Tascam M-600
Scott Whatman
I have one that hasn't been used for some time. I am looking at using an
analog console again, ( as opposed to mixing in the box), I have the
opportunity to buy a Trident 80B for what seems to be a good price. I will
be stretching my finances very thin, so how much of an improvement in audio
quality will I get? Is it worth trying to upgrade the Tascam?
I've searched all over the net but found very little info on Tascam M-600
consoles. There must be quite a few out there being used.
Jay Kahrs
I'm sure the 80B has better mic pres and probably has more headroom overall.
But, how much outboard do you have? You could probably mod the Tascam into
something nice for less then half the going rate of an 80B and put the rest
into some outboard EQ's and mic pres that you'd want around anyway.
---
-Jay Kahrs
Owner - Chief Engineer
Mad Moose Recording Inc.
Morris Plains, NJ
http://www.madmooserecording.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Come visit me here --> http://www.gearslutz.com
Bill Thompson
really, it was dead easy to work on - both from a routing flexibility
and maintenance point of view, and it was well put together. I don't
think it would be a direct competitor to the 80B, but it has been ages
since I've used either one.
Now if you are comparing it to most of the current crop of reasonably
priced consoles out there, I'd take the M-600 over any of them. But
comparing it to an 80B is a lot tougher question!
Another consideration might be what will be required to get either one
actually working in your studio???
Bill
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
Ted Spencer
>> Is the Tascam M-600 considered to be a decent mixing console or is it
>junk?
I heard an M600 many years ago when I was console shopping and I thought it
sounded surprisingly nice. Sweet, clean, and very open at the top. I'd give it
a chance especially since you already own it.
Ted Spencer, NYC
"No amount of classical training will ever teach you what's so cool about
"Tighten Up" by Archie Bell And The Drells" -author unknown
Jim Williams
You can hear a modified Tascam 600 on the recent Yes records that were
produced by Billy Sherwood. It was fitted with many sip-to-dip
daughterboards to convert opamp pinouts (some manu's use crappy single
in line jap opamps instead of dip packages, like tascam, roland,
mackie, etc.). The records were tracked on the 600, then they went to
the Enterprise to mix on the 9000 SSL. They couldn't get the same open
high speed sound there so they rented some 480's and mixed the records
on the 600 at Billy's Van Nuys studio.
It's an extensive mod, one I wouldn't usually recommend, I would
suggest a better console to sink several k's into.
Jim Williams Audio Upgrades
http://www.audioupgrades.com
EggHd
produced by Billy Sherwood. >>
I believe Billy has a TASCAM 3500 that you modified (unless he changed in the
last couple years) and that is one heck of a nice sounding console. Now, if it
were balanced and he had decent acoustics in the control room......
---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"
Scott Whatman
brown...@aol.com wrote on 3/10/02 3:16 AM:
I have some nice mic pres and outboard compression and eq. Although there
are things that I have on my shopping list that I still NEED.
It sounds as though the M-600 is quite a reasonable board. I was lucky
enough to pick it up very cheaply and was going sell it to fund other
acquisitions. The desk is in good condition and is fully functional.
The desk would mainly be used for mixing as I have enough mic pres to bypass
the desk when tracking. I was concerned that the desk might be detrimental
to getting a good sound but it sounds like the consensus is that this is not
the case.
Jim Williams talked about an expensive mod that he did to a desk that YES
used. Is there any other way to upgrade the desk without overcapitalizing in
it?
Thanks all for replying
Scott Whatman
Ted Spencer
>used. Is there any other way to upgrade the desk without overcapitalizing in
>it?
>Thanks all for replying
>Scott Whatman
I have a Jim Williams (Audio Upgrades) modified M3500 and Jim does excellent
work (although I changed out for different opamps afterwards - search google
for details). What I'd recommend you do in this case though, is to fire up the
unmodded M600 and try it out. If my recollection is accurate you may not feel a
need to mod it at all. Others seem to agree that this is a good sounding desk
right out of the box.
If you then feel you want to go a step higher in sound quality, Jim can do
parts of the console for you (such as the master section) for very reasonable
prices. Good luck and enjoy the board.
Rob Adelman
Scott Whatman wrote:
>
> Jim Williams talked about an expensive mod that he did to a desk that YES
> used. Is there any other way to upgrade the desk without overcapitalizing in
> it?
Try it as is, you might like it just fine. I have heard that the high
end Tascam boards are quit nice, very underrated.
-Rob
Mark Richardson
it, it's usable enough. It's better than all the low-end Tascam crap boards,
but still sounds kind of "mushy"- hard to get definition in the low-mid to
bottom end. The pres aren't awful, and the EQ is surprisingly usable. The thing
I HATE about it is the fact you can only send the talkback to two aux sends at
a time. I keep meaning to wire a dedicated TB mic to an unused mic input, but
haven't gotten around to it yet. Layout is straightforward and usable. Be
careful, as the direct channel outs are -10, and the busses are +4.
Is it better than a Mackie 8-buss? Different, certainly. Where the Mackie and
tends towards thin/harsh/brittle, the M600 is dull/mushy. With some outboard
pres, you can do work on it. I'd take a Soundcraft 600 over it any day, though.
-Mark
EggHd
console...
EggHd
Should read which.
Ted Spencer
>Which one is the 600? I remember Tascam making a huge, kinda SSL looking
>console...
It's not that one. That was the first and last attempt Tascam made at a full
size analog console with (some) high end features. I forget the number. IIRC it
was made in the early to mid 90s and cost $50-70K or so. Looked pretty nice,
didn't sell many AFAIK.
The M600 was a larger, more expensive (maybe $15-20K) predecessor of the M3500,
but similar in many ways. It probably came out around 1987 or so and was gone
not long after the M3500 came out, around 1990.
I'm working from memory here. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong...
Rob Adelman
one?
-Rob
Rob Adelman
1989:
"- TASCAM introduced the M700, a 40x32 mixer. This was TASCAM's first mixer featuring
built-in automation. The mixer had the familiarity of a traditional console and
performed like more expensive consoles. It was dubbed the baby SSL. (A fader package
was introduced at a later date.)"
Rob Adelman
1987:
- The TASCAM M-600 Series mixing consoles were developed in response to popular demand
for TASCAM quality in a larger console designed specifically for the professional
recording environment. The result was a high-performance console that offered broad
mixing control and versatility while at the same time being remarkably compact and easy
to use. 24 and 32 input channel versions were available.
EggHd
simonstav
Regards Simon
"EggHd" <eg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021004170942...@mb-fi.aol.com...
Roger W. Norman
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"Rob Adelman" <rade...@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3D9E24D2...@mn.rr.com...
Rob Adelman
<http://www.tascam.com/company/index.php>
Scott Whatman
lobs...@bellsouth.net wrote on 5/10/02 6:04 AM:
> I work on a Trashcan M-600 semi-regularly, and although I don't actually LIKE
> it, it's usable enough. It's better than all the low-end Tascam crap boards,
> but still sounds kind of "mushy"- hard to get definition in the low-mid to
> bottom end. The pres aren't awful, and the EQ is surprisingly usable.
>
> Is it better than a Mackie 8-buss? Different, certainly. Where the Mackie and
> tends towards thin/harsh/brittle, the M600 is dull/mushy. With some outboard
> pres, you can do work on it. I'd take a Soundcraft 600 over it any day,
> though.
>
> -Mark
If you were using Pro Tools, for example, would you prefer to mix on the
M-600 rather than mixing inside the computer.
I've been using outboard mic pre's for tracking and mixing inside Pro Tools
for a while and can't stand the narrowness and lack of depth. Will the M-600
give me what I'm looking for and at what expense? eg. noise, mushy bottom
end etc......
Adam Kagan
good. I had about half of the channels (line input and eq modified by Audio
Upgrades) and I really liked the sound. I would say the eq is very useable, but
not outstanding. The bussing worked well and there were many 'pro' features like
oscillators, switchable metering and buss voltage indicators. My console came with
Tascam TT patchabays that were wired to the console via D-sub connectors. The
problems I had were power supply issues (only happened once) and noisy control
room pot (replacing the pot was very simple).
I would put the sound in the clean/ dark category, as opposed to Mackie or
Berhinger in the clean/ thin category. Years ago I had an M3500, on which I did
some very good sounding jingles, demos and indy record work. The 3500 had a much
higher noise floor than the M600.
regards,
kags
Ted Spencer
>Years ago I had an M3500, on which I did
>some very good sounding jingles, demos and indy record work. The 3500 had a
>much
>higher noise floor than the M600.
The M3500's noise issues are almost entirely related to bad interrnal
grounding. It's about a day's work to fix it.