesn't have to be analog there are other options. Tascam DP-02 8 tracks of 16/44.1 Built in CD burner It is just like a cassette 8 track except you get full 20 - 20 000 hz +- 3db. And 96 db signal to noise ratio without the use of NR. And no wow and flutter. And no channel leakage! Full mixer section. All 8 channels have: FADER PAN EFFECT SEND TWO BAND PARAMETRIC EQ 31 frequencies (30 - 1600 hz) 31 frequencies (1700 - 18 000 hz Effect return and master fader. Full digital editing. Built in digital reverb (no delay though) Optical output Analog output. Damn....No monitor out..just run your powered near fields off the headphone Amp. It will work with no hum. (None worth mentioning) And almost 300 effects. Two balanced phantom powered XLR / 1/4 inch mike preamps. 40 GB hard drive UNLIMITED UNDO AND REDO. Used in good condition for $250 or less. Or the Tascam DP-03. Same thing but it records on an SD card, has two built in omni-directional microphones (not bad) and basic mastering effects. No CD burner. $300 used or less. $500 new.
Can anyone confirm this: Most 4/8 track cassette porta-studios have a frequency response of 42 - 12 500 hz +-3 db. But they are two well known Tascam or Fosrex 4 and 8 track models that have an impressive spec of: 30 - 16 000hz +-3db. (Or 40 - 15 000hz +-2db) This is very good. Certainly by 60's standards. For example the famous 1 inch 4 track the Beatles recorded on, The Studer J-37 had a frequency response of 30 - 15 000hz +-2db @ 15 ips. 50 - 18 000hz +- 2db @ 30ips. Someone member in the back shouts, 15 000hz! No way. Come on....It's a 1 inch 4 track. Don't look at me guys! I didn't build the damn blasted thing. Truth is all top of the line multi-tracks in the 60's had these specs. And only a few had the 30ips speed option like the Studer J-37 and the Scully 284-8 / 284-12. Could they have built one that was flat up to 18khz or even 20khz at 15 ips? Don't know. 15khz back in 1966 was serious Hi-Fi. Most records back then had no frequencies above 10khz anyway and 3.75 ips pre-recorded reel to reel releases were flat up to maybe 12 or 13khz. And most home speaker just didn't go as high as 15khz let alone 20khz. 20khz was science fiction back in those days. Making a 4 or 8 track that went up to 20khz back in 1966 would have been pointless. Why bother???? My point is 30 - 16000 hz +-3 db is all you need. Thousands of great 60's records were made on 3, 4, 8, 12 and 16 tracks with these specs and they sound great. Flat up to 20khz is great but only if it's recorded and mixed properly.
No digital editing, only 4 or 8 tracks. I think that definitely will make a better song. Pro Tools with it's 384 track count is silly. No one needs it!
Reel to reel multitracks require a lot of ahhh....TLC or MBJ. Azuimth adjustments, cleaning, demagnatizing (every 10 hours), And that's once you get everthing up and running. It's not just thread a tape through and hit play. At Seven Nations Studio we have two Otari MX-80's with the 2 inch 32 head stacks. These machines were built like tanks and were designed to last a long time. But at 30 years they are not what they used to be. We can cannibalize parts we need from other multi-tracks. plenty of spare parts on Ebay and other places. But every year it gets harder to find parts. Yes I agree with these knowledgeable gentlemen: Before you decide buy an old Tascam 1/4 inch 4 track or whatever think on it real hard. And get a head report. And if the guy says, "It's only a 4 track. Come on!" Tell him it doesn't matter. You want a Head Report. Reel to reel multitracks sound pretty good. Don't worry that top end cuts off at 18khz or 17khz. Every multi-track in the 60's had a frequency response of 30 - 15 000hz +-2db @ 15 ips anyway and the music off that whole period sounds pretty good to me. But again, a reel to reel purchase is serious purchase. Think carefully. Good luck!
What was the last year pro reel to reel tape recorders were made or marketed? It must be some year in the 1990's, by the begining of that decade analogue recordings were still the norm, for good...
The Otari MX 5050 III was the last production 1/2 track, 1/4" machine available on special order for many years.
Those reasons are why real studios have full time maintenance engineers. Big difference between ultra-conservative professional machine specification sheets, and optimistic specs by people like Akai. Professional machines are quoted at the minimum warranted specifications, and usually considerably better than spec as a rule. Same goes for ReVox machines. And yes, get that Head Report.
I have a tee-shirt that says ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS GET THE HEAD REPORT. Funny true story. Some guy was selling a 2 inch 24 track on Ebay. I think it was a 3M....Can't remember. Anyway he said it wall tested and working great. Except one thing. (Wait for it!) The edge tracks (1, 24) had no bass. And right in the Ebay auction ad he says, "Just don't record anything with bass on the edge tracks.." Huh?...What the organic fudge?!!?! Is this guy serious? I guess our new edge tracks are now what 2 and 23? But the auction ad makes it sound like this machine is great except for this one little tiny its-bitsy little thing. Full time engineering! That's explains why I am never home. A full time engineering staff of one. I had to travel all the way to Hong Kong in 2010 to get some parts for our SSL4064 G / +G board. Yum Yum...And then the guy I was meeting doubled the price and he only took American dollars. You ever try to find a cash machine in Honk Kong that dispenses USD? Agree with everthing you say.. Engineers are conservative on paper. Where as the marketing people at Revox (consumer division of Studer. They made some of the greatest cassette decks ever made but ahhh...no one noticed.) have other priorities. Back in the day Otari had a reputation. The MX-80 (we have two. Both with 32 inch head stacks.) specs are 30 - 20 000 Hz +-2db @ 15 ips. The specs are probably better but when you are dealing with Pros you want a spec you are completely sure of. They quote +- 2db whereas consumer companies will quote frequency response in +-3 db. Professional multitrack companies always quoted their signal to noise ratio unweighted. Whereas consumer companies quote A weighted. Why? Because A Weighted looks better. The MX-80 has a 7.5ips speed option for that authentic 1966 sound: 20 - 15 000hz +-2db . Or is there another reason the 7.5ips speed is given? We have gotten a few tapes at that speed. For example back in 1973 The Stephens 2 inch 40 track was quoted in the spec sheet as: 40 - 22 000hz +-2db @ 30 ips. (You could run the 2 inch 40 at 15ips but ahhh.....mmmm) But John Stephens guaranteed the frequency response at 40 - 20 000hz +-2db @ 30ips. As an engineer he didn't want to push his luck. whereas Pioneer and JVC would exaggerate things all the time. Not lie. Just push the truth. Anybody remember those rumble ratings on direct drive turntables ? Most companies just popped a 250hz high pass (low cut) filter on the rumble and wow - look how good those rumble readings are. That was some real bull!
John, you and I see very much eye to eye on this very thing. On that 3M 2" 24 track, there's two words from me which sum this machine up very well, they are "Money Pit" Major things for me which disqualify a machine are: 1: Heads of questionable or very worn nature. 2: motors with noise, bearing wear, or dysfunction, and 3: Abused machines and/or missing critical items, unless 4: Cheap enough to repair.
Stephens, the 1960's Jaguar of tape machines. Works when it wants to, sometimes does not work at all. Known for being somewhat temperamental. 7 1/2 IPS on Otari machines is specced because, where do you find more Otari machines than anywhere else, in an AM or FM broadcast studio or production room. Especially of the 5050 varieties. In that market, 7 1/2 IPS is the most used speed (the typical AM/FM station speed standard, another reason why the low flux setting is factory biased for Ampex 631 or 3M 177, the most commonly used tape formulas in radio)
When they create a digital recorder that produces sounds as good as a good analog cassette deck, I'll give up on cassettes. And no thank you to analog vinyl.
