Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!ames!dftsrv!mimsy!leviathan.cs.umd.edu!ogata From: ogata@leviathan.cs.umd.edu (Jefferson Ogata) Newsgroups: comp.music Subject: Re: Tascam 488 Portastudio Keywords: portastudio Message-ID: <30576@mimsy.umd.edu> Date: 22 Feb 91 16:17:18 GMT References: <59586@aurs01.UUCP> <1991Feb22.014059.27264@ingres.Ingres.COM> Sender: news@mimsy.umd.edu Reply-To: ogata@leviathan.cs.umd.edu (Jefferson Ogata) Distribution: usa Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742 Lines: 20 We just had a discussion about the Tascam 688 on I.can't.remember.what.group and over email. I have used this thing, so I'll pipe up now; I hate it. I think the 688 is a complete blowout, except that the recording quality is decent. The 688 has the most insane mixer on the planet and the midi scenes are actually of almost no use whatsoever. There aren't enough effects buses for a 16-channel mixer, and 8 of those channels are very difficult to use. The mon/fx bus knobs are queer as all hell. I don't know what the architecture of the 488 is like, but I hope it's not like the 688. What a pain. A guitar player I work with has a 488; he brought in a tape he made with it the other day and it sounded great. He said he likes the machine. He also said that it has dbx (does Tascam make another non-midi 8-track cassette machine besides the 488? Perhaps what the guitar player has is not the 488; Tascam does not have the most mnemonic naming scheme.) I note that the original post in this thread said the 488 has Dolby C, which I think would be a grave injustice. -- Jefferson Ogata ogata@cs.umd.edu University Of Maryland Department of Computer Science Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com