Improvement for 32 DP and 24 DP

lastmonk

Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2019
Messages
132
Karma
136
Gear owned
DP 24 ,DP-02, Model 12,
I left Cubase+MacOSX in favor of the Tascam Portastudio. After using the DAW solution (and becoming competent with it) for a few years, I discovered the Portastudio. Now I would only leave my DP -24 for a better DP-24, or DP-32 and I really only have one practical suggestion to improve the DP 24 and DP 32:

Add a HDMI out port so that the display can be simultaneously viewed on the unit and an external monitor:ugeek:

There are times when my band, or a customer is in my studio and I need to share the DP 24's screen. Currently I use a digital camera poised over my DP 24 and the camera is connected to a large external screen. That way I can share any discussion that I'm having with the band or customers. It would be really nice to be able to plug my DP 24 directly into an external monitor and save me the camera setup.

Also if anybody has any TEAC connections out there, let them know TEAC could take a big chunk out of the DAW+computer recording market, just by adding a HDMI out port to the DP24, DP32. Hell add it to the entire portastudio and pocketstudio line, and I'm willing to bet hard cold cash that the portastudio and pocketstudio would take serious marketshare away from the Daw+general purpose computer market:LOL:

Would a HDMI port out be useful to anybody else besides me?:rolleyes:
 
Yes, but we've seen the last of the standalone multitrack recording solution. Even Tascam's 64 track digital MTR is for playback and backup purposes. It doesn't really work as a studio recorder. I'm afraid we are stuck with software recording and the systems are so completely different, that it has literally killed the freelance producer as a career. You cannot go into a studio, check out the console's channel strips and MTR remote, sit down and go to work, because there is no console and there is no MTR. Experience does not translate from one DAW to the next like it does with consoles. In the 80's a recording engineer was expected to be able to work with whatever console/recorder arrangement they had (I talked about this before). Show me someone that can do that today. While recording concepts are the same, DAWs implement these concepts as if each one was designed in a vacuum.
 
Huh??? Really??? Wat???
So this was just released for backup purposes? :LOL:

Walk into a studio Huh??? Wat???

Maybe you're used to a different time:confused: A studio these days is where ever somebody is doing recording.:rolleyes: Are you aware that these days grammy award nominated songs have been recorded on a cellphone?

https://genius.com/a/steve-lacy-explains-how-he-produces-grammy-nominated-songs-on-his-iphone

Freelance ... huh? wat? I do freelance tracks all the time on my DP 24. Hell, I've done freelance work for a client using my 2 track DR-05. Do you realize all the ways that today's artists get songs on ITunes, Spotify, Facebook, Youtube, Bandcamp, etc? In 2019 a studio can be somebody's Cubase rig, Somebody's IPhone, Somebody's Tascam DR-05. These days if it can spit out a .wav file or .mp3 it can be used as a recording studio, and the result can be uploaded to the Internet and sold for a Patreon contribution:X3:

Walking into a studio ???? @mjk I think you might be referring to a narrow paradigm of recording studios from possibly a previous era, or only a certain crowd. Today anybody can have a recording studio virtually anywhere and if you know what you're doing you can easily get work as a freelance recording engineer (easily!) Now because recording can literally be done anywhere the payscale for a recording freelance job is not what it use to be:cry: But the work is plentiful.

Large segments of the listening public stream music over the Internet, download tracks from all kinds of websites for all kinds of prices and for all intentional purposes its a recording free for all out there:LOL: @mjk this is a freelancer's world more than any other point in time in history.

So I'm a bit confused about what premises you might be using for your argument. For example, I have a Tascam DP 24, DP-02, and DR-05 and Midi Recording setup. That is my recording studio, I get paid by local bands, choirs, the community brass band, vocalists, hopeful garage bands regularly to record, mix, and master tracks. So far (knock on wood) my customers have been very happy with the product I deliver. In most cases I take my studio to where the client is performing. And I deal with whatever acoustics are there. I consider myself a freelancer in this regard.

Now perhaps you are referring to situations or scenarios where a freelancer walks into someone else's setup. I don't have much experience about that paradigm. Or what happens when someone walks in an old school AAA studio. But its 2019 and high quality digital multi-track recording can be accomplished in a myriad of ways. And if you're uncomfortable working with someone else's gear or in someone else's spot, Start your own:ugeek: and use whatever setup suits you. If you're any good at producing the finished product you'll get work;) As a matter of fact, there are times that when my clients see my setup they say "Finally somebody who knows what he's doing":LOL:

But to be sure no recording studio these days have a monopoly on producing records, demos, film scores, cable tv scores, game music,etc. It literally can be done virtually anywhere and by anybody with basic recording skills that can produce stereo wav, mp3, or .mid files. I know this is true because I see it almost every day:LOL: The large record companies and recording studios no longer dictate what is recorded, who records it, or how its recorded.

And the notion that we've seen the last MTR is odd considering that the Tascam M 24 which is a MTR was just recently released. And even if there is nothing after the DP 24, and DP 32, Perhaps that's more a testament of if-aint-broke-dont-fix-it (notwithstanding a HDMI out port) And in any event the DP 24 and DP 32 will be in service for a long long time. For Pete's sake, folks are still using 2488's, I've seen DP-01s out there being actively used for commercially released material.

I guess we are all heavily influenced by the circles we travel in , or are exposed to. In the environment I'm in, the sky is the limit for freelancers (in terms of quantity of work opportunities) again the pay reflects the fact that there is a lot of competition out there. But there is plenty of work to go around.

And in my particular case, my work integrates well with others because I either do the recording myself with my gear, or I accept wav files, .mp3 files, or .mid files and I produce wav files, .mp3 file and .mid files. Because I have no proprietary DAW file formats to worry about coming in to me or going out from me, I don't run into the DAW trap. So from a gear point of view my customers could actually care less whether I'm using Protools, Cubase, Reason, Cakewalk, or Tascam recording solutions as long as I can handle their file formats, and give them back files that they can use.

And, if you have some setup that can't work with .wav 16 bit or 24bit, or .midi files or .mp3 or can't be recorded by my setup then you are not a potential customer for me;) and I am not a potential freelancer for you:geek:

I think TEAC will keep selling PortaStudio standalone solutions as long as there is a market and so far: PortaStudio has been more or less continually available since 1979. That suggests to me the Tascam folks know a great deal about home recording. mjk make no mistake about it, there is more home recording going on than any other kind and there are more ppl, freelancing, hustling, making money(albeit small money) off home recording scale rigs than there are AAA recording studios.

So if I were to bet, I would say that the Portastudio in one form or another will outlast the concept of the large AAA recording studio:)

And what improvements beyond my suggestion to add HDMI out to DP 24 and DP 32 would you add.? DP 24,32 already have the basic recording, mixing, and mastering tools, They provide acceptable interface to computers, they produce very high quality recordings, they have send ,return, and aux capability that allow the users to add whatever outboard gear they need. One could argue that adding Midi Sync would be a good addition. Reasonable ppl can disagree over this but, those who want midi features do have valid arguments. What improvements could TEAC realistically add and keep the units at $499 and $599? Perhaps increasing SD card storage to keep up with the Model 24o_O

I think you might be in for a surprise with respect to the future of standalone MTRs:cool:
 
Last edited:
Sorry, you just wrote a book, and I don't know where to begin. But you clearly misunderstood what I meant. Because as a record producer in Boston, I would work on perhaps 3 or 4 different mixing consoles in a year. I don't know people who can work on all those different DAWs. You made my point by saying that you are a freelancer, but with the DP-24.

I already wrote a Portastudio wish list in another thread. It included moving fader automation.

The model 24 was released for live show purposes.

Just because someone installs DAW software on their computer doesn't mean they have a recording studio, lol.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lastmonk and Matt B
Sorry, you just wrote a book, and I don't know where to begin. But you clearly misunderstood what I meant. Because as a record producer in Boston, I would work on perhaps 3 or 4 different mixing consoles in a year. I don't know people who can work on all those different DAWs. You made my point by saying that you are a freelancer, but with the DP-24.

I already wrote a Portastudio wish list in another thread. It included moving fader automation.

The model 24 was released for live show purposes.

Just because someone installs DAW software on their computer doesn't mean they have a recording studio, lol.

Wow, I didn't realize how long my post was until reading your post:LOL: Ok, you've seen the long version, its understandable if you did not read it all. Here is the short version:

  • The DP 24 and DP 32 as standalone units can and are being used by freelancers to produce professional grade product that clients are happy with although the payscale has dropped somewhat.
  • We have not seen the last standalone recording solution MTR , the M 24 proves this
  • The Tascam PortaStudio does work as a studio recorder. Especially if its the center of your studio;)
  • We are not stuck with software recording. Freelancing is alive and well among people using dedicated recorders as the center piece of their studios:cool:
  • A freelance recording engineer can still get gigs in the portastudio scene, but he/she will have to use different marketing techniques than the ones that use to work for the walk in studios
Each of these points were more fully fleshed out in my initial book:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: -mjk- and Matt B
Thanks Monk. I did read what you said, I just don't find where we disagree. I have a DP-32, with MIDI. I'm about halfway through with a new album.

The Model 24 is not, and cannot be used as a Portastudio, because there are no ways to route the tracks without using DAW, or patch cables. It is designed for live, location recording. After that, you have to take the tracks and import them into a DAW to do anything with them. Its interesting to note, that while there are 24 recording tracks, you have to give up two of those to use for stereo mixdown within the 24 itself. So discussing the model 24 in this context is really quite irrelevant.

Tascam's own 64 track digital recorder is not meant to be used to replace say a 2 inch tape machine. The uTrack24 cannot practically be used as a replacement multitrack recorder in a studio either, or else I would be using it with my Soundcraft Ghost desk. These devices are missing all important multitrack remote control systems, like we had on all the Studer, MCI, Otari, blah blah blah recorders in the old days.

What I really like about the DP-32 is that it is essentially for all intents and purposes, an in-line console. While I'm recording, I'm tweaking the monitor mix to make it sound as close to the final results I want, so I can see how the new tracks fit in. The monitor mix is the 2mix just like a big format recording desk. At the end of each session, I have a pretty good mix going so I can easily make a work mix for reference. I'm cutting tracks with the DP-32 as quickly and as efficiently as I did in a big studio like Longview Farms (I just wish I had their mics!).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lastmonk
Yes, I think we agree on all. I was thrown off by your statement:

"Yes, but we've seen the last of the standalone multitrack recording solution. Even Tascam's 64 track digital MTR is for playback and backup purposes"

Even though Tascam M 24 is meant for live recording and is not meant to replace studio work, it is technically a MTR right:) Keep in mind that me and my group are going to be using the

Tascam Dp 24 + Tascam M 24 = Complete Solution.

I personally don't believe we've seen the last of standalone multitrack. I think the market is going to go the other way. The hardware is getting so cheap, and the SOC (System On Chip), (Software On Chip) concepts are going crazy:

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/126235-soc-vs-cpu-the-battle-for-the-future-of-computing

This will actually allow dedicated hardware to be made so cheap, that vendors will be putting their software plugins into new types of dedicated hardware. No need for plugin & daw vendors to have to worry about general purpose computer operating system compatibility nightmares:geek: Also Midi 2.0 is coming:

https://www.midi.org/articles-old/t...industry-amei-announce-midi-2-0tm-prototyping

And there is a huge and growing market for people who simply don't want to work with a general purpose computer + daw or put up with all those shenanigans. Vendors will be able to take full advantage of the new up and coming SOC and capitalize on this market. That means there will be new standalone multitrack devices, 24, 32, 48, 64 tracks etc. Because it will be cheap to make them.

I can't look into the crystal ball for TEAC in particular. But I have very good reason to believe that we will see more hardware standalone MTRs in the future with as much functionality as the DP 32 and much more:).

But for now at least for my group DP 24 + M 24 = Bliss
 
  • Like
Reactions: -mjk-
@lastmonk I hope you're right. I don't share your enthusiasm, however. Time will tell. Tascam did kill off their beautiful 48 track hard disk recorder and replaced it with a one rack space 64 track digital system, with a minimal user interface. You can't really use it for punching in and stuff like that so.... If it worked for making records, I would use that because I already have a large format mixing desk. I would absolutely love a solid-state replacement for the Studer A80! Elsewhere on this forum however people will tell you that the replacement is called a DAW. Sigh....
 
I need to clarify some terms, sorry. "Standalone multitrack recording solution" means everything in one box. Mixer, FX, track routing, master mixdown record and mastering section.

"MTR" is a specific type of recorder designed for music and media production. A Flight Data Recorder is a MTR, but I wouldn't try to make a record on it.
 
Last edited:
Ok, Understood., Makes sense.

  • So was HDMI out, or VGA out on your wish list for potential improvements to SD 24, 32?
 
  • Like
Reactions: -mjk-
No, HDMI was at the top of the list. VGA would be ok. I'd like a real audio/MIDI capable USB interface too, and full MIDI implementation on every single parameter (which the DP-32 does have). 4 sends minimum, and moving faders with standalone automation like the API consoles. 48 + 2 tracks, but I'd settle for 32 + 2. Oh, FX returns with level controls to the mix would be good. And please partner with TC Electronic for FX!
 
  • Like
Reactions: lastmonk
So what should the final cost look like?

$500 - $700
$700 - $1000
$1000 - $1500
$1500 - $2500

Currently the Tascam DP 32 costs less than the full professional version of Cubase, or Ultimate Protools versions.

So where do you think TEAC should price the flagship Portastudio?
 
  • Like
Reactions: -mjk-
No, HDMI was at the top of the list. VGA would be ok. I'd like a real audio/MIDI capable USB interface too, and full MIDI implementation on every single parameter (which the DP-32 does have). 4 sends minimum, and moving faders with standalone automation like the API consoles. 48 + 2 tracks, but I'd settle for 32 + 2. Oh, FX returns with level controls to the mix would be good. And please partner with TC Electronic for FX!

The one aspect of the DP-24/32(SD) series that I really love is the ease of use. The workflow. The fact that once you grasp the effects arrangement and signal flow (thank you Phil Tipping - I can't say that enough) skipping around to do what you want to do with speed and ease is invaluable.

So if we can get even a portion of what mjk has listed and keep the wonderful "ease of use" format - I would pony up at least $1000.00.... I imagine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: -mjk- and lastmonk
Yea, I think $1000 would be my limit too. And I guess if I'm putting a $1000 wish list together I would want:

  • HDMI Out (for video)
  • WAV to MP3 conversion option in the unit
  • Ability to copy the stereo master tracks to any other tracks in the unit without having to send them to external equipment.
  • direct import/export integration between the DP 24,32 and the PocketStudios .e.g DR-05,DR-40
  • direct import/export integration between M 24 and the DP24,32 so tracks, can be transferred between them without the involvement of other equipment.
  • support for larger SD cards
  • ability to save mix down and master settings to a template that can be retrieved for any song
  • The ability to connect 2 DP 24s or 32s to make a 48 or 56 or 64 track unit.
It would be nice to stack these. So if a customer has a 24 and wants to buy a 32 the customer could buy the 32, connect it to the 24 and have 56 tracks. i.e. it would be nice to make these standalone units modular, so you could build on them. In the Tascam world the Portastudios and Pocketstudios should be stackable:LOL:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: -mjk-
Monk, the truth is, if somebody produces a piece of equipment that is exactly what you need, you can't really put a price tag on that. What we're talking about basically is a machine that would replace a standalone recorder, an entire FX rack and a DM 3200 console. The price point should come in where it is still cheaper than a DAW with a custom-built computer, and a Slate Raven console.

I'm gonna go off the Reservation for a moment here....

Touchscreen interfaces on DAWs seem very practical to me. So much so, that I'm starting to question the necessity of a console like the API Vision. The truth is, everything that we're talking about can be done with the DAW but we just hate the computer interface. If I could get anything I wanted, it would be a 2 metre long touchscreen 4K flat screen gaming monitor mounted in a desk like a real console.

But back to reality, the price point for the above new 21st-century Portastudio is $1999.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steven L. Stevens
@mjk, I normally don't talk about my day job on music/recording forums. But in this case, I think I'll mention something.

During the day I'm a paid software engineer. A big part of my job is designing, testing, evaluating, and improving user interfaces and the user experience. I also work with embedded controllers, microprocessors, custom raspberry PI and arduino solutions. Also lots of development in the Linux KDE and QT environment. What this means is I know a little something about computers, user interfaces, software interfaces, etc., etc., etc.

So the fact that I'm reticent to use a DAW + a general purpose computer has nothing to do with the idea that:

"we just hate the computer interface."


I'm extremely comfortable with computer interfaces. I get paid to build them. I'm extremely comfortable with computers I get paid to program them and design them. I am not a computer phobe, or someone who is sheepish about DAWs. :cool: I simply prefer dedicated computers when it comes to my music production and when it comes to composing, arranging, and live performance. I prefer the reliability and simplicity and elegance of a dedicated portastudio or pocket studio versus the Bull S#!@ that I run into using Daws such as Cubase and Protools. IMO ,AFAIC Portastudio is a superior choice for my workflow. Its a informed position that I've developed after being a software engineer by day and musician on nights and weekends for a few years now:LOL: The ironic thing is I even teach Daws at the local University from time to time.

So no my friend there is no hating of computer interfaces here. Just good ole fashioned consumer preference.

I understand your wish list, much of it seems like good stuff:ugeek: But my wish list does not require a full FX rack, or replacement of a DM 3200 console:LOL: If you look closely at the things I listed they all would be rather minor additions to the current DP 24 and 32 internal software. Roughly 80-90% of what I'm suggesting could be done with a modicum of changes to the DP 24,32 internal software. Yes the HDMI port would require hardware, and the DP to DP or DP to DR integration might require an additional USB host port, but thats about it. And in all fairness we should be able to get what I'm talking about in a price range of:

$500 - $1000

Now the changes you would like to see i.e.

"I'd like a real audio/MIDI capable USB interface too, and full MIDI implementation on every single parameter (which the DP-32 does have). 4 sends minimum, and moving faders with standalone automation" + HDMI OUT

Thats another ball game altogether:)

 
  • Like
Reactions: dctdct
10 yrs ago I had a KORG D32XD, much like the
Tascam DP24,
an all in one stand alone hardware recorder, with a touch screen, loved it, was rock solid, never a hic-up or freeze-up, it sounded amazing , would still have it today except it had antiquated USB 1 that made it a nightmare to back up and transfer files, It was also an outstanding processor that had features like a 7 band parametric EQ, multi-band compression and other nifty mastering tools on the stereo output.
I really regret selling it.
 
Last edited:
I didn't get that unit because it was only 16-bit at 32 tracks. Otherwise, yeah.
 
I think it’s unfortunate that Tascam is moving away from the Portastudio concept, and that the DP-32SD is really the last in the line of stand alone studio multitrack recorders. There’s a lot I wish Tascam would do with this.

My only realistic request is that I hope Tascam makes a firmware update which allows SDXC cards (64gb, 128gb, etc.) to be used with the DP-32/DP-24 line of multitracks. 32 gig cards are starting to be phased out: When SanDisk updated their SDXC Extreme Pro cards to have 170 mb/s (instead of 90 mb/s) transfer speed, the 32 gig SDHC models kept the older 95 mb/second speed. This worries me; it looks like it will now become more and more difficult to get good SDHC cards which the DP series can support.

I suggest to anyone who is invested in the DP line to stock up on good 32gb SanDisk Extreme Pro cards now, while they are only $14 each, before they stop being made and increase in price (or when the only 32gb SDHC cards available are of questionable quality).
 
@lastmonk thanks for your well worded reply. Clearly you are in some technical field. My computer experience goes back to the Z80 processor in 1981, so yeah I'm comfortable with computer interfaces too. It's not about a "computer interface" it's about the lack of a console interface. Actual audio engineers who have mixed on a console, will not mouse around on a computer screen. The following video makes a really good point about this where, a famous mix engineer released a plug-in that's designed to give his console workflow on a DAW. The young guy doing the review uses vintage consoles in connection with his DAW so he does actually get it and he's quite a good engineer.


So more correctly worded, it's the DAW interface we hate because you can't turn the knob with your fingers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lastmonk

New threads

Members online