Conference napalm::commusic_v1

  I have a Tascam 234 with a Teac PE-20/PX-20 mixer that I bought
  as a package from EU Wurlitzer last year for $900. The mixer
  is very basic, 4 channels with parametric eq, all patching must
  be done manually. I find the tape deck to be superb (it's spec'd
  better then the portastudio), the mixer as I said is basic, but
  clean and sufficient if one is not too exotic. If you can afford
  it I recommend buying the tape deck and mixer separate, then
  if you expand or decide to change mixers , the tape deck (or
  whatever) is not built into the mixer. The portastudio has the
  one advantage of being one unit, and very portable without haveing
  to mess with all of those patch cords.
  
  dave

    I also recommend the 234 very highly. It's a super deck.
    
    The 246 might be nice but limited.
    
    Don't bother with the porta-studio at all. It's lousey.
    
    Dennis Savage
    

    RE .2
    
    You mean the mini-studio not the 246 porta-studio, don't you?
    
    Dave

    I mean the porta-one, I think.
    
    Dennis

    I've never seen the 234, could you give more info?  Does it have
    dbx?  Any ideas on mixers as well as signal processing for the
    Juno would also be appreciated.
    
    thanks.............Bruce

    The 234 is a three space rack mount unit with internal dbx. It has
    nice a nice pre-load synch circuit and facilities to do internal
    mixing. The RC-71 for about $50 is a standard Teac remote box and
    a single pole normally open momentary switch can be plugged into
    the unit for punch in/out. There is also a stereo que out. i personally
    think it's easily the best 4 channel cassette machine on the market.
    It's audibly quieter than the 246. It runs at 3 3/4 IPS. It seems
    to work well with bashing a big signal in there also. 
    
    If I had my way I would get a Tascam 216 mixer. That way you can
    do all kinds of stereo sorts of effects things on your mixdown. A
    channel for each effect return...etc. Hard to have too many channels
    on a mixer.                                          
    
    A 300 series Tascam like the 308 is *very* nice also. About $1250
    for a 308. Many people think the 308/234 is a match made in heaven
    for the small home gig.
    
    There are actually a hell of a lot of good mixing options on the
    market right now with more, I'm sure, to come.
    
    One thing I am sure about is that you will not be disappointed with
    the sonic or operational qualities of the 234. About $700 or so.
    
    Dennis Savage

    Well, perhaps I'm replying to a dead note (still trying to read
    through the history of this file) but...
    
    I also don't care for the Tascam "Porta-one".  I borrowed one from
    a  friend once and just kept running into limitations.
    
    The biggest limitation that I can recall is lack of control in the
    monitor mix.  We found that when laying down a new track we could not
    get the desired balance (in the headphones) between the new track
    and the old tracks we were playing along to.   The new track was
    always too loud and overpowered the old tracks such that it was
    very hard to sync up to (especially for the drummer).  The only
    way around this problem involved using an external mixer.
    
    Also the limitation of recording at most two tracks at once causes
    one to have to choose among various compromises when trying to 
    mixdown midi stuff.
    
    I do have a recommendation though.  The Yamaha MT1X, which is what
    I ended up with.  It runs about $450 and does about everything one
    could reasonably expect from a 4-track:
    
    1)  can record 4 channels simultaneously (a must for "live
    	recording")
    
    2)  With each track, you have the choice of recording off
    
    	    a) the channel with the same number as the track
    	    b) off the stereo buss
    
        This means you can mixdown live.  For example, if you have 4
        MIDI inputs (M1-M4)and one to record M1 and M2 on the same
        track, and M3 and M4 on separate tracks, you can do
    	it without ping-ponging.  You just assign one track to record
        M1 and M2 mixed off the stereo buss, and assign track 3 to
        record just M3 and track 4 to record M4.  (You could even mix
    	M3 and M4 down while mixing M1 and M2 down but assigning one
        pair to the left channel and the other to the right.)
    
    3) The MT1X has one effects send with a mono send and a stereo
       return.  This is useful even just for stereo effects during
       mixdowns, but nothing prevents you from using those two returns
       from being effectively a balanced (between left and right) fifth
       channel (if you only plug one return in, it sends the signal
       to both L+R),  or even a fifth and sixth channel (with each
       channel panned to different sides).
    
       Of course, this effects return can also be used to hook up an
       additional mixer.
    
    4) The MT1X has dbx which I think is better than dolby which is
       what the 246 has.
    
    5) Builtin MIDI sync feature.  (All this does is turn dbx processing
       off one channel so that you can record FSK on it).
    
    6) 4 monitor modes!!!  You can monitor the stereo buss (output of
       the mixer section), the monitor buss (which has its own separate
       levels and pans for each channel) or a mixture of the two.
    
    7) Level meters are LEDs, not needles.  Needles don't react as fast
       as LEDs.  You can monitor the stereo buss (stereo meter mode)
       or each track individually.
    
       Wait.  That's just three  modes right?  Well you can also use
       the effects send as a completely separate monitor section if
       you're not using it for anything else.  (Each channel has it's
       own effects send level, and there are master levels for send
       and return).  To do this, you just plug your powered monitor
       into the effects send output.  (You can still use the effects
       return for a completely separate purpose like an additional 
       mixer!)
    
    8) Each channel of the mixer has a pot for matching the impedance
       of the inputs.  It goes from MIC to Line.   The manual tells
       you how to match the impedance of your inputs without any guessing
       using the input adjustment pot, and the level meters.
    
    These are the semi-unique features of the MT1X.  Of course, it has
    all the semi-standard features as well (zero-stop on rewind, etc.).
    The recording quality is decent, which is to say it's as good or
    better than anything else I've used in the same range.
    
    Anyway I think it's a much better deal than the 246 even if it is
    a little bit more.   That little bit more, buys you a whole lot
    more flexibility.
    
    	Dave Blickstein
    
    p.s.  The manual for the MT1X is very good, but I'd particularly
          recommend staring at the schematic for about 1/2 an hour
          as that's where you really get a feel for how the thing is
          laid out and how to do some non-standard tricks.
    
          I'm also using the MT1X as my keyboard/drum-machine mixer.

Dave, is the MT1X rack-mount or board style?  Do you know how it compares with 
the Tascam234?  I had read that Yamaha really got their act together after 
screwing it up with their first one (which used dolbyC; OK for compatibility 
among home decks but not good enough for professional use).  If this thing is 
good enough, it might mean they have a modular series coming down the road 
that would be an imporvement on the Tascam234.

Feature-wise, it's already better than the Tascam234, but features aren't as 
important as headroom, crosstalk and other sonic properties unless they are 
features that can't be moved onto an external mixer.


				Mark

    Yamaha will not be coming out with any more recording equipment
    down the road. They have discontinued all lines of recording equipment.
     
    At the NAMM show last month, they revealed that their multitrack
    equipment was actually made by Panasonic, and the line wasn't selling
    successfully enough to make it worthwhile.
    
    This information was given to me by Fritz, from E.U. Wurlitzer in
    Boston.

I agree.  Wurlitzer doesn't carry most of Yamaha's line, so they don't have 
any incentive to say anything good about them.  One of the guys who used to 
work at the Framingham store told me a few years ago that Yamaha wasn't going 
to be sending any more DX7's to the U.S. market for another six months.  What 
he REALLY meant was that Wurlitzer's line of credit was in default and Yamaha 
was about to go into an exclusive dealership agreement with LaSalle.

I have no idea what the story is here, but Panasonic makes equipment that 
holds up well so you probably made a wise choice for the board-style 
multi-tracks.  I went to the 234 for superior sound, and have found its mixing 
capabilities more than adequate for my current needs, but the MT1X sounds like 
all you would need in a mixer.  The other choices that were available when the 
234 came out would STILL have required an outboard mixer to do much useful 
stuff, so it made more sense to go with quality over features and get the one 
that was rack-mount and had just basic mixing.

The 234 is very light and portable, by the way.  The PortastudioTwo looks like 
a step back from the PortastudioOne, in terms of the human interface and 
overall design.  It's harder to see needles and LED's that are flat down than 
ones that are at an angle, as on the One.

The 234 uses LED's and needles.  LED's for spikes in the signal to indicate 
overload, and needles to give a better idea of average signal.  That is, it 
combines LED peak meters with needle average meters.  It's a good compromise.

For its price, I would probably go with the MT1X if I was starting from 
scratch, rather than the 234 (whose price has NOT come down).


				Mark

    
    re. 9
    
    I hate to dissent but I saw an announcement this week re a new tape
    machine from Yamaha to put alongside the MT1X. Would you beleive
    the MT2X?. It is apparently similar to the 1x but has 6 input
    channels.?
    					Paul.

    re: the last 4 replies
    
    Wow, I have to admit I'm a little surprised. I've always had nothing
    but the best luck when dealing with E.U. Wurlitzer. Dave, I hope
    you are right - I'd like to think that Fritz was just misinformed.
    However, I wish I could have seen the Yamaha machine and played
    with it before I bought the Porta One. I guess this is one case
    where my eagerness to buy the unit overpowered my common sense and
    patience.
    
    Oh well, the Porta One is still not THAT bad...
    
    -Dan
    

RE: .7

  Just wanted to clarify... db mentions limitations of the "246" when I think
  he meant the "Porta-one." The Tascam 246 is like a 234 with 6 input mixer,
  all the benefits of the MT1X, and then some...

- Tom (satisfied 246 owner)

    re: .15
    
    Oops, you're right.  Somewhere in the middle of my note I started
    substituted 246 for Porta-one.  I even said that the MT1X costs
    a bit more than the 246 when exactly the opposite is true.
    
    	db

    A very good friend of mine was the manager of the EU store in Newington
    He quit because he felt they were unethical.....they were told to
    lie about the availability of brands that they didn't stock etc.
    
    dave

    I was aware of the bad reputation EU Wurlitzer used to have. However,
    once Gene Joly took over as president of the company last year,
    I have been much more willing to trust them. Gene was the manager
    of Daddy's Nashua (before Fritz), and he was very honest and 
    straightforward. When he got promoted to president, he pulled Fritz
    from Daddy's Nashua because he had liked working with him before,
    and because Fritz was also known for his integrity.
    
    Maybe I was wrong, but I have had only good experiences with my
    dealings with them over the past year or so.
    
    -Dan
    

    I never liked the attitudes EU had to offer...who do they think
    they are anyway?? Then again, there are very few music stores 
    that I feel treat their customers with any respect, or that offer
    good service. They're few and far between in my book.

	The Wurlitzer store in Framingham has always been helpful to me. I get
good prices, time to shop and big favors.  While one of my amps is in the shop
they've given me a loaner, free of charge and with no hassle. 

	I generally find that the better you know the salespeople (translated:
more you've seriously shopped and *bought* there) the better they treat you.

What speed does the tape run on the MT1X (in ips)?  I am definitely
    interested in multitrack recorders, but have turned a deaf ear due
    to the lack of sound quality.
    
    Todd.
    

    
    MT1x runs at 1 7/8 ips. The MT2x runs at 3 3/4. 
    
    The best new multi-tracker (cassette based) I have seen recently
    was the new Fostex (160) I think. This was based on the more
    traditional machines i.e. 4 inputs only. But it runs at 3 3/4 and
    the sound was superb. Inbuilt DOLBY C I think. And the price was
    about 450 pounds which is extremely competetive at the moment.
    
    You can tell this machine because it is smaller than all the other
    Fostex machines (X-15) accepted. And is long and thin rather than
    short and fat ( technical detail ).
    
    				Paul.		                      
    

    The MT1X runs at regular cassette speed (1 7/8 ips?).  If sound
    quality is of the utmost importance to you, you'd probably be better
    off with one of the units that records at 2x speed.  You pick up
    an extra 3db that way.
    
    But do remember that the various functions of the recording section
    (tape speed, noise reduction, etc.) are only one part of sound quality.
    Certain features (flexibility, MIDI-sync, etc) which allow you to
    delay or avoid track bouncing can also make a big difference.
    
    I wish the MT1X had a double speed, but mainly because I've found
    that feature useful for copping stuff off of recordings (play the 
    recording back at half speed).
    
    	db

    TASCAM have also the new PORTA-TWO out, which have six input channels
    and that might have fixed the problem with the mixer of the PORTA-ONE.
    If anybody is interrested I can bring in the data.
    Also if mixing is important FOSTEX have the new 460 out with 8 input
    channels. It is a cassette recorder based on the FOSTEX 450 mixer.
    Price will be about same as TASCAM 246 I think.
    
    Svein
    

    I just got off the horn with Fritz from E.U. Wurlitzer.
    
    In violation of a vow I took a few years ago, I just ordered a
    high-ticket guitar from E.U., but it was mainly because they were
    the only one's in the area I could get it from.  I was actually
    glad to be able to give Fritz some business because he had been
    exceptionally good to me in that past, but it always seemed to work
    out that I never made any of my significant purchases from him.
    
    In our conversation, I was pretty much convinced that things have
    been and are changing rapidly at E.U. under Gene Joly's presidency.
    Part of what convinced me was how critical Fritz was of E.U.
    before Gene took over.  He said, that their bad reputation was 
    entirely deserved but things have changed and they are trying to
    overcome the reputation.
    
    This has convinced me to treat them as a new company and give them
    a shot.   Fritz seemed just as honest as he was before.  He paid
    high praise to product lines that E.U. doesn't carry (Yamaha and
    Ensoniq).
    
    Anyway, I've deleted the notes in which I have criticized them based
    on old painful memories.  The idea being not to give any future
    reader out-of-context, outdated information.
    
    I'll relate any new experiences (good or bad) worth mentioning.
    
    	db

    re : earlier MT1X note....
    
    I have recently purchased a Yamaha MT1X and loved it. For the money,
    about $450, it is definitely a good bargain. I was especially attracted
    to it due the the significant amount of increased functionality
    as well as DBX and MIDI-compatibility. I think the sound quality
    is more than acceptable and better than most decks in the same price
    range. I especially love the flexibility I get when recording.
    
    A satisfied Yamaha customer,
    
    Tony