Home -> Magazines -> Issues -> Articles in this issue -> View
The Tascam Way (Part 2) | |
ConclusionArticle from Sound International, June 1978 |
The Teac 80-8 tape machine, Tascam Model 5 mixer and dbx DX-8 noise-reduction unit: last month we examined them individually, this month we look at them in combination.
The system comprises an 8/4 mixer and an 8-track tape machine. It may seem strange, however, to connect an 8-track to a mixer that has only four outputs. But few people will want to record on all eight tracks at once (apart from multitrack recording of live performance; and more of that in the next section). So a mixer with eight outputs is rather a luxury. And an expensive luxury at that.
Trying to match eight into four does pose problems though — not serious ones, but they must be borne in mind when planning a recording session. Take the mixer line outputs and tape inputs for example. As we've seen, four outputs are available and four tape inputs. Any four tracks on the 80-8 can be selected for connection to these four sets, but for the sake of argument let's assume that they correspond to tracks 1 to 4. What do you do if you want to record on tracks 5 to 8? Well, there are several ways round this and the solution I chose was to use the parallel auxiliary outputs to connect submaster output 1 to track 5, submaster output 2 to track 6, etc. That way any input could be assigned via the necessary submasters to any track on the 80-8. Neat, huh?
The 'tape in' sockets of the Model 5 are not so easily sorted out. Their purpose, of course, is to provide connections from the output of the tape machine into the mixer. In particular, off-tape signals can be fed to the cue buss during overdubbing, without having to use the cue pot on an input channel. The setup works satisfactorily for the first four tracks of the 80-8, but then you run out of 'tape in' sockets on the Model 5. Of course, all eight tracks could be reconnected as the need arises, but I preferred to look for a way of having them connected permanently. (And don't forget that during mixdown of the 8-track recording into stereo, the tape machine outputs need to be connected to the mixer inputs. Having to sort out that number of inputs and outputs every time can be a real pain.)
The solution I came up with — and once again there must be alternatives — was to connect tracks 1 to 4 to the four 'tape in' sockets in the normal way, and then connect tracks 5 to 8 to 'line in' on channels 5 to 8. No was long as you don't need to listen off tracks 5, 6, 7 and 8 and simultaneously use the same number input as a microphone channel, there are no problems. With a little prior planning there shouldn't be any trouble. And, of course, 8-track mixdown is now simply a matter of setting the input selectors on channels 1 to 4 to the centre position, and channels 5 to 8 to 'line'. (Plus the fact that all the tracks are in the right order, and there is no need for sheaves of notes to remember what is recorded where.)
The first recording session I had planned with the Tascam gear was a live performance of a couple of bands in an empty church hall near Bristol. If time permitted the group wanted to have a go at overdubbing, but would settle for 8-track recording of several numbers. To provide the eight tape machine inputs, I had planned to use direct outputs on four channels and route the remainder to the submaster outputs as normal. I say 'planned' because for some unknown reason I forgot to take the reel of tape with me. (Don't laugh, it could happen to you!) Instead, it was decided that a stereo recording on a Revox A77 would do just as well for demo purposes.
One of the bands, who go by the name of NW10, consisted of drums, bass, lead guitar, electric piano and vocals. I used three microphones to cover the drum kit: an AKG D202 resting on a pillow inside the bass drum; and a pair of AKG D190s arranged either side of the kit to cover the cymbals and tom toms. Not an excessive number of microphones, but they have to be enough if you've only got eight channels. An AKG D19 was stuck in front of the lead guitarist's amplifier, and a D707 handled the electric piano's amp. The bass was direct-injected because, quite simply, we hadn't brought enough microphones. (Ever had one of those days when it's not worth getting up?) It was no real hassle, however, because I had tried miking up the bassist's amp and compared it with the di sound — I preferred the latter. Anyhow, there was enough spill from the bass into the drum and guitar mics to give some richness to the mix.
The mics were routed to the Model 5 as follows: channel 1 was assigned to the bass drum; channel 2 to kit left; channel 3 to kit right; channel 4 to the bass guitar; channel 5 to the lead guitar; and channel 6 to the electric piano. This left two channels for the lead and harmony vocals. As we didn't have any splitter boxes to allow the vocal microphones to be fed to the mixer and PA simultaneously (so the vocalists could hear themselves above the band's instruments) I used the Model 5's cue system. By connecting one channel of the PA directly to the mixer's cue output, the vocalists were satisfied and I could balance them in the mix. An added bonus was that it also allowed me to replay the tape through the PA so the group could hear how they sounded.
For the stereo recording, group 1 was designated left output and group 2 the right. Drum mics were panned to duplicate their actual position over the kit, bass was panned centre, lead guitar right and piano left — roughly the same positions they occupied on stage. The lead vocal was panned slightly left of centre and backing vocals right of centre to give them some spread.
The only problem worth mentioning was the lack of level on the headphone feed. Probably my fault, but the only place I could set up the gear was on the right-hand side of the stage in the wings (mainly because our mic leads were a trifle short). I was only a few feet away from the band, which is great for visual communications but lousy for sound isolation. The only solution was to connect a 15W amplifier I just happened to have along (amps I remember; tape and mics are another matter) between the monitor outputs and my Koss Pro 4AA cans. With the amp running flat out I could just about monitor the mix above the noise of the band. God knows what spl the cans were producing, but I had a piercing headache for three days afterwards. I only had myself to blame, but let it be a warning to sound engineers: don't try and mix too near the band. You know it makes sense.
That then is the Tascam approach to integrated mixer/tape-machine combos. The Model 5 is particularly versatile and the 80-8 is very easy to use. Prices may vary slightly from retailer to retailer but the Model 5 can be had for about £1100/$1500, while the 80-8 will set you back about £2200/$2650. The optional DX-8 noise reduction module adds another £770/$950 to the sum. OK, not exactly peanuts, but for a total of around four to five grand you can have yourself a bloody good recording/PA setup with more than adequate specifications. (On the subject of spec, the more technical reader may like to take a look at Hugh Ford's review of the 80-8 published in the December '77 issue of Studio Sound.)
For looks, the Model 5 and 80-8 are pretty tasty duo. Paintwork is a semi-reflective black, with easy-to-read white lettering to let you know what's what. In fact, physical appearance is one of the forgettable things about the Tascam series. That's not meant to be a criticism — rather that you take in everything so easily, and it's so immediately obvious what everything is there for, that nothing attracts your attention as being odd or out of place. Both units simply exude competence. What more could you ask for?
No gear is without its faults, and these two are no exception. Until the eagerly-awaited Model 15 16-input/8-output mixer finally appears on the market, for a fully Tascam mixer/tape setup the 80-8 will have to be linked to a mixer with only four outputs. But as you've seen four into eight can work with a little prior planning on sessions. The 80-8 is obviously handicapped to a certain extent by the track-jumping problem, but this can be overcome fairly easily with some forethought when the track-sheets are drawn up. All in all a fine duo and one that would do justice to any band's music.
This is the last part in this series. The first article in this series is:
The Tascam Way
(SI May 78)
All parts in this series:
Part 1 | Part 2 (Viewing)
Review by Mel Lambert
mu:zines is the result of thousands of hours of effort, and will require many thousands more going forward to reach our goals of getting all this content online.
If you value this resource, you can support this project - it really helps!
New issues that have been donated or scanned for us this month.
All donations and support are gratefully appreciated - thank you.
Do you have any of these magazine issues?
If so, and you can donate, lend or scan them to help complete our archive, please get in touch via the Contribute page - thanks!