Quote:
Originally Posted by
EvilRoy
➡️
Still don't get why the 388 gets so much love, but it does.
Did you own one? I did and still miss it, despite the bulkiness, which is the biggest setback. The thing practically maintained itself and is very nice to look at too.
Anyway, I got one back when it cost 350€ and I think that's what I made when I sold it as well, but in the end I prefer a 244, much better for your back too and a tad more fun. But there's something to that machine, i can assure you.
Not that there's anything wrong with your rationale, in theory it would be correct, but in reality it's really not, unless you're going for fidelity, which I have no interest in to be honest. I record to a 4 track surrounded by valve gear from the 40s and 50s, the 388's tape width was never an issue for me, you'd be surprised with what happens when you surround these "narrow tape width machines" with transformer coupled well made and maintained valve gear. If anything, and surprisingly, the 388 can sound a bit too hi-fi for my taste.
I think you have a problem/irritation with the 388. Sort of, if not exactly like the
cassette police that loves to show up unannounced when 4 tracking or mixing down to cassette is mentioned on a thread, when they really have no place there. Not that there's anything wrong with having an opinion on using this type gear/format and acting accordingly regarding your own choices, but most of those posts are just irritated people venting about what's really not their business and trying to convince others that there's no merit in doing things like that.
A 388 can sound great, has a lot of range actually, it's really fun and there's something to be said about the all-in-1 format. I've always liked it, from 4 tracks to siabs. It can also sound special and cohesive, there's a "glue" going on, but it can also sound like crap - like most things, it depends on who's using it and what the user can take out of it. I can't make a digital track sound good enough to like it, but i spend my days seeing engineers do just that, mixing voice-overs with old run of the mill plugins. I can make a 4 track spit out something quite charming, though, it's effortless and has to do with not only the electronics, but also the workflow and choices you have to make with such limited track count and what bouncing will do to the sound. But that's beyond the point, i guess, in the end the 388 wasn't for me and something similar evidently will never exist again.
Back on topic, and despite seeming to have their hearts in the right place, Tascam can hardly get the features on their current siabs right, especially the need to integrate multiple outboard which is getting better and cheaper by the day. Loosing a few tracks, the crappy built in fx and building a better analogue mixer would go a long way in terms of what siabs should be in this age. If this new piece can overdub and truly work as a standalone recorder, i'm certainly interested. But not until they trim it down a few tracks and loose the "live" aspect.
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Latest
Trending
This looks like an interesting concept, and very stylized. I'd be interested to know how stable the drivers are for USB connectivity. As always, until there are units to demo, the sound quality of the preamps, compressor, FX and EQ remains unkown. I will say that this may very well fill a hole in the audio recording industry. Not requiring a computer, and having it record to an SD card, and to be able to mix from SD card playback is very useful. This will most likely make live recording (pending channel count requirements) and those wanting a simplistic way to record without needing a computer, DAW and interface very happy. Well done, Tascam.
