Upgrade to Model 16- need list

[JSchmo_Bass]

So I am LOVING my Model 12 so far. I bought it to use with my band live as both a PA mixer and live recorder. It’s my first serious foray into recording. This machine is so coX

however I am quickly knocking on the door of needing a few more channels, particularly as we start mic’ing the drums and doing more complex live session, I could really use the 3 more channels of the Model 16. (Plus I am intrigued by the analog mixing although no one seems to have made a side by side comparison).

howevrr there are few features the 16 lacks compared to the 12 that I feel are really essential

- ability to select whether the MTR sends for recording the individual tracks are pre comp, post comp or post EQ (Model 12 has this, Model 16 is always fixed post-comp). Thats a big issue in my view, as it forces you to choose to forgo compression for live sound if you want to record a totally “dry” track.

- swap/bounce tracks (within the MTR without having to re-record or hook up to a computer and play with the track file names) which really free up space when doing live takes... in the hustle and bustle of musicians playing, who wants to move the cables... and it opens up the stereo channels as temp parking spots.

These two features are kind of holding me back from making the upgrade straight away

so what are the odds Tascam is gonna do this?

the first feels like a physical wiring change (a switch?) (as the Model 16 is all analog through EQ... the second feels like it should be easy enough via firm ware (along with track copy, auto divide, trim all tracks).

What are the odds Tascam adds these things?

 

[Blue Monster 65]

From what I was told by a Tascam rep, there are no plans to make the Model 16 nor the 24 operate like the Model 12.

 

[JSchmo_Bass]

That’s a shame. Certainly they should push out a common set of MTR functions (figuring it’s digital/firmware based). This could better encourage a sense of an upgrade path.

 

[Freebird]

I guess some things are impossible to change in Model 16 and Model 24 since they are more analogue based and Model 12 more digital based. To change certain things in Model 16/24 so it resembles how model 12 works, I guess they have to do major "physic" changes inside the modules (soldering, adding transistors and chipset etc.) and that would make them more expensive.

Although... some things they should be able to do with upgrades/reprogramming the firmware. But since the physical routing inside Model 16/24 are a bit different than Model 12 I wouldn't hold my hopes up to high.

 

[Blue Monster 65]

Exactly. The mixer sections of those models are analog - hard-wired - while only the recorder section is digital.

To use the analogy that’s been used many times, it’s like having an analog board and tape machine setup, but the tape machine has been replaced by a digital system. Could they add some flexibility to the digital recorder? Possibly, but I’m not counting on it. That doesn’t seem to be the point or purpose of these machines (I am OK with that).

 

[Freebird]

To JSchmo Bass. If you need more tracks for the drums you could get another small mixer, maybe 4-6 channels and route that mixers main stereo output into a stereo track on Model 12. That way you can "pre mix" the individual drums on the smaller mixer before recording and create a 2 channel stereo mix on model 12.

Blue Monster... (I am OK with that)... me too

 

[JSchmo_Bass]

Yeah, I suppose it’s helpful try to bucket our wishlists to things that are likely doable via firmware vs things that are likelyhardware changes.

My Firmware Improvement Wish List:
1. Track swap feature of the M12 across M16, M24
2. Track duplicate/copy feature to all Model series.

Both 1 and 2 are things that can today be accomplished in Storage mode by messing about with the file names via a attached computer’s file manager. But that route is uncool for “live” spur of the moment capture sessions, where chances are don’t even have access to a PC or the mindset to use one.

3. Simple song-level trim and divide@marks feature (DR-40x implementation is pretty much spot on in this regard). Why have a marks feature if we can’t trim and cut a recording into smaller song units at said marks?

4. Conversely, a simple DUPLICATE Song and JOIN two songs together feature, would eliminate the need for adding a Vamp Record feature. Eg, one could catch a short riff, save as song A, then chain a bunch of A’s together in a new longer song in to record over the looping A’s.

In principle they should possible within the digital MTR aspect of all three Models series without changing any fundamentals.

I get that it’s different architecture, so some things will just be what they are...but I do t see why the above can’t be present across all....

 

[JSchmo_Bass]

Resmaller additional mixer - that is exactly what I am gonna do for now.! I have a Yamaha MG10X

The Tascam M12 as a mixer alone sounds A LOT better than the Yamaha just doing the duty of mixing vocal mics into a powered PA speaker (it’s those pre amps I suppose?)

So am debating whether to use it for the drums (thus loosing the ability to have separate snare, cymbals etc later) or Vox.

I think I may run the backing Vox mics through the outboard mixer for a rehearsal. It means swapping mic cables when we swap lead singer roles so the lead singer has the Tascam’s better mic pre...

For a live gig (whenever that sort of thing returns) I think I’d instead run the drums through it (eg not sending any drums to FOH other than perhaps a little kick)... so it’s basically mixing a summed drum track memorandum of our live set).