The maintenance regime was a nightmare, it was impossible to really edit anything, and when you did play a perfect take, the cassette would probably suffer a drop-out or a glitchвЂ¦ Getting a really great result was extremely difficult.

Using the pan functions, it was possible to create stereo mixes with a Tascam 424, but the individual channels/tracks onto which each instrument was recorded, were mono, and the listener could tell.ДЇurthermore, four tracks was rarely enough, and the overall sound quality wasnвЂ™t great with these home tape multitrackers either.

Add to that the rather flat personality of instruments recorded in mono, and the finished recordings could sound very one-dimensional. Consequently, theyвЂ™d end up with quite a raw and basic sound. Such hardware could be extremely costly, so most home recording amateurs just couldnвЂ™t afford the amount of processing gear they really needed. Whereas these days musicians are used to having reams of special effects and processing tools readily available in virtual form on their computers, a couple of decades back theyвЂ™d have to go out and buy each effect and processing tool as a piece of hardware. So a 60 minute cassette would offer just 15 minutes of recording time.Д«ut the biggest compromises lay in the lack of peripheral tools, and the limitation of tracks. And if you additionally ran at double speed, the capacity would be halved again. Because the device would use both sides of your tape for each song you recorded, youвЂ™d lose half of the cassetteвЂ™s recording time whatever happened. The Tascam 424 was one of the better models available, offering adequate mixing facilities with independent equalisation controls for each track/channel, panning controls, and an option to run the tape at double-speed, which made for a higher quality recording. But there really wasnвЂ™t much scope for creativity production-wise with these home multitrackers. So this device permitted amateur bands or multi-intrumentalists to create their own controlled and balanced recordings, without having to shell out the sometimes monstrous fees charged by commercial recording studios in the 1980s and early 1990s. Finally, the finished master could be copied to as many tapes as necessary, for distribution. Using the built-in вЂmixing deskвЂ™, the four sounds could then be mixed into a balanced, stereo output, which would be recorded to a cassette вЂmasterвЂ™ on an ordinary stereo tape deck. For example, drums on Track 1, bass on Track 2, guitar on Track 3, and vocals on Track 4. Fundamentally, four separate sound sources could be recorded or dubbed alongside each other, each on its own channel or track. Most of these four-track home multitracking devices insisted on the use of Type II high bias tapes. No one was under any illusions about what these contraptions did: they recorded up to four simultaneous tracks of audio onto a single standard cassette tape вЂ“ although when I say вЂњstandardвЂќ, I just mean the format. Of course, the concept of a recording studio in a desktop casing was always going to have huge compromises and limitations. This is a Tascam 424 Portastudio вЂ“ a multitracking device which gave home recording enthusiasts (often musicians, but sometimes amateur producers) their own small recording studio, in the days before hard disk digital multitracking became available to the masses. I thought IвЂ™d do something a bit different today and take a concise look at an archetypal piece of tape recording equipment.

Recording tascam 424 mkii