I want to buy a good, but cheap, 4 track. Can I get some recommendations?
Pic related is something I saved from a thread ages ago for when I was gonna get one.
>cassette
>good
If you want low-fi, fine. But for sound quality you'll have to go digital even if it'll ruin your hipster cred.
>>54176868
Get the mkiii
>>54177415
>I don't know what I'm talking about but I still want to chime in
>>54177440
>I bought into the latest moronic fad so everybody who didn't must be clueless
>>54177574
>latest moronic fad
It's as if you think it's 1993
>>54177574
>everybody who didn't must be clueless
If you think a 4-track, when recorded on correctly, is poor sound quality then you are clueless.
>>54177415
Nah dude its not that I care about the lo-fi or anything. I just want something easy to use.
>>54177686
Not that guy, but he's right. Even by tape standards, 4-tracks are terrible. If you want to get actual quality tape recordings, invest in a reel2reel and a soldering iron.
>>54178106
well what do you expect (for budget buying)
Cassette recorders sound like shit no matter how much you spend so go for whatever the fuck one you can find.
>>54178197
I wasn't really for or against 4-tracks. I was just pointing out that they're budget devices, not hi-fi recording tools.
>>54178249
sorry I meant to say 'suggest' not 'expect'. lol.
I mean what do you suggest for reel-to-reel
>>54178274
Teac 3340 is a great machine and are still somewhat easy to find secondhand and repair.
How much would one expect to spend on a 4 track reel-to-reel
>>54178344
More than it's worth in both time and money.
>>54178233
>>54176868
Not cassette but it's a 4 track and has a good built in stereo mic! I've been using this for about a year now and it's great. You can get them new for around $150 now I think.
>>54178380
Is this the part where you tell me about the incredible tape warmth you got from your two dollar tascam preamps and consumer cassettes?
So wait, is "lo-fi" music, be it a punk band or dude with an acoustic guitar, generally recorded on shitty reel-to-reel by amateurs, or on cassette..?
let's use pic related as an example I guess
>>54176868
use a laptop hippy
>>5417686
I used to have this. I didnt really know how to use it, but the quality was p good when i listened to stuff I recorded through it.
Im not sure if it makes sense to use if you are going to master it digitaly but i donno.
>>54178383
Alternately you can get a Tascam DR-40 probably for slightly cheaper (same features otherwise) BUT the Tascam doesn't have as much for internal mixing. It has some reverbs and general FX but not as comprehensively as the Zoom. If you want to mix your demos in the unit the Zoom will be better
>>54178344
$150-$500
Depends on how good you can haggle and how old the seller is.
>>54178475
and really while the Zoom's in house features are pretty cool they're just so frustrating to use compared to just exporting and using some sort of DAW so you don't have to be doing all that jazz on a handheld device. Zoom H4N comes with like 50 or so built in preamps/effects that are adjustable and that's p cool.
let the analog/digital shitstorm commence.
They both have benefits, try them out to see which one you like instead of listening to nerds on the internet who know nothing (like me)
>tfw i recorded an album on my iphone and people paid money for it and talk about it here sometimes
>>54178602
wow! do you want some hot meals?
>>54178602
Sam Ray?
>>54178602
ive done some iphone recording as well, but it can only go so far... i would record a full band with it.
>>54178602
are you that bloke who did the recordings of his farts and made over a thousand dollars from it?
>>54178561
i use a zoom h2 and just plug it directly into my laptop to use it as a soundcard. works pretty well but has lately been really buggy. i have a hard time trusting usb based interface
>>54178693
haha that sucks and I've never used the usb port on the h4n because it has an SD card slot too.
>>54178693
download latest drivers and firmware. if that cuased the problem go back a generation of drivers/firmware!
unlike the Zoom, the Tascam doesn't support direct USB IO yet, just USB for power or data transfer. which I'm fine with as I got interfaci up the whazoo
>>54178414
anyone
>>54178414
>>54178847
No, it is not generally done that way.
These days, lo-fi is accomplished two ways.
1. in/non-competence with recording and mixing techniques. If the songs and performances are good this can have a certain charm to it (see: early Black Keys)
2. Carefully crafted high-budget studio recording altered, effected, and mixed in such a way as to sound charmingly lo-fi. (see: Kasabian)
In either case, reel-to-reel or other cheap gear doesn't have to sound as lo-fi as people would have you believe. If you embrace and exploit the technological limitations of the gear with skill and a sense of aesthetic, you can accomplish an appealing lo-fi sound without sounding like a know-nothing amateur. But this can also be accomplished with good gear, and it's generally a better investment to get good gear that allows you the freedom to pursue any sound you might want.
>>54178847
some lo fi artists just use tape recorders... not four tracks or anything like that. just well-placed cassette recorders. i dont htink that is whats going on in your sample though.
>>54178774
yea.. it probably doesn't help that im using Logic Express 7 ahaha
>>54179084
So I assume reel to reel and garbage-ass mics would be the way to go for that kind of sound?
>>54178106
>4-tracks are terrible
>invest in a reel2reel
lel
>reel to reel fags chiming in
They have totally separate uses in 2015. If you're just going to make slightly warm, fuzzy, more accessible music, reel to reel is great. But for people into truly lo-fi music, the 4-track is the best. And the fact that you're complaining about shit recording quality when that's the entire point proves you're not into making truly lo-fi music.
>>54179547
>shit recording quality
Seriously?
>anything with a little tape hiss is shit quality
Millennials
>>54177884
buy a computer if you want easy
>>54179697
I spent the whole of the 90s wishing I had something, ANYTHING other than a shitty 4 track. They are awful, it blows my mind anybody would actually want to use these tacky pieces of shit when they sell computers with endless possibilities for music making.
>>54179547
shut up.
Tape is bullshit and no one in this thread can even align a machine anyways. Give it up.
>>54179730
What's shitty about them?
>>54179730
It's almost like people have different preferences, and work better in different ways.
>>54179748
>getting this buttblasted
Typical reelfag
>>54179730
amen.
i sometimes bounce stuff to my 4 track when sampling stuff. i like the compression.
>>54179771
not a reelfag dipshit, could care less about it
>>54179758
expensive and outdated
>>54176868
I have the portastudio in the pic, it's fun and easy to use. if you can pick one up for 80 dollars i'd recommend it
>>54179832
>expensive
They are very cheap. You can get a Tascam for $40.
>and outdated
Oh are you just looking for the newest fads?
>>54179857
>Oh are you just looking for the newest fads?
the great irony here being that everybody who ever had to use this shit when it was the only option to budget recordists wants absolutely nothing to do with it at all and the people buying this junk are people looking for that flavor of the month lo fi vibe!
>>54179936
>use this shit
You have yet still to prove this beyond "I don't like it". Many great sounding albums were recorded to 4-track.
>when it was the only option to budget recordists wants absolutely nothing to do with it at all and the people buying this junk are people looking for that flavor of the month lo fi vibe!
Except this is not an authentic point of view, this is revisionist history based on what you read on wikipedia. You were probably born in the 90s.
>>54180121
>Except this is not an authentic point of view
This is an authentic point of view based on the entire generation of people who would probably rather die than hear the words Tascam Preamp one more time.
>getting this booty blasted over the fact that someone wants to use something you don't like
pure autism
>>54180187
>This is an authentic point of view based on the digital generation's perception of people who use technology not of our own
ftfy
Can you possibly be more of a le rite generationer
>>54180187
>>54179936
To be fair, those people who complained about being stuck using 4-tracks were too lazy to put much effort into their craft and simply looked for an easy way out.
>>54180318
Are you really saying that the only people who don't like all that cruddy "prosumer" fostex and tascam shit are underage?
I have a heap of this junk I bought when I was a poor dumb kid, you can buy it all at 4x the original retail price if you want, it's got that retro vibe. Smoke free home.
>>54176868
Is there any value beyond artistic integrity to recording field recordings?
>>54180461
>Are you really saying that the only people who don't like all that cruddy "prosumer" fostex and tascam shit are underage?
Are you really saying that everyone who's ever used a Tascam hated it and that this tool is irrevocably shit?
>I have a heap of this junk I bought when I was a poor dumb kid
Maybe the problem was you were a dumb kid who didn't know how to use it properly.
>>54180545
>Are you really saying that everyone who's ever used a Tascam hated it and that this tool is irrevocably shit?
Yes that's honestly a fair review for tascam
>Maybe the problem was you were a dumb kid who didn't know how to use it properly.
oh yeah absolutely, in capable hands those things just have that pristine sheen to them.
>>54180597
>oh yeah absolutely, in capable hands those things just have that pristine sheen to them.
Like on Black Foliage or Dusk at Cubist castle? Yep.
>>54180597
>Yes that's honestly a fair review for tascam
I first got one in 1998 and still use it to this day. Every musician I've ever worked with who've used one still remembers them fondly even if they've moved onto digital.
I'm fairly sure you were born in the 1990s and don't even play a real instrument.
Computer + interface + some multitrack software.
>>54180652
>Every musician I've ever worked with who've used one still remembers them fondly even if they've moved onto digital.
Who the fuck were you working with, the deaf?
so what do you do when you've got a computer, Ableton, a few SM57's, a Scarlett 18i8 etc but you want that lo-fi sound?
we make garage punk/psychedelic rock
>>54180739
record farther away
>>54180739
Get a 4-track.
>>54180667
ebin
>>54180667
Former reel to reel user. I have fond memories. I loved the upkeep cost of using some outdated 1980s device. I loved the price of parts that had to be replaced for it to work correctly. I loved the price of multi-track tape, too. I loved how delicate the medium was. It was worth it for muh warmth.
I then began thinking rationally and just moved into a DAW.
>>54180739
http://cdsoundmaster.com/site/cds-software-online/r2rplugin.html
Also use Spring Reverb VSTs.
>>54180880
any tips that don't cost $180?
>>54180880
https://varietyofsound.wordpress.com/downloads/
All of these are free and mostly analog emulations that are pretty good. I think Bootsy FerricTDS is the one that you're looking for if you're aiming for crunchiness. As for reverb, I use this one quite a bit but it's not free: http://www.genuinesoundware.com/?a=showproduct&b=28 or you could use an IR Reverb VST (My Ableton has one included, not sure about yours) and load these up http://fokkie.home.xs4all.nl/IR.htm#Springreverb
If not, try these: http://bedroomproducersblog.com/2011/05/07/bpb-freeware-studio-best-free-algorithmic-reverb-vst-plugins/
Also browse /prod/ threads. Here's the latest one. >>54180501
>>54180739
saturation
>>54180880
having used reel to reel in past, i have the utmost respect for artists who painstaking manipulated the tape to create their art but there is absolutely no reason to maintain those monsters any more
>>54180739
Just buy a cheap 4-track, record your shit how you normally do, then assuming you have it saved on your computer, record it to tape via the line in, and bounce it back via the output. Easy, cheap, authentic.
>>54181469
The thing is that there's nothing stopping people from using a DAW like a reel to reel. If you want to record live without any editing, you can.
>>54181435
thank you you're amazing
>>54181628
What does that have to do with the post you're replying to?
>>54181435
alright dumb question but you've been really helpful and nice so far....i downloaded ambience and epicverb, put them in my VSTs folder, pointed Ableton to my custom folder, i click on the plugins tab, and.........nothing happens
i'm guessing this is a 32 bit vs 64 bit problem?
does anyone know of a good 64 bit spring reverb?
I love these threads, because as soon as it's mentioned that casette tapes are not good sounding, the casette people lose their shit. But even better, the DAW kiddies lose their shit even worse when reel machines are mentioned.
>>54181764
Shit, didn't expect that. You'll have to invest into jBridge, which is extremely worth it. https://jstuff.wordpress.com/jbridge/
It allows you to use 32 bit plugins in 64 bit DAWs and vice versa.
>>54176868
I used to try and make demo's on those things back when i was at college.
Seriously dude.. just use a computer.. then dub it on to a shitty boom box and back again if you want it to sound... i dunno.. I guess the word i'm looking for is.. shit!
seriously... make your demos on a laptop and save up to get into Steve Albini's studio record on some decent analog equipment.
>>54182285
>save up to get into Steve Albini's studio record on some decent analog equipment.
Except Steve Albini first used 4-tracks
>>54178602
>band wants to record some rough tracks
>rent a tascam from college's tech services
>put it in the middle of the room
>quality is shit
>try the same thing with an iphone
>we end up putting the iphone recordings online
>iphone quality exceeds tascam by a mile
the standards are lowered when you play in a punk band but still
>>54182463
>>put it in the middle of the room
>>quality is shit
I don't think you were using it properly
>>54182406
everyone who made a demo between the years 1985 and 1995 used one of those little machines. If Steve where a 18 year old kid today would he have used one?
if you really want to make is sound bad.. i would use the cheap as ass store bought microphones we only had access to.
>>54182701
>If Steve where a 18 year old kid today would he have used one?
It's still Steve Albini, of course he would.
>>54182701
>bad
What about it sounds bad? SAWfags can never quite explain it.
>>54181801
But that's why we use tape. That "not good sounding" sound is what we're after. Unless you're on some sanctimonious minimalist binge where you're using old equipment to "get in touch with the music" or some bullshit, the sound quality is what's sought after.
>>54183712
>minimalist
Why do people always use this term wrong?
>>54183784
Why do you assume it's wrong? There's a reason I preceded it with "sanctimonious".
>>54176868
man this thread is filled with posts from assholes who dont need to be posting
get an mf-p01. its real cheap, got mine for under 50 bucks, its easy to use, and durable (i havent had any problems in the few yeasrs ive had mine) also they are always on ebay.
have fun recording
