Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    Dual speed transport.  At High speed (3.75 ips) and dbx off, you get 40
    Hz to 16 kHz.  Signal to noise ratio at high speed (but measured with
    dbx *on*) is 93 dB.  (With dbx off it is 58dB.  No mention in the specs
    as to what the frequency response is with dbx on.)  Crosstalk 70 dB,
    erasure 65 dB.  All this is probably similar to the 388.
    
    The 4track version weighs about 16 pounds.  The 8 track version weighs
    38.5 pounds.
    
    There is a built-in Midi sync unit that uses FSK with SPP.  If you want
    SMPTE you still need an external box.  (The brochure suggests the
    Tascam MTS-100 MIDiiZER, of course.)
    
    The mixer has insert patch points on the main channels.  Four
    assignable effect returns and two Aux sends, but there are also 8 group
    sends.
    
    I've seen one of these at Daddy's here, but I didn't play with it.

I broke down and bought one. I'll have a detailed review in about a week 
probably. My reactions during reading the owners manaual have been uniformly
"It does that too.." (keeping in mind that I've never had a sophistocated mixer
before in my studio).

yes Virginia it's a portastudio, but what a portastudio!

I got mine at East Coast Music Mall, for $2599.00

dbii

    DOA!!!
    
    just my luck
    
    dbii

Not DOA! but one of the wierdest problems I've ever encountered. A most 
bizzarre ground loop got me thinking that the 688 had noise problems big time.
It took me four hours to located the problem. Addded to this was a 1/4" to XLR
transformer acting like an antenna and generating even more 60Hz hum...I had 
never seen that before either.

A nice machine all in all. Yesterday I played with it for quite a while. I'll 
list the features I can remember.

10 X 8 X 2 mixer: each input is assignable to a group, Each pair of groups has 
a master fader (1/2, 3/4 etc...) Each input then allows you to pan odd or even.
The mixer has two aux sends, the returns are assignable to a group, allowing for
4 mono sends with 4 mono returns, or 2 stereo returns or 2 stereo sends with
stereo returns. Each AUX has a pan pot assigned to it. AUX 1 allows you to 
select pre or post main input fader, AUX 2 does something different (I forget).

There is a function called DUAL. DUAL allows you to operate the line inputs as
a seperate 10 X 2 mixer. You can run this independantly of the main mix or link
dual to a group or groups.

Also included is a 8 X 2 cue mixer. Standard level controls and a pan pot.

Each channel has 3 band eq, with sweepable midrange. You know standard stuff.

MIDI:

It has MIDI in, out and out/thru. Sync to midi works very good. Essentially you
tell it to save midi data on channel 8 (it automatically defeats the dbx) you
play your sequence and it generates FSK sync track that includes song position
pointer. The to use it you play it back and it really works. If you stop in the
middle of a song and then restart the tape deck, my HR-16 gets back in sync in
about 3 seconds, not too bad actually (I experimented with some wicked 
flanging on the drums last night). So you can create a number of virtual tracks
at the cost of one for a sync track.

Other sync like features: An EIA 232-c interface for connecting to a MIDIizer
or other SMPTE-to-midi sync'r. 

two external sync plugs one in and one out with level controls for recording 
your sequencer's own FSK sync tone.

The tape deck: standard cassettes (high bias) runs at 3 3/4 ips, dbx I noise
reduction, rewinds a C-60 in about 1 min 18 secs (no record but not that slow
either).

8 individual record on/off buttons. Transport seems pretty good, the controls
are big and easy to get to (FF, play etc.). Return to zero button, 

autolocater functions: 

rehersal--- allows you to rehearse a 'punch in' by defining the in/out points 
and looping over it (3 secs before to 3 secs after the points) when in the
punch in range it drops the track you're punching so you can hear just yourself.
when you;re ready just hit auto/in and it'll record it that pass.

MEMO 1 & 2: allows you to set two points to go to. no special order. If you 
reset zero, it recalculates the points to be the same 

 EX: if you had memo1 at 500 and memo2 at 600 and reset zero to be a 400 memo1 
becomes 100 and memo2 becomes 200.

The how of routing the mixer signals:

Via scenes: it stores 99 scenes internally (there is a provision to store the 
entire scene set up to the local tape drive) the first 12 are factory set ups, 
which can be restored if you screw 'em up. Essentially you control the "where 
from" and the "where to" of each channel. This is a bit tricky at first but it 
is easy to learn the basics of it by reading the manual (and you'll get a couple
of good laughs at the translations). I think it's gonna take me a couple of 
months to really grasp the potential of this machine.

The sound quality is as good as my 234, possibly better. It's not too noisy 
(now), and seems like a real good tool.

A big bonus I didn;t count on: My 234 tapes play on tracks 1,2,7,8. No need to
trash all that work you did on your portastudio!!!!

any specific questions?

dbii

    > 10 X 8 X 2 mixer:
    
    The literature says it gives you 20 channels.
    
    What gives?
    
    Is this "fraud", I mean, err, accurate but not realistic, I mean,
    err,... well... you know what I mean.
    
    ;-)
    
    	db

Well yeah you can get 20 channels, using the dual function, but the dual
channels don't have EQ for one thing and effects sends for the other, also
they're line (1/4") inputs vs XLR on the 10 main channels...among other things
you can use dual for a stereo effects loop in addition to the other two..or 4
depending on how you look at it...

dbii

For those who have some $$, I just received a Daddy's Junky Music circular in 
the mail advertising some interesting prices on a whole set of TEAC recording
gear--I think the sale price on the 688 was $2699 or something like that.

They also had some other packages, including another TEAC 8-track cassette
machine (the 238?) packaged with a mixer and a rack for around the same price 
range.

Peter

Well, I've started pricing 8-tracks again.  My car is about due to be 
replaced.  Instead of replacing it with a "new, slick, expensive, foreign 
model," I'm considering replacing it with a "cheap, used, functional 
American" model and use the extra cash to buy a "new, slick, expensive, 
foreign" 8-track system.

Here's my question.  I've been pricing the Tascam 238 and Tascam M-208 mixer.  
Together I'm getting quotes of around $2,400 to 2,500.00.  I know I could
get a better price via mail order (which I'm still considering), but I'd
like to get it locally through a music dealer if possible.  I've noticed
that the Tascam 688 music workstation is in a similar price range, although 
slightly higher.

What are the advantages to buying the 688 (with built-in mixer, MIDI 
interface, etc) instead of the 238, packaged with a mixer like the M-208?

Right now, I don't use MIDI.  The MIDI equipment I have is a KORG DW-8000 
synthesizer and a TR505 drum machine.  I don't have a sequencer.  I've 
decided I'm going 8-track before going MIDI, because I use my FOSTEX X-15
4-track machine constantly and it's going to need replacing soon.  I don't 
want another 4-track.  I want 8-track.

Considering I'm not using MIDI now, should I go for the 238 w/mixer instead
of the 688.  Or does the 688 give you more than just advanced MIDI 
capabilities?  I'll admit there's something nice to having the mixer built-in.
It'd fit nicer in my home studio, for example.

Any thoughts?  Dave Bottom:  how's things going with your 688?

Peter

The MIDI functionality of the 688 is such that you can run your drum
machine as a "virtual track" and use track 8 for the sync track and
record 7 other tracks of music and sync the drums live for mixes etc.
Gives me an extra track (I do drums in stereo now). If you're sequencing
the DW you could also sync that

If I understand correctly to do that with the 238 you'd need the $2000
midizer add on...but you'de get SMPTE with that also...I could be mistaken

I like my 688, it does everything I need for the forseeable future.

dbii

    re: .11
    
    You can use MIDI in that way on most multi-track recorders.  The
    only feature needed there is a way to defeat NR on one track.
    Most 4-tracks have that.
    
    I think the MIDI  functionality that distinguishes the 688 is that
    you can have a limited form on console automation.
    
    The 688 has a concept called "scenes",  Some of the mixers settings
    (effects routing, muting, etc.) can be memorized and associated with
    a MIDI patch #.
    
    You can call up those "scenes" via MIDI and thus you can in effect
    "sequence" your mixing cues.
    
    But be warned, the one thing you'd REALLY like it to do, automated
    volume level mixing of each track, can't really be done because scenes
    don't include channel levels.
    
    	db

    Note that the built-in sync feature of the 688 is a MIDI beat clock
    wityh Song Position Pointer.  If you want the flexibility of MIDI
    Time Code, you still need an external box.

    Peter, consider a used FOSTEX 1/4" unit for about $1000 and a new
    ALESIS 16 channel mixer for about (?)$700, and save a thousand for
    other things..
    
    karl

    Peter, just price open-reel 1/2" vs. 1/4" tape - that should be
    convincing.  
    
    karl

                What's the best price anyone's seen on the 688?

I got mine as a package for $2800 with the 688 + a beyer M69 mic.  I got this
price from E.U.Wurlitzers in Boston,
 and then negotiated it at Daddy's in Nashua.  By the way, I love the 688.

Found a local store that will sell them for $2475, without any bargaining.  Time
to call up Guitar Center & see what they can do.

    
Tascam is about to blow open the multitrack market with three new entries for
1991.

488

Eight track cassette, similar to the 688 Midistudio, minus the MIDI.  EQ is
only two-band fixed vs. three band sweep, only eight mixer channels vs. ten and
no ability to "stack" channels to get double the channels for mixdowns.  Only
two mixer channels will accept microphones!!!  List: $1599 (vs. $3299 for the
688 and $1799 for the 238 deck).

424

This is an AC powered four track that *looks* kind of like the 644 but is much
reduced.  The flyer makes no mention of any EQ at all.  The mixer has 4
channels, but you can stack it to 8 for mixdowns.  The transport has *three*
speeds.  3-3/4 for best quality, 1-7/8 for compatibility with stereo decks, and
15/16 for figuring out Yngwie licks or recording "Space" at Dead concerts.
It also lets you do speed tricks like us old-timers used to pull with our open
reel machines. Can record all four tracks at once. List: $549

Porta 03

Talk about stripped down.  $329 list!  Record two tracks at once, no EQ, and no
metering!!??  You get but two LEDs per track, one shows "activity" (probably
triggers at about -15 db) and one shows overloads.  Expect this one to hit the
$250 street price mark after Christmas.  AC adapter is included (thank heaven
for small favors).

							Brian

       

       The latest Musician's Friend Catalog includes both the 488 &
       Porta 03 with the familiar "Call for Sale Price".  800-776-5173

       
       
       

    What do the 644 and 688 usually go for?  They only show the list
    prices.
    
    Mike

    I just got a mega-catalog from Sam Ash a few nights ago.  I don't
    remember *exact* prices, but the Porta-3 was something like $370.  The
    new 8-track was something like $1500-1600.  If folks are seriously
    interested, I can try and post the prices tomorrow.
    
    BTW - Sam Ash is having a big sale on the Sansui stuff - I think you
    can get the 6-track recorder and the mixer for less than $800 (!).
    
    Mike - if the "list" prices are true list, then you should be able to
    roughly figure your cost by multiplying by .75 ... most decent mail
    order places give that type of discount.  Note, however, that some
    places would appear to artificially inflate list to act like they're
    giving you a bigger discount.  An example from about a year ago - Sam
    Ash quoted $209.95 list for a USS Apex stand, and was offering it for
    $150.  The Woodwind/Brasswind quoted $239.95 list and $170 with
    discount.  The latter also marketed their flyer as "over xx% markdowns
    on all gear".
    
    For what it's worth.
    
+b

>    I just got a mega-catalog from Sam Ash a few nights ago.  I don't
    
    Is it larger than their usual catalog?  I'm on their distribution so I
    should probably get one soon.
    
    Mike

    It's called "Musician's Quarterly".  Never got one before.
    
    Anyway, here are the prices I said I would post:
    
    		    Tape  Buss	 Mix	Type	 Sam 
    MODEL           Trx   Cnt	 Ins	NR  	 Ash	 List
    --------------  ---   ----   ---    ------- -----   -----
    Tascam 424      4	   4	  8	dbx	$ 440	$ 550
    Tascam Porta03  4	   2	  2	Dolby B	$ 266	$ 330
    Tascam 488      8	   4	  8	dbx	$1280	$1600
    
    The 644 and 688 have *much* nicer mixer setups than the 488, which is
    probably why the 488 is so much cheaper.
    
    As an side, the December '90 issue of Keyboard has *excellent*
    summaries of product features/availability for the MIDI-oriented,
    including multi-track and DAT recorders.  I highly recommend it to the
    person who is looking to buy but unsure of what's out there.
    
+b

    Got a bit of a look at the 488 yesterday (daddy's Nashua has one in
    stock for anyone in a hurry).
    
    The brief review:
    
    Good points:
    
    	o Price/performance - basically 8 tracks and a decent mixer
    	  for this price is GREAT
    
    Bad points:
    
    	o The mixer is very limited
    
    If it weren't for a couple of complaints, I might have whipped my
    credit card last night and bought it on the spot:
    
    	o Only 2 sends - NO returns - i.e.  you have to use channels for
    	  returns and you only have 4 extra to begin with (12 altogether)
    
    	o The mixer is 8x$4 AND there are NO "tape outs" for each track.
    
    	  Thus, if you want to use this thing as a slave with some other
    	  mixer, you first have to mix the 8-tracks down to 4 channels.
    
    	  I've had applications where that just wouldn't do for me -
          however having 8-tracks with this limitation is better than
    	  having 4 without - but it's frustrating that they didn't at
    	  least have tape-outs.
    
    	  Oh yeah, it should go w/o saying, but there are also no inserts
    	  for the channels either.
    
    	o You can only record 4 tracks at a time - i.e. the 488 is probably
    	  no better for recording live material than the 644 - in fact
    	  I would say the 644's somewhat better mixer makes it better
    	  for that application.
    
    I guess what I really want is a 468?  Or really, what I want is a 688
    EXACTLY but w/o the MIDI/automation stuff.
    
    But, despite these limitations, this thing is a BIG step up from your
    average 4-track (I'd say a uniform improvement over any 4-track but
    the 644) and I'm still thinking long and hard about gettiing one.
    
    Only problem is, I *JUST* finished a long recording phase and don't
    expect to be recording for another 6 months at least. 

Well, the 424 is finally here, saw one in the Worcester, MA Wurlitzer's on
Saturday.  Didn't hear it though.

It's got almost everything done right.  The two stereo inputs are wired with
opposite tip/ring polarity, so that inserting a mono plug in the first one
places the mono signal on the left buss while the second jack feeds the mono
signal to the right buss.  Inserting a mono plug into only the first jack gives
a mono return (but you can't use the second return; if you do, the signal ends
up on the left).  Not as flexible as offering panpots or a balance control, but
it does offer a good range of options.  The stereo inputs either go to the L-R
buss or the cue buss, so to actually use all "eight" inputs on recording, you
must record in stereo.  The stereo ins are obviously intended more for FX and
MIDI instrument submixes during mixdown than as recording inputs.

Jacks on the rear are marked L and R out, sync in and out.  Throw a switch
marked tape and these jacks carry the raw four track outs.   There's  a jack
for the RC-30P punch-in switch (not mentioned in the literature).  No mono out
for the cue buss...if you want to run the cue buss to an amp, you need to use
the phone out, not the ideal situation but workable.

The master volume slider has an extra long throw which is appreciated.  You can
record direct to the four tracks or record through the mixer direct to stereo.

The unit takes a wall bug for power, which helps account for the small size. 
All the input jacks are situated so they are easily reached but don't require
cords exiting the front of the machine (the phones and punch switch cords do
exit the front, though). 

So if I could have wishes, I'd like to see a cue out and sweep EQ, but at the
price it's a sweet deck.  It should give the MT100-II a serious run for its
money.  I'm not sure why the Porta 05 is still around, this machine seems to
beat it feature for feature and is cheaper to boot.

							Brian  

    Since these have built-in mixers, couldn't you use them as part of a
    small home studio PA system?  All that would be need are some small
    monitors and a power amp, right?
    
    Mike

Sure. That's what I do with my 4-track, it's the permanent link between my
synth and my (powered) monitors, whether I'm recording or not.

Bob

    The only thing that bothers me about this is that there are (at least
    on my new 688) moving parts turning all the time the power's on.  I had
    planned to use the mixer section of my 688 as a total replacement for
    my old line mixer, which was an imbedded part of the system in my
    living room/studio.  But now that I've seen that the capstan motor is
    always turning I'm re-thinking my setup.
    
    No, it wasn't an impulse purchase, but it was kind of unplanned.  I
    called Sam Ash in pursuit of a DH-100 and figured that while I had'em
    on the phone I'd check their price on the 688.  The guy on the other
    end said "That's a real diverse request" and handed me off to pro
    audio.  So I talked to some guy named Dennis and told him that a local
    shop had quoted me $2475 for the 688.  After some negotiation involving
    sales tax computation he came down to $2470 (no sales tax since they're
    out of state).  I told him I'd think about it, hung up and called the
    local guys.  Got them down to $2350 for the floor model (with less than
    1 hour on it), so I bought it.  Also got the shop manual and a couple
    of alignment tapes at dealer cost (but they're special order, so I have
    to wait for these - hope the manual's in English).  Put the deck in the
    car and walked back in to get some strings and they threw those into
    the package.  It was a nice Saturday afternoon...
    

I've been doing alot of work lately with my 688 and am extremely impressed
with the results. This deck is much better than I originally thought it was.
And that was pretty good. I may actually put a song on the next commusic
tape....


dbii

    I've been thinking about a 688.
    
      How is the quality on vocals and acoustic and electric guitars.  I 
    have used a porta one for a coupleof years as well as making demo's
    on a trs-8 and the real difference was not so much on electronic 
    instruments  (synth etc) but in vocals .... I know this is also
    attributed to tape speed but I would be very curious for someones
    opinoin who has used a 688 well as an 8 track reel to reel.
    
    	Also I was reading an interview with Dave Edmunds who said he
    liked the 688 so much that he bought a second one and connected the
    m together.  Is this too good to be true a 16 track recorder and
    40 channel mixer for under $6000.???????? or is he just talking 
    about using the midi or mixer sections.
    
    	Also this midi scene thing is it just a map or does it do it
    automatically for you.
    
    
    			Thanks P.K.

    re: .32
    
    To the best of my knowledge, if your mic'ed tracks don't sound as good
    as your direct tracks, the problem isn't with your tape recorder or
    it's tape speed, it's with how you record those tracks.
    
    Would a bonafide expert confirm or deny this?
    
    I've never heard a tape recorders distinguished the way, say, mics
    are in terms of being better for some kinds of tracks than others.
    
    Mic tracks are simply harder to record.  It's truly an art.
    
    It could be almost anything.  The mic.  The recording environment.
    Perhaps you might benefit from using a compressor/limiter. etc. etc.
    
    Also, I'd be pleasantly surprised if you can hook up two 688's and
    have them be in sync but I don't know for sure that you can't either.
    
    688'ers?  What say you?

I think the 688 is an outstanding deck. It does as good as *I* have ever done
with vocals. is it as good as an 8-track reel-to-reel? Of course not, but it's
probably well over 90% as good and for my application that's almost overkill.

You can hear a product off my 688 on the next guitarnotes tape (if I get the 
mix done in time...)

dbii

    
    Anyone know of any recent low prices on these?
    
    How about an answer to that "connecting 2 8's to get a 16 track"
    question? Anyone know for sure?
    
    Mike
    

    
    Seems to me that I've seen new ones in the Recycler (So. CA) for around
    $2600.
    
    These guys can sync to an external source (with extra gear), so instead
    of 16 tracks you're probably really only getting 14, since you'd need
    a sync track on each deck.  Of course, if you slave your sequencer to
    the sync track, all of a sudden you've got a LOT of virtual tracks...
    
    

    If the 688 syncs to SMPTE/MTC/DTL you're home free..  
    
    karl

The Dave Edmunds article was in the Spring issue of EQ Magazine. Quotes Dave: 

"My setup is based around two Tascam 688 MidiStudios. I bought one and
liked it so much, I had to get a second. The 688 is perfect for me because
its an eight-track cassette recorder and MIDI controller mixing board all
in one. All patching is digital, which means the end of conventional patch
bays. And I'm all in favor of that."

"My two 688s are linked via a Tascam MIDIizer. The MIDI gear is driven by
an Alesis MMT-8 sequencer, and all lashed together via a Digital Music
Corp MX-8 MIDI patch bay."

"In all then, I've got 16 virtual tracks and 14 tape tracks (eight on each
688, minus one track per machine for sync code)."


Hope that helps answer your questions......

alan

Yeah now the big downer, the TASCAM midizer is pretty expensive, I don't 
rember exactly but seems like it was supposed to go for over $1K...


The 688 itself doesn't sync to midi, however it will record a sync track and
allow you to sync external devices to song position pointer over midi...I
use this extensivly with my HR-16. 

dave

    How does one of the 688s sync to the other one - unless the transport
    is prepared to lock to a sync signal, it doesn't matter how much
    outboard gear you add, the motors in the two recorders will run
    independently of one another.
    
    len.
    

    
    
>    How does one of the 688s sync to the other one - unless the transport
>    is prepared to lock to a sync signal, it doesn't matter how much
>    outboard gear you add, the motors in the two recorders will run
>    independently of one another.
    
    They can chase.  One of the front panel controls is for the sync
    source.  Actually, the combination of two of these with the scene
    switching under MIDI control would make for an extremely powerful
    system.  This thing really goes beyond the capabilities of an oridinary
    mixing-desk/multi-track combination.  You can slave your sequencer
    either via MIDI or via the normal tape-sync provisions your
    MIDI-interface/sequencer supports.
    

      Thanks very much for the replies on the 688 re quality and the
    possibility of connecting two together.  But one question I still
    have is what does this midi scene thing do.  if possible could 
    someone explain that one.  Also someone mentioned something about
    a motor running all the time.  I have a porta  one which I have 
    really got some use out of over the last 2-3yrs and a lot of the
    time it is used just as a mixer for my D-20.  Will this be a 
    problem with the 688 having it on all the time and not just when
    recording.
    
    	I'll look forward to hearing a demo of the 688 on the guitar
    notes tape if I can get one sent to Australia.
    
    		Thanks P.K.

    A "scene", as I understand, it is a snapshot of the mixer assignments;
    i.e. what's on what buss, which channels are active for record,
    mic/line assignment, etc.  It doesn't actually store the fader or knob
    settings for volume and tone, though.  
    
    What this allows is a quick change from a recording assignment to a
    mixing assignment, or even have multiple assignments for particular
    needs.  You can store a number of scenes in memory for recall and dump
    the settings to tape for archiving.
    
    							Brian

re: .43 

That's essentially correct, the mixer assignments are all internal and digitally
controlled. Each scene allows you to select input assignments, efects 
assignments, "dual" assignments (dual  allows you to use the line inputs
as an additional 10 channel mixer, with no eq or to use dual as an additional
stereo effects loop, or some combination thereof...) I use a different scene 
for recording vs. mixdown...


re: syncing tow decks

I was unsure as to how that actually worked, I do know you need the midiizer
to do it and that's a big expense, however the midiizer gives you access to 
smpte sync and all those other nice to have things...I've seen very little in
my owners manual about useing two together, just a note that it can be done..

dbii

    Lest anyone be confused, it should be stated up front that the 688
    does not provide quite enough to be called "console automation".
    
    In particular, one thing you can not record in a "scene" is fader
    levels - so you can't do automated adjusting of levels during a
    mixdown.
    
    However, I did hear of a cute trick to get something akin to that
    if you happen to have extra channels.
    
    If you want to use two different levels on a particular track, you
    can route the signal to TWO channels set to different levels.  You
    get the console automation by muting one channel or the other.
    
    For example, let's say you have a guitar track that has both rhythm
    and lead and you want to boost the lead section.
    
    You set channel A to the rhythm level, and channel B to the lead
    level.  During the rhythm section use a scene that has A on and B
    muted.  During the lead section use a scene that has A muted and
    B unmuted.
    
    Sorta cute, but how often do you have extra channels to burn on
    something like this?
    
    	db

    
    
    Well, I guess that depends on how many 688s you have sync'ed together.
    
    A while back I mentioned that the capstan motor turns all of the time
    while power is applied.  A couple of weeks later I realized that
    there's an easy way to stop the motor so that you can leave the whole
    unit powered up all of the time: put the transport in shuttle mode!
    
    

There was a question a few replies back about how to keep the two motors
really locked.

Using this MIDIizer, I believe it uses the RS422? port on the back of the
688s to keep the units really locked together synched to the synch tracks
on each unit.

	- Jim (who really likes his 688)

re: Shuttle


Wasn't there a caution about this causing premature head wear?

dbii

    
    
    Not when you just use it to stop the capstan from turning!  *8')
    
    But as with any tape drive, sliding the tape past the heads at high
    speed produces wear on the tape and the heads.  Shuttling the tape can
    also produce extremely loud sounds, so exercise caution...
    

    
    
    
    			I really want one these decks.  Do you guys
    	have any new info on it. ie.  features, limitations, problems,
    
    			Have you found the limited headroom a problem?
    	
    
    			Let me know before I plunk down the cash, O.K.??
    
    
    
    						Chris

    
    Once you get used to the scene concept, this box has no zits!  At least
    in my experience so far, your mileage may vary...  Of course, I read
    everything on the 688 I could before I bought it, so I had a pretty
    good idea of what I was getting.
    
    BTW, some of the features I thought I'd use very infrequently (like the
    transport automation) are very handy.  When I'm working out a part I
    like to set the deck to continuously replay the section I'm working on. 
    Sounds frivolous, but it sure comes in handy!
    

ah what limited headroom? Is that dynamic range 'headroom' or physical size
of the heads 'headroom'?

My 688 has more dynamic headroom than my old TEAC 3340 reel to reel had. I've 
found that you can consistantly drive the record levels to +5 on the meters 
without distortion if you use premium tape. The best results I've seen are 
with SONY UX-PRO, DENON HD-8, or maxell/tdk high bias tapes in that order.

In terms of what you lose with the slim tape read/write area, I think the 
bass has slightly less 'fullness' than a reel to reel. Other than that I 
think I agree with .51, this box has no real zits on it.

dbii

    
    
    
    		Maybe it's not "headroom" I mean.  With the very slim width
    of each track (in this format) you just can't get a veryhot, wide
    bandwidth track, without some adjacent channel crosstalk.  My question
    was: Has this been a problem for your purposes?
    
    		I've read alot about this machine.  It seems to be
    everything I need. though I'm not sure about the cassette format. For
    about 4-5 hundred more, Musicans Friend has the Fostex system for
    sale.  R8 deck (15ips, 1/4 inch, and a midi controller, With a
    mixer.  The add doesn't tell much about the mixer and I know I'll
    have to get a patchbay for playback.  I hate these kind of decisions
    
    
    					Hmmmphf
    
                                           Chris

Chris,
 All I can say is it's obvious what my choice was. The cassette format is a 
good one IMHO. This deck uses that same amount of tape in terms of width
that a 4 track cassette uses, it uses 2 4-track heads slightly offset from
each other. I looked at Tascam and Fostex reel decks and decided to go with
the 688, as much as anything else because it used cassettes and they are
very available and very inexpensive. Also, my experience with both reels and
cassettes leads me to believe, that in my application, cassettes have 
significantly less dropouts and other problems. You're probably not
going to mix the Boston album of the 90's on a 688, but I think you can 
do an 8 track demo that's as acceptable as anything done on a reel deck on a
688. If the music is there it'll sound good, if it isn't, recording at the 
record plant won't help you.


hard choices are always fun eh?

dbii

    
    
    If you go with the reel-to-reel, I'd add in a $200 bucks for a nice
    quiet line level mixer for playback/monitoring.  It'll save a lot of
    wear and tear on the ol' patch bay, which you'll still need.  The
    scene automation can't be fully appreciated until you've had to do
    things the old fashioned way.  At least with a dedicated mixer tied to
    the deck's outputs you'll be able to analyze the playback without
    moving a lot of cables.
    
    The R-8 is only a couple of hundred more?  How much more is the R-16? 
    Jeez, you know you can never have enough tracks...
    

    Still happy with my used Fostex A8LR ($900 in 1988), buy AMPEX 456
    tape on pancakes, about $14 for two 7" reels, or $7 each.  that's 
    *15* ips and Dolby 'C'...
    
    karl

Just for the record. I've recently done a session with my 688, using a 24X8X2
soundcraft board recording my current band and the results were fairly
awesome (IMHO). The sound is very very good considering the handicapps we
were under (having the mixing in the same room as the drums was the major one,
setting up the 11 mic's on the drums and mixing them was an exercise in
patience). Not only am I conviced that the 688 is a very serious tool, but
my band is still shaking their heads: "That from an 8-track cassette??"

dbii

I was asked by Tom Gallo to expand on what we did so I'll try to shed some
light on exactly how we did the recording.

We mixed into the 688 via a soundcraft 24 X 8 X 2 board. Essentially I ran
the 8 submix's out to channel 1-8 line in's on the 688. I mapped the line in's
to the tape via dual, bypassing the eq section completely for (hopefully)
some noise minimization.

We mixed 11 (yes eleven!) drum mikes onto the 1-2 submix over to the 688, via
a symetrix 525 stereo compressor/limiter. I also used a midiverb II to put
a slight gated reverb on the snare. This was the most time consuming part,
the "studio" was actually the showroom of Captial City Music here in Augusta,
the owner/operator of which plays drums in the band (the soundcraft is his 
also). We used 10 SM57beta mikes and one other AT mike of some sort for the 
bass drum. Since the  board was right next to the drums in the same room
we did all the eq'ing and mixing by the trial and error method

"Ok Al, hit the snare a few times" we then recorded it and played it back.

"needs some more high end"

"Ok Al hit the snare a few times" etc. ad nauseam....

After a few years of this we set up the guitar amps in the basement and used
a snake (thanks to the store again) to run both guitar signals and in the 
other guitar player's case, his footswitch down to the amps, and used 
said snake to route the mike'd signals back to the soundcraft.

The bass player went direct into the board with no fx or compression. He was
using a spector bass with active electronics.

Headphones were another problem, but we overcame it by running headphones
on several power amps (yes direct but we turned them way down!)
using the aux sends on the 688 to drive the headphone "mix", it was rather
heavy handed but it worked.

After burning an entire tape trying  to get a good rhythm pass, I put in a new
tape and the next take was the  keeper.

Since I couldn't get the feedback I needed for my guitar part with the 
midi-rack of doom and speakers down stairs,, we drug my amp up and I re-did my 
track. I got a keeper first pass (this can be highly unusal for Dave). Andy
(other guitar player) then wanted to re-do his track, but rather than move his
amps up he played through mine. We did keep his original track and before you
know it I ended up bouncing his two tracks onto one. 

we punched in a couple of fixes to the bass track and then recorded the lead
vocal. We used heavy (hard?) limiting on this track and no fx.

After that Andy and I did two tracks of backup vocals, doubling them up.

After than I re-config'd the setup and used my quadraverb to put effects on
the vocals for a crude mixdown.

11 hours and one fairly decent 8 track cassette master. I never even ate all
day...

I did the final mix last night at home using a pair of Altec 886A speakers 
and some bose roomates, the quadraverb, the midiverb II and a alesis 
micro-enhancer. I attempted to minimize any eq'ing at mixdown to help with
the overall noise level. I think it came out pretty nice, other who have heard
it seem to agree. The worst part of it was the drums, which lack the low end 
punch they have live, and that's the one disadvantage of the cassette medium.

I used a sony UX-PRO cassette as I think they are by far the best high bias
tape made. I confirmed this by mixing to a TDK-SA and a UX-PRO and A/B'ing
them, the difference was quite obvious. 

The song is going to be used as the backing track for some Capital City Music
ads to run on WTOS (The Mountain) a Maine "Classic Rock" radio station, and 
if TOS likes it, it might get some airplay in rotation. The song (Hold On)
was written by the singer, and is IMHO, very commercial, AOR oriented rock 
and roll.

dbii

    congrats on getting a complex tune done on the 688.  ..also congrats on
    recruiting a music store owner as a band member..
    
    karl

    The February 92 issue of Keyboard magazine mentions a new option for
    the 688 that (apparently) allows you to do lockup between two units.
    
    Obviously they had the foresight to put the hooks in ahead of time.
    
    Wonder if they also left enough hooks in to slave the boards (OK, 
    not really necessary but...)
    
    So Dave, when do you get the 2nd 688?  ;-)
    
    	db

They had mentioned this in the marketing literature over a year ago.

A 2nd 688, naw....I'm gonna let somebody else take the hit for a 16 track...

dbii

    
    
    Keyboard is one of the few music commix I don't get...I know you can
    sync the 688 to all kinds of stuff with a MIDIizer - is the
    announcement describing a firmware upgrade or a new piece of external
    gear, or what???
    
    I'm not likely to buy another 688 soon, but it sure would be nice to
    know how to do this if I run into someone else that's got one...
    
    

    I knew you could sync things to a 688, but when I originally asked
    if you could sync a 688 to something else I was told know and thus
    I figured it required extra hardware that wasn't built into the
    688.
    
    What I'm hearing now is that Tascam builtin that capability even though
    it was available at FRS.

The MIDIizer allowed sync to smpte and other things at FRS, and as I understood
it also another 688. This was covered in the first ad/or article I ever saw on 
the 688. The 688 users guide mentions it as well.

I think the dealer or whatever who told you no they didn't sync was just wrong.

dbii