Another Tascam 388 wonderer...

[Antler23]

I'm tempted by the Tascam 388. I love the idea of a return to making music with ears and hands instead of screen-eyes and mouse-fingers and email breaks between vocal takes. I do enjoy working in Logic for many reasons, but the 388 has been pulling at me.

Still, I've never used a 388, never seen one up close. I'm not a tech type in the least. I can break things ok, but I can't fix 'em. $2500-3500 is a bunch of money, and then there's tape/upkeep costs and and...

For those who know the 388, how well do these machines hold up, and what kinds of trouble am I asking for if I were to buy one? Also, is/was the 388 your main recording setup? I've no notion to stop recording with Logic, but I like the idea of making music with all the "limitations" of a machine like this.

[jacksaturn]

Bear in mind that I'm merely someone who has worked on these machines before, and not someone who has actively used one, so take what I have to say from that perspective:

I understand the draw of the Tascam 388 – it's a gorgeous piece of studio furniture, regardless of how it sounds. But in my experience, there are complications due to the way it is built that make me advise people against getting one. Whenever I hear someone beginning to salivate about a 388 purchase, I try to guide them gently away...

One example that springs to mind: a client brought me a 388 that had a few issues, most of which I was able to fix. But one of the VU meters was dead, and I can't recall if it was a bad bulb or if it was some other issue. Either way, getting access to inspect and replace that component would have been a 5-step process of disassembly. I explained this to the client, realizing that that amount of work was cost-prohibitive.

That's just one off the top of my head. The thing is a boat anchor – so darn heavy – and is really difficult to work on by oneself.

You mentioned that you're seeking a tactile experience when making music, and the analog workflow will help you achieve that. I hear you! What I'd suggest you consider, though, is the possibility of purchasing a standalone Tascam reel-to-reel of that same era (the 38 or 48, etc.) and getting a period-correct Tascam mixer to go with it. These two individual items, independently of one another, will be much easier for your technician to handle, should problems arise. You'll be spending a lot less money on the initial purchase. And you'll be able to lift and move each component by yourself when needed, rather than enlisting a friend or throwing out your back!

I would never try to talk someone out of something they deeply wanted, but at least keep this in mind as you continue to explore a potential purchase.

[Snarl 12/8]

If you want analog workflow, without analog hassles, get an Alesis HD24XR (or similar) and an Allen & Heath (or similar) 24 channel (or more) mixer. For the budget you mention you could get these two pieces and the cabling to hook them together. I'm loving my setup.

[Nick Sevilla]

If I may offer a suggestion:

Try working with your current setup as follows:

ONLY use 8 tracks. The length of material cannot exceed the maximum that would be on the 388 tape.

ONLY use the keyboard for the transport controls. No Mouse! Unplug it!

You CANNOT EDIT, you can only punch in / out of those 8 tracks.

You can only "fold in" into one of the 8 tracks, if you want to bounce down tracks. You may not cheat with a 9th track, even temporarily.

For added realism, buy some fake vinyl wood sticker stuff from a hardware store, and stick it on either side / back of your computer. Get that nice, wood grain for cheap.

After that, if you really believe the 388 is for you, go for it.

[kslight]

I have owned 4 of them over the years. Currently have 2.

I think they are super cool, have had some minor repairs and adjustments that I could do myself, and one had a motor / electronics issue that I had to pay someone a lot to fix. Also had the heads lapped on one of them.

Tape cost on these is relatively inexpensive compared to other decks. It uses LPR35, which is last I checked under $40 a reel and being a 7.5ips machine gets around 40 minutes of record time. You can reuse tapes too, not infinitely but it’s not like you need to buy tons of tape probably unless you’re a real heavy user.

Workflow is nothing like using an HD24xr and a mixer (which I also used to have). I enjoy the self contained routing, varispeed, and track ping ponging functionality of the 388. And the sound characteristics. It is not my only setup, it is for specific projects.

I would be hard pressed to pay $3000 for one myself, but when I’ve sold them I’ve never had issues getting top dollar for them, in good shape they are in demand. But I wouldn’t recommend you buy one on eBay or whatever, definitely something you want to see working fully before handing cash over. Realistically they are old electronic and mechanical machines, they will wear out and need work occasionally, if you would be heartbroken if it broke tomorrow and you couldn’t afford to get it repaired, then maybe this isn’t for you. But besides the motor issue mentioned above I’ve not experienced debilitating issues.

[Antler23]

Thanks to each of ye for the very varied suggestions! I do have a few screen-free digital options. I still have 3 Roland HD recorders. I loved using those back in the day, but they come with their own hassles and there's a bit of "been there..." with those machines for me now. Nick's idea of imposing limits on my working methods doesn't work for undisciplined me, plus I'd still be staring at this very screen.

I'm not driven by fire to suddenly go analog, and I don't want to drift into a vague philosophical/psychological rant, but I do quite like the idea of a shift away from the mouse & screen, even if only for a one-off album project. The physicality of tape - of having to move the body in order to move the machine - is increasingly appealing to me. Even a recent dabble back into 4-tracking hit me hard this way.

Still, a big part of the way I make records is importing performances from long-distance sexy guests. It struck me this morning that any record made on a 388 or other tape-based rig would have to be "local." In the spirit of limitation, this could be groovy, but when I have songs I'm really keen on, I rely on the afore-mentioned long-distance peeps to elevate my tracks. The Logic trap has a strong hold!

[drumsound]

Thanks to each of ye for the very varied suggestions! I do have a few screen-free digital options. I still have 3 Roland HD recorders. I loved using those back in the day, but they come with their own hassles and there's a bit of "been there..." with those machines for me now. Nick's idea of imposing limits on my working methods doesn't work for undisciplined me, plus I'd still be staring at this very screen.

I'm not driven by fire to suddenly go analog, and I don't want to drift into a vague philosophical/psychological rant, but I do quite like the idea of a shift away from the mouse & screen, even if only for a one-off album project. The physicality of tape - of having to move the body in order to move the machine - is increasingly appealing to me. Even a recent dabble back into 4-tracking hit me hard this way.

Still, a big part of the way I make records is importing performances from long-distance sexy guests. It struck me this morning that any record made on a 388 or other tape-based rig would have to be "local." In the spirit of limitation, this could be groovy, but when I have songs I'm really keen on, I rely on the afore-mentioned long-distance peeps to elevate my tracks. The Logic trap has a strong hold!

Long distance collaborations are one of the best parts of modern technology. I do a ton of this, and it's lucrative and pleasing.

[Antler23]

Thanks to each of ye for the very varied suggestions! I do have a few screen-free digital options. I still have 3 Roland HD recorders. I loved using those back in the day, but they come with their own hassles and there's a bit of "been there..." with those machines for me now. Nick's idea of imposing limits on my working methods doesn't work for undisciplined me, plus I'd still be staring at this very screen.

I'm not driven by fire to suddenly go analog, and I don't want to drift into a vague philosophical/psychological rant, but I do quite like the idea of a shift away from the mouse & screen, even if only for a one-off album project. The physicality of tape - of having to move the body in order to move the machine - is increasingly appealing to me. Even a recent dabble back into 4-tracking hit me hard this way.

Still, a big part of the way I make records is importing performances from long-distance sexy guests. It struck me this morning that any record made on a 388 or other tape-based rig would have to be "local." In the spirit of limitation, this could be groovy, but when I have songs I'm really keen on, I rely on the afore-mentioned long-distance peeps to elevate my tracks. The Logic trap has a strong hold!

Long distance collaborations are one of the best parts of modern technology. I do a ton of this, and it's lucrative and pleasing.

Indeed! I just had a vocal job come in today... I think the client is in Serbia. I've got a number of folks on my own latest album that I've worked with a good number of times now but have never met in real life. And while my UK band split up a decade back, this new record has seen an easy virtual reunion happen. At the same time, I've been so happy to be doing "people in the same room" studio sessions again.

[markjazzbassist]

i've owned them a few times and each time i sell. i don't like DBX and unless you record loud punk/metal/rock you're gonna have hiss issues with DBX off. If there are any quiet parts that could be a problem. There are other options that are great as well, try the Fostex line (Model 80, R8, E8) it is also 8 tracks on 1/4" tape but it runs at 15 IPS (less hiss, better sound) and uses Dolby C noise reduction which you can saturate (unlike DBX). If you are able to be more judicious with tracks and are ok with bouncing, you can get Pro studio level quality on the cheap by going 1/2" 4 track (equivalent to 1" 8 track or 2" 16 track). Still cheaper tape and the machine won't be as large. Then just get a nice mixer to pair with whatever machine you get and you can probably do this for cheaper than a 388 and have way better fidelity. Just my .02

[drumsound]

Thanks to each of ye for the very varied suggestions! I do have a few screen-free digital options. I still have 3 Roland HD recorders. I loved using those back in the day, but they come with their own hassles and there's a bit of "been there..." with those machines for me now. Nick's idea of imposing limits on my working methods doesn't work for undisciplined me, plus I'd still be staring at this very screen.

I'm not driven by fire to suddenly go analog, and I don't want to drift into a vague philosophical/psychological rant, but I do quite like the idea of a shift away from the mouse & screen, even if only for a one-off album project. The physicality of tape - of having to move the body in order to move the machine - is increasingly appealing to me. Even a recent dabble back into 4-tracking hit me hard this way.

Still, a big part of the way I make records is importing performances from long-distance sexy guests. It struck me this morning that any record made on a 388 or other tape-based rig would have to be "local." In the spirit of limitation, this could be groovy, but when I have songs I'm really keen on, I rely on the afore-mentioned long-distance peeps to elevate my tracks. The Logic trap has a strong hold!

Long distance collaborations are one of the best parts of modern technology. I do a ton of this, and it's lucrative and pleasing.

Indeed! I just had a vocal job come in today... I think the client is in Serbia. I've got a number of folks on my own latest album that I've worked with a good number of times now but have never met in real life. And while my UK band split up a decade back, this new record has seen an easy virtual reunion happen. At the same time, I've been so happy to be doing "people in the same room" studio sessions again.

The bulk of my work is still artists coming into the studio, but I supplement that with remote drumming sessions. It was nice to be able to work during lockdown, though.

[Antler23]

i've owned them a few times and each time i sell. i don't like DBX and unless you record loud punk/metal/rock you're gonna have hiss issues with DBX off. If there are any quiet parts that could be a problem. There are other options that are great as well, try the Fostex line (Model 80, R8, E8) it is also 8 tracks on 1/4" tape but it runs at 15 IPS (less hiss, better sound) and uses Dolby C noise reduction which you can saturate (unlike DBX). If you are able to be more judicious with tracks and are ok with bouncing, you can get Pro studio level quality on the cheap by going 1/2" 4 track (equivalent to 1" 8 track or 2" 16 track). Still cheaper tape and the machine won't be as large. Then just get a nice mixer to pair with whatever machine you get and you can probably do this for cheaper than a 388 and have way better fidelity. Just my .02

This is starting to sound more a likely plan for me. The Fostex Model 80 was the machine I started on in the Enharmonik days, so I'd be getting my nostalgia fix as well as less hiss! (And I still have all of my OG 8-track reels - a scary thought!) I want an analog set-up as a secondary recording situation... Logic in my "office" will still be the boss, but an 8-track in the basement would be lovely.

But yeah... the 388 is looking like it won't be getting the vote from me after all. A nice dream, but it's pricey and seemingly too problematic for what I'd be wanting from it.

[Antler23]

Long distance collaborations are one of the best parts of modern technology. I do a ton of this, and it's lucrative and pleasing.

Indeed! I just had a vocal job come in today... I think the client is in Serbia. I've got a number of folks on my own latest album that I've worked with a good number of times now but have never met in real life. And while my UK band split up a decade back, this new record has seen an easy virtual reunion happen. At the same time, I've been so happy to be doing "people in the same room" studio sessions again.

The bulk of my work is still artists coming into the studio, but I supplement that with remote drumming sessions. It was nice to be able to work during lockdown, though.

Glad you've been able to carry on with rock even as things shuttered around the world.

I saw an uptick in paid work as well... and now that things are (sorta) a bit easier again, I've spent all that income on other people's studios. Around and around!

[drumsound]

Indeed! I just had a vocal job come in today... I think the client is in Serbia. I've got a number of folks on my own latest album that I've worked with a good number of times now but have never met in real life. And while my UK band split up a decade back, this new record has seen an easy virtual reunion happen. At the same time, I've been so happy to be doing "people in the same room" studio sessions again.

The bulk of my work is still artists coming into the studio, but I supplement that with remote drumming sessions. It was nice to be able to work during lockdown, though.

Glad you've been able to carry on with rock even as things shuttered around the world.

I saw an uptick in paid work as well... and now that things are (sorta) a bit easier again, I've spent all that income on other people's studios. Around and around!

You're good for the musical economy!

[Antler23]

The bulk of my work is still artists coming into the studio, but I supplement that with remote drumming sessions. It was nice to be able to work during lockdown, though.

Glad you've been able to carry on with rock even as things shuttered around the world.

I saw an uptick in paid work as well... and now that things are (sorta) a bit easier again, I've spent all that income on other people's studios. Around and around!

You're good for the musical economy!

Ha! And not done yet - just booked Oz Fritz to master this mess of an album I'm making. Looking forward to spending that money!

[drumsound]

Glad you've been able to carry on with rock even as things shuttered around the world.

I saw an uptick in paid work as well... and now that things are (sorta) a bit easier again, I've spent all that income on other people's studios. Around and around!

You're good for the musical economy!

Ha! And not done yet - just booked Oz Fritz to master this mess of an album I'm making. Looking forward to spending that money!

I hope it turns out well!