24SD/32SD size difference

[Pete C]

Hi folks, new here but have owned Tascam equipment for many years.

I'm looking at the 24SD or the 32SD for some recording in the studio separate from my other equipment. Seems like either one would do well (except for that lack of midi thing!).

My question that I can't seem to figure out for myself is that Tascam site says that both units are the same size (dimensions). So, how do they fit more faders into the 32SD without shrinking something?

This could end up being a dumb question but might make a difference to me. Either unit will do the job but would like the 32SD, but want to know what I'm sacrificing if they are both the same size.

Could this be a copy and paste problem of the specs on the site? I looked at many pictures of both side to side and see where things line up differently but can't judge size from the pics.

 

[Phil Tipping]

Welcome Pete, I think the track faders are just spaced closer together on the dp32. As far as I know, the only functional difference apart from the no. of tracks is the stereo/mono option on the dp32sd for the last 12 tracks. That was the deal maker for me as it's much more convenient having real stereo tracks to handle stereo sources such as synths etc. instead of bodging it with pairs of monos. I have to do this on my large analogue mixer which only has 4 true stereo inputs and it's fiddly adjusting routing, EQ and levels on 2 monos in tandem. This is even harder on the dp machines where you don't have many knobs for each channel, so you can only adjust settings (apart from the level faders) for one track at a time. Note you don't actually get 32 mono tracks as each stereo track becomes a single mono and not 2 x monos.

 

[Pete C]

Hello Phil, and thank you very much for the welcome.
So glad to see you on this forum. I'm on part 8D of your videos for the DP. I found your videos and then went searching for a forum and saw some of your replies and couldn't believe you were on here. You have a way of explaining that is just fantastic.

As far as I can tell from two pictures of different sizes it must be the faders. Which doesn't bother me too much as the benefit that you mentioned is substantial for me also. I was thinking that perhaps the metering might be easier to read on the 24. It appears to be the same size screen but the bar graphs would be larger, no? But this is of no matter to me really.

I think the 32 is the way to go. Thanks.

I also was wondering about a re-fresh coming soon. I asked in another thread asking how long the DP's have been out (SD's) and haven't gotten an answer yet. If it's been out since 2013/14 like I think, it could be time for a Tascam re-fresh. Or a discontinuance (!) which would mean no firmware updates. But that's just the "next years model" thing and I'm not going to worry about it.

I find myself in a situation where I will be collaborating with someone and need to travel to their location 2 or 3 times a week. I wouldn't look forward to taking my current equipment out of my racks and putting it back that often. This could be a great unit for this need.

Sorry for the long reply and thanks again!

 

[Phil Tipping]

Thanks for the support Pete. You may be right about the width of bar lines... but I deliberated about exactly the same things and in the end, decided the extra tracks and stereo/mono feature was worth the gamble and have no regrets. The tracks on the timeline screen are closely spaced but they're colour coded so not as bad as it seems. You may be able to assess the clarity of the screens from the close-ups on the videos. I also justified mine for portable work - the old Mackie 1604 mixer and Fostex 8-track hard-disc recorder were just getting too bulky... and heavy, even without their flight-cases! So they're now plumbed into a rack for in-house duties and the Tascam travels in its original cardboard box. A couple of active 5" speakers and I can playback recordings on the spot. The prime requirement is to capture & digitise ready for processing back at base, but it's a bonus to have extra features on location, such as processing effects and sends for foldback etc.
Whether there will be a refresh I don't know but I wouldn't hold my breath. It would be sad to see these all-in-one boxes disappear completely.

 

[Pete C]

Your words are a sounding board for me and I agree with everything you say.
Your clever screen in screen shots of the board and the display clearly show the display is pretty easily read, and of course the extra tracks are always handy.

Our use for this instrument seem to be identical. Variety of Mackie's here too. Got to admit, their pre-amps are pretty good.

Looking at the market past and present, I think the all-in-one boxes (at least the bigger ones) are disappearing. Sad indeed.

Like many things I buy, sometimes you just have to pull the trigger and not worry about what else is coming out.

Many thanks Phil.