Tascam 38 8 track-Should I get it?

[Jedi]

On ebay there is a Tascam 38 8-track going for $500. Here lately, I've been a little less than pleased with my Roland VS. Nothing against Roland or Digital recording, but I think I'm realizing that I love analog. For me, it's just a preference for MY music. For example, as guitarist some play solid state amps, some love tube amps for their music. I'm a tube amp man. I hope that makes since. So, they've got this Tascam 38 for $500. Anybody got any opinions? P.S.-I just need comments/opinions about the unit itself and the price. I'm not worried about any ebay horror stories or anything or a digital vs. analog debate. Thanks guys, Lincoln Ross Dead Black Jedis

[not Cereal]

is this the tascam da38, the 8 track hi8 tape machine thats a relative of the da88? if so, it seems i remeber hearing that tascam re-did the drum mechanism resulting in fewer repairs. on the pair of da88's i used to loath er i mean use, they were both sent off once a year for head replacement and more often drum repair/replacement. this was about $500+ per machine per repair (often 2-3 times a year) i bet that computer hardware interface is looking pretty nice now doesnt it? oh did i mention dropouts, spit, and the fact that when the format tascam uses (hi8) starts to go bad it ruins all the tracks on the tape? i have NO "beef" with tascam gear. its just the nature of those types of machines. there is a lot of motion going on in there, and a lot of detailed parts. other than the hi8 recorders i have been very pleased with tascam machines, especially pleased with the 8 track reel to reels - wonderful machines (need$ repair$ too, like any complex machine$) please dont take this as a slam on tascam, but i would avoid ANY hi8 machine like an aids infested crack whore.

[Jedi]

Hey xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, It's a reel to reel 1/2 inch analog recorder. Lincoln Ross Dead Black Jedis

[Lee Flier]

Jedi, Well you know me, I'm an old analog-head too. The thing is though, I'm not sure you'll quite get the sound you want out of the Tascam. Don't get me wrong, they're cool machines. I've had one, many of my friends still have them, lots of cool DIY records have been done on them. But, you can't assume that analog is analog is analog. A lot of the things you like about analog, have to do with the line amps and other electronics as well as the tape. In other words just "hitting tape" is not necessarily going to get you where you want to go. Now if you were talking about something like an Otari or Ampex 1-inch 8-track, that's a whole other story. You CAN get those for fairly cheap these days, although not $500. But those are studio quality decks and they have that fantastic sound. Of course you also need a decent sounding mixer to get the most out of it, and you need to know how to maintain the deck, etc. Then there's tape costs. In other words this is probably not something you want to just jump into without thinking it through, if you don't have a lot of previous experience with analog. For $500 though, it might be worth it for you just to stick your toe in the water. You can probably sell it for what you put into it, should you decide not to keep it. I would also check out some of the other digital studios that are on the market, which you might prefer to the Roland VS sound. Check out the Yamaha, Akai and Korg all in one units, and compare that with the Tascam. Anyhow the 38's are definitely cool, just don't be too disappointed if it's not exactly what you think it might be.

[not Cereal]

like i said the reel to reels are very stout machines. when coupled with a companding expander (ala dbx) they can be very powerful, reliable machines. for $500 i can almost without a doubt already tell that the tape heads will be worn, and the mechanics will be worn although it may have many years of useful service in it. in my experience these are good machines, although i notice that when the heads get worn a little the HF tends to get a little dark. i noticed very little track bleed also. i had good experiences with that unit. i love the warm fat sound of the upper bass and the soft cream sound of the mids. the highs were too dark for me, but you can work around that, and again this is likely because the heads were worn. if you really want it, buy it. it will be a bitch to ship though, they are very heavy. tapes will be about $25-$75 per reel and i liked the ampex (i forget the# sorry) tapes. good luck, i bet you will love it. also, you can use this machine with SMPTE but you lose two outside tracks (one for smpte, other for bleed space)

[Jedi]

I was waiting on you, Lee. I saw you had just posted on another thread, and I was like "Come'on sweetheart, hook me up with some wisdom." Thanks a lot, and thanks xxx xxxx xxxx I forgot to thank you for your input as well. [quote]I would also check out some of the other digital studios that are on the market, which you might prefer to the Roland VS sound. Check out the Yamaha, Akai and Korg all in one units, and compare that with the Tascam. [/quote]See, here's the thing Lee. I'm thinking it's gotta be analog. All the records I love were recorded on analog. I'm hesitant to get into the other All in one units, I'm thinking it'll be more of the same brittle crap. ARRRRGGHHHHH. I'm really leaning to renting out a professional analog studio, but I really like working at home. And by working at home, I don't want to be doing just scratch demos. I want some type of destination for my work. My other strategy was maybe getting another PC, grab a Digi 001, and get some better converters and be off and running. But again, I'm frightened of investing in something that at the foundation won't give me what I want. I remember doing some of my first recordings on my father's 4-Track Teac(before it broke) and just how they smoke my recordings with all of my 1,000 levels of undo crap. I, honestly, think I'm just got a lovejones for that analog warmth. Do I sound sound crazy or What The :D ? Lincoln Ross Dead Black Jedis

[Nawor]

The Tascam 38 was their base model 1/2' 8 track machine of the time. I still have a Tascam 58 1/2" 8 track going cheap with 8 channels of DBX noise reduction. Offers anyone??? You can't compare these machines to the pro level Studers etc. It's a bit like comparing an 128kbit mp3 through a five year old Soundblaster with 24bit/96khz Apogees etc. It just ain't a fair comparison. The problem with the lower level analog decks is their narrow track format and restricted dynamic range, s/n ratio and frequency response. Often noise reduction is employed to counter some of these problems but that in itself has often undesriable side effects. Then there's maintenance and tape costs. While a half inch machine is MUCH cheaper to maintain than a 2" pro version, non-the-less it still costs. My current setup kills the old Tascam 58 and I'm not running Apogees etc or anything even like them. However I did once own a 1" 8 track Otari and that did sound VERY nice... but the tape costs were the killer. If you are after some of that analog magic in a track width equivelant to a 1" 8 track or a 2" 16 track condsider getting yourself a 1/4" 2 track 15ips recorder (maybe a Revox B77). Anything thing you want to 'warm up' could be sent through the Revox on it's way to the Roland and then you could realign the tracks afterwards. You may only need to do this on this odd track or two. I ofter run bass through my Revox on the way to my DAW and the tape compression richens things up nicely.. and it's cheap to run! :D

[Duhduh]

Keep in mind that the Roland VS series recorders are a bad example of digital recording. They use compressed audio which gives you that "brittle" digital sound. DAW's and better all-in-one units like the Yamaha AW4416 are uncompressed which will basically give you back whatever you put in. The general consensus around here seems to be mic's, mic pre's, and converters are gonna make more of a difference than the end format.

[Jedi]

Thanks everyone for all the insight. Great info. So Lee, You got the Yamaha don't you? And you're an analog lover. What's your take on your unit, does it measure up? Thanks again folks, Lincoln Ross Dead Black Jedis

[nhcomp45aol.com]

Hey jedi, send me an email and I'll give you my phone No. I have all the answers to your questions and will send you a cd recorded on my Tascam 80-8. The 40 series is so much better built and can be had even cheaper. The 38 will sound the same but that price is a little high. After you try both you will find that DBX is not the way to go. The biggest difference between my Otari MTR-10 half track at 15ips and my 25 year old Teac 3300sx quarter track at 7.5ips is the hiss. The frequency range of both go far beyond FM radio. As for the guy with the Tascam-58. Some people would rather drive a Volkswagen than a Corvette, They're on a different page than you and I. Give me a call. Paul.

[-_dup1]

[quote]Originally posted by Jedi: [b]I'm thinking it's gotta be analog. All the records I love were recorded on analog.[/b][/quote]Same here -- Especially since I got into collecting [i]records[/i] (y'know, those large circular vinyl things). Just about everything I've been listening to this year was recorded before 1980 and on analog gear. Still, the one thing you might be overlooking is the incredible discrepency between the pro and "musician" recording gear of days past; That gap has narrowed considerably in the last couple of years, and it's easy to forget how non-CD quality stuff was... As others have said, you probably aren't going to get the "analog" sound you're digging from musician-level gear. But then it depends. If you're into a low-fi kind of sound (Guided by Voices?) you might do well with the Tascam... [quote]Originally posted by Jedi: [b]My other strategy was maybe getting another PC, grab a Digi 001, and get some better converters and be off and running. But again, I'm frightened of investing in something that at the foundation won't give me what I want.[/b][/quote]PTLE is the computer program most like operating a tape deck, IMO. Heck, if all you need are 8 tracks, you can download Pro Tools Free and be off and running. :) :thu: As I mentioned on Alpha's thread about DAWs, PTLE/001 has been really good to me so far. It's not perfect (001 converters are just so-so, 32 track limit, mix bus gets funky with the more tracks you throw through it, it's VERY picky as far as what motherboard you're using) but the advantages strongly outweigh the disadvantages, at least for me. I used to use 16/24 track analog tape when I worked at local recording studios; I'd pick the convenience of PTLE any day over that. (Ever have to bias a tape deck? Ehhhhhh... :mad: :D ) [quote]Originally posted by Jedi: [b]I remember doing some of my first recordings on my father's 4-Track Teac(before it broke) and just how they smoke my recordings with all of my 1,000 levels of undo crap. I, honestly, think I'm just got a lovejones for that analog warmth.[/b][/quote]Pro Tools Free only has one level of undo, so perhaps that might be what you're looking for. ;) I'm joking of course, but I know what you mean. If I were you, I'd give PTLE a good look -- it really is a great program if you want something that operates like a tape deck. Good luck on your search for a new recording device; Definitely let us know how it turns out!

[Tedster]

Shit, DblackLincolncontinental :D ('scuse me, while I kiss Captain Morgan's girlfriend)... It's only 5 bills. If ya got it, I'd buy the mo-sheen. But what do I know?

[Jedi]

Thanks everyone, I feel ya, Tedster. But if I'm going to throw some money away, I'll probably get the Akai 12 track Ken/Eleven Shadows suggested. They're going for $300 bills. Atleast, I could hollar at him an ask for some samples of what he's done with it. Ken, expect a PM from me, pretty soon bro. Paul, Thanks for the offer, bro. I'll be hitting you up today. [quote]Originally posted by Hank, The Cave Peanut As others have said, you probably aren't going to get the "analog" sound you're digging from musician-level gear. But then it depends. If you're into a low-fi kind of sound (Guided by Voices?) you might do well with the Tascam... [/quote]Yeah, the lo-fi thing would work for me for now. I'm really starting to dislike the glossed up record feel. I stop using reverb altogether. So it looks like I'm heading in that direction. In the days of autotune, and punch-in every syllable, I'm beginning to find comfort in stripped down production. Guided by Voices are kind of cool, but I haven't picked up a Cd yet. I think I will. Thanks Hank for your input. Peace to all, Lincoln Ross Dead Black Jedis

[strat0124]

I love it! As a proud owner of both the Tascam 38 and the cassette based Tascam 238, its refreshing to see folks lamenting on the old analog sound heard on albums that attracted them to recording in the first place. Still I embrace the tech of the digital realm and getting my Christmas present real soon, but I'll never get shed of those aforementioned machines. THE SLEEPER HAS AWAKENED!!!!!!!!!! :) :) OK...dunno what that obscure reference has to do with the subject matter, but it just felt right! :) :)

[conceptDIGITAL]

We did some pretty killer stuff with our Model 38. I somewhat disagree with some of the posters, in that as long as I was somewhat careful with the levels that the DBX worked exactly the way I intended it to. I moved to all digital (PC DAW), and in all honesty, haven't looked back. I still listen to some of the recordings we did in analog, and they still sound good, but I really like the added flexibility of digital. I'd be willing to part with the 38 (and DBX) for a reasonable price if there is anyone out there who longs for the old ways. Yes, there is some head wear, but that can be worked around. Bear in mind that it does cost a bundle to move the thing. It's built like a tank, and weighs about as much. If interested, let me know.

[nhcomp45aol.com]

A friend has two of those Akai 12 tracks and they are quite a bag of worms. Tempermental hard to align mechanically and electronically. Very poor headstack arangment and you have to use their cartrages which makes tape choice non existant.

[Anderton]

<> If you get overloaded with offers, pass them on to me...I'm looking to sell my Model 58 (no dbx, though)! I'd advise against the Akai due to tape availability and servicing issues. But yeah, they sounded good -- I think they used input transformers.

[DC]

Say Jedi, I can see the longing for reels, but don't forget the cleaning and de-magnetizing that go along. Not to mention keeping the head in line. I've still got my Fostex 8 track on 1/4" format deck but I've quit using it. I liked the foot punching but it just didn't have low end using the narrow tape. The 1/2" machines sound better but I'd really try and find one local so you can check it before purchase. UPS has gotten bad about throwing stuff around so you might be in for a head allignment just from shipping the thing. I'm having great luck with the last generation Leoni machine (Cele overclocked to 900MHz, Cake 9.03 plus a DAL Card Deluxe). I don't auto tune or anything like that and it's sounding musical as hell to me.

[Lee Flier]

Hi Jedi, Believe me I totally know what you mean about jonesing for analog. All my fave records were analog too. BUT, like I said, you won't necessarily get that sound from a TASCAM. Plus, without having a chance to check out the machine on eBay you don't know the condition of the heads and other factors. And what would you use for a mixer? That's a big factor in the sound too. As for the "brittle" sound, I don't blame you for being dissatisfied with the VS. Its converters aren't very good at all and the data compression adds an extra layer of suckiness. :D Don't associate that sound with all of digital audio! Anyhow... yes I have the Yamaha AW4416. It is NOT at all brittle sounding, the converters have a very "rounded" quality that's pretty close to analog. It doesn't have quite the spatial depth of great analog, but a Tascam deck isn't going to either. You're welcome to listen to any of our MP3's and hear for yourself, they were all done on the AW. Definitely it sounds a lot different from the VS. If you want, I THINK I even have some drum tracks lying around that were done on the TASCAM 38 and a Mackie board, plus some other drum tracks recorded on the same kit in the same room with the same mics, on the AW4416. They're quite close really (although different drummers). If you're positively determined to go analog, be prepared to spend some time and money getting it together. I'd really recommend that you buy a deck locally so you can check it out first, and spend a little more money to get a good 1" 8 track deck. Otherwise I honestly don't think the difference between the TASCAM and something like an AW4416 is worth the hassle of maintenance and tape costs. Just let me know which way you decide to go or if you have any more questions... and whichever way you go I'm sure I can help ya out! Believe me I'd love to have a 2" 16 track deck and a nice analog mixer in here... but it's just not practical for a home studio compared to what I've got. Then again I'm pretty broke these days too. :mad:

[Jedi]

Thanks gang, I'm not a purist at all. I would love to have a studio-in-a-box that gave me the sound I want. Unfortunately, all the stuff I like even recently sound analog(ish). The breaking point for me was Wilco's "I'm trying to break your heart" documentary. I love the sound of their album. I think it is the first album where I appreciated the production more than the songwriting(granted they do have a couple of great songs(Jesus, etc.) on that album). Once I found out they were hitting tape my heart began to "break"(pun intended). Anyway, I'm interested in the Yamaha now, I'm going to check out Lee's mp3s and see what I think. Thanks everyone, Lincoln Ross Dead Black Jedis

[Calfee Jones]

I agree with Lee - you have a good chance of NOT getting the sound you are after with it. I did a lot of recording on the Tascam 1/2 inch 8 track machines, and I could never quite get the sound I was after. I'm sure you are limited by the physical size of the track on the tape. Tape costs will be significant. And the tape will be increasingly difficult to find. Parts and service will be increasingly difficult also (as an owner of obseleted technologies in the past I know what I'm talking about). I think Rowan has the right idea - get a good 2 track and send tracks from your new DAW ;) through it to warm them up. In my experience it takes a lot of money to stay with 'vintage' gear, and keep it in working order. So if you have lots of money, Great! But I personally would still go after a different analogue multi-track than the Tascam machine...

[Lee Flier]

Yeah exactly Calfee - you're very limited by the track width and the quality of the line amps, with the TASCAM's. It's easy to think it's just "analog" that gives you the great "analog sound" but it ain't. There's a HUGE difference between TASCAM and Ampex/Studer/Otari/etc. Huge difference between 1/2" 8 track and 1" 8 track, etc. Also keep in mind that many of your favorite records that were recorded analog were also MIXED on large frame analog desks. A Mackie or Allen & Heath, ain't a Neve, either. And actually I forgot to mention Rowan's point about getting a good 2 track deck. They're pretty cheap, the tape costs are less if you go with 1/4", and you can do a lot with one of those and a DAW - you can record individual tracks through them so that they'll hit tape (and those fabulous old electronics) before going into your DAW. You can use it for a tape delay on vox or guitar. And you can mix to it if you want. I've done this before, I had a 1965 Ampex deck in here for awhile and the sound of it just kills. Plus they're built like tanks. The 2-track + DAW thing is a more practical solution for the home studio enthusiast who wants some high quality analog sound. Again though, I wouldn't do this with the VS, the converters and data compression just take too much away from the quality you're trying to impart.

[sign]

Ever heard of "the kiss of tape"? I've had a 38 and I can assure you it sounds very good. The hiss is a problem with the 38 and using DBX doesn't "improve" the sound, actually I hate DBX NR. The best sounding small tape analog machine is the Fostex G-series. A Fostex G24 sounds even better than some two inch machines.

[nhcomp45aol.com]

The smaller the tape the more analog it sounds. I'll send a couple of CDs to any two of you that want to hear how huge a tascam machine can sound. Lee, I downloaded some of your music a few months ago. Great guitar work, tight band, nice mix but it lacks life and bottom end. If you could hear your songs side by side with mine like I have you might be tempted to rewrite your thoughts on small format decks. The analog sound that we love so much is a defect. The larger the tape and faster the speeds the more clear and steril the sound becomes. I have close to thirty reel to reel decks in my house and have been recording vocals and piano since 1960 and drums and multitracking since 1965. As soon as someone mentions Tascam around here they are ignored like the village idiot. I got into electronics at the age of 4, by 6 I was doing local tv and radio repair. At 8 years old I completely rewired my neighbors washer and dryer room for 220 service.I have an undestanding of electrnics that is way beyond average. I bought my Tascam 8516-B from a guy who upgraded to a two inch 24 track Otari. I saw him a few months later and he said he was so dissapointed that he could'nt get as rich an analog sound as he had with the tascam.As far as maintainence, I have a more difficult time shaving than I do setting up these decks. Paul.

[Lee Flier]

nhcomp, I've got nothing against TASCAM's, I've recorded a lot on them myself, even recently. And certainly heard lots of recordings that have been done on them. They CAN sound great, and I certainly preferred them to ADAT's :D . But I have to disagree that "the smaller the tape, the more analog it sounds." Sorry but I've done plenty of direct comparison between 1/2" 8 track and 1" 8 track, between 2" 24 track and 2" 16 track, etc. and I prefer the sound of the bigger track width every time. Maybe your friend's deck just wasn't set up properly or he didn't align it hot enough. To say you can get a richer sound from a TASCAM than a properly set up 2" Otari is just bunk. I do often prefer 15ips to 30, depending on the material. In any case, I'm happy for you that YOU find maintaining tape decks to be easier than shaving, but I don't think Jedi does, nor most home studio enthusiasts. I wouldn't want anybody to buy an analog deck without knowing what they're getting themselves into if they're used to a DAW. It's a lot easier if you do know something about electronics, and are willing to learn alignment procedures and the effect of different alignment specs on the sound. Also, when talking about tape vs. DAW you CAN'T just compare the deck to the DAW, you have to consider the mixer too. Internal mixing in a DAW still doesn't sound anything like even a halfway decent analog desk, so it's hardly any wonder if a recording on a TASCAM through a Soundcraft Ghost or something decent, kills anything mixed in a DAW. That doesn't mean the digital recording or the high end tape deck mixed out through the same desk, wouldn't kill the TASCAM. For awhile I had a TASCAM 38 in here side by side with an Ampex 1/4" 2 track and the Ampex just KILLED it. Absolutely floored everyone who heard the direct comparison.

[Dan South]

Jedi, You've gotten lots of good feedback here. I'll add my own two cents - which is more than my advice is worth - and I'll also suggest that you (a) post this question on Roger Nichols' forum, and (b) look up Roger's post showing graphs of input and output comparisons between a high end analog recorder and a first generation ADAT (hint: ADAT won). If it were me, I would NOT buy the 38 because I would expect that first of all it's probably going to need some service, and who knows how much that will cost. Second, it's big and bulky and heavy. Third, I hate demagnetizing heads. Fourth, if it doesn't need service now, it will sooner or later. Fifth, NOIZ. Sixth, editing capabilities are non-existent. Seventh, I'll bet that your money would be better spent on an external clock for your VS recorder which will make a BIG difference in the way it sounds, compression or no compression. I'm convinced that the problems that people hear with digital stem from a less than stellar system clock, a condition that can be easily remedied.

[Lee Flier]

[quote]Originally posted by Dan South: [b]You've gotten lots of good feedback here. I'll add my own two cents - which is more than my advice is worth - and I'll also suggest that you (a) post this question on Roger Nichols' forum, and (b) look up Roger's post showing graphs of input and output comparisons between a high end analog recorder and a first generation ADAT (hint: ADAT won).[/b][/quote]Dan, I'm aware of that comparison and it's very misleading. Looking at a graph has very little bearing on how something actually sounds. I could record my guitar directly into an input on my mixer vs. going through a miked tube amp, and the specs would tell me I was getting all sorts of noise and distortion when going through the amp. But how many rock guitarists prefer going direct over playing through a tube amp? Practically none. Same thing with analog; it's a "flavor." If "that sound" is what you want there is no substitute for it, graphs be damned. [quote][b] it's big and bulky and heavy.[/b][/quote]Not really. Certainly not compared to a high end deck. :) [quote][b]Third, I hate demagnetizing heads.[/b][/quote]Oh come on. It takes less time than backing up a hard drive. :) [quote][b] Fifth, NOIZ.[/b][/quote]NOIZ is part of rock'n'roll, dude. It's kind of silly to complain about noise when the noise from snares rattling and amps buzzing is going to be way louder than any noise produced by the tape, if it's properly aligned and maintained. Besides, a little tape hiss helps glue things together. [quote][b]Sixth, editing capabilities are non-existent.[/b][/quote]Ain't ya ever heard of a razor blade? And anyhow Mr. Jedi has already stated that he's really moving away from doing much in the way of editing. [quote][b] Seventh, I'll bet that your money would be better spent on an external clock for your VS recorder which will make a BIG difference in the way it sounds, compression or no compression. I'm convinced that the problems that people hear with digital stem from a less than stellar system clock, a condition that can be easily remedied.[/b][/quote]I think that's probably true of most DAW's, but NOT the VS. Those converters simply aren't going to sound analog no matter what, they're too crispy. Converters have come a long way in the short time since those things were first made. And the compression DOES affect the sound in a way that I don't think a good clock will fix. Now you can prefer the sound of analog, or you can prefer the sound of ADAT's or VS's, but if what you want is an analog sound you ain't gonna get it from a VS or ADAT (or vice versa either of course). Otherwise, with the right converters and clock you can get most DAW's to sound more like analog if you want to.

[zele]

[quote]Originally posted by Duhduh: [b]Keep in mind that the Roland VS series recorders are a bad example of digital recording. They use compressed audio which gives you that "brittle" digital sound. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^HOPE OUR HAPPY CLIENTS DO NOT DISCOVER THAT OUR VS 2480 IS A BAD EXAMPLE OF RECORDING QUALITY...SURE HAS BEEN FINE FOR ALL OF OUR STUDIOS....http://fp2k.redshift.com/cjogo/crystalrecording.htm<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<, DAW's and better all-in-one units like the Yamaha AW4416 are uncompressed which will basically give you back whatever you put in. The general consensus around here seems to be mic's, mic pre's, and converters are gonna make more of a difference than the end format.[/b][/quote]

[Nawor]

[quote]The smaller the tape the more analog it sounds. I'll send a couple of CDs to any two of you that want to hear how huge a tascam machine can sound.[/quote]???... My 1" 8 track Otari (15ips, transformer coupled, no NR) sounded big and warm and 'analog'. My Tascam 58 sounded nowhere near as big and warm and 'analog'. Without NR it was too noisy and with it (DBX) it still had side effects even after careful calibration of heads and levels. You had to be careful not to oversaturate the tape with the DBX switched in or the rec/replay level errors would start becoming apparent. In it's own right the Tascam didn't sound bad but when comparing it with the 1" 8 track... there was no comparison. And I owned both machines at the same time. Even some of my 'cloth eared' friends commented on the 'bigness' of the 1". Everything was just so much more 'solid' and 'muscular' coming off it. Just my 2cents :)

[Dan South]

Korg makes some good sounding all in one digital recorders, also. These are complex machines, so be sure to do some research and try them out if you can before buying. Re: demagnetizing, editing, etc. It's my two cents. Not everyone is going to agree with me on all points, and that's fine, but I mention the points because there's a chance that someone else may be bugged by the same unforeseen analog tape bugaboos that annoy me. If someone enjoys fussing over their tape deck and recording with that type of equipment, more power to them. For me, I'm glad that the digital age is here, even if you have to buy a good clock to get the best of it. Re: mics and pres. Not likely to improve a VS's sound much, even with an expensive chain.