I am getting ready to move in my M-520. We had been using an M-30, and M-512, to date. The M-520 was held in reserve.

Anyway, many of you are Familiar with these boards from the 80's. The thing most people worry about is that they use a hell of a lot of unbalanced signals. This has not been an issue for us here.

For the money, I don't think the number of features can be matched.

Parametric EQs(by-passable - biggest complaint with the B company board I had.), phase reverse, phantom power, 2 auxs, real VU meters...not much I can think of that isn't there.

About all I will ever need. (For now )

20 channels and 8 busses on the M-520. For my 16 tracks that's plenty. If it isn't, the other boards are there.

I picked this one up for about $400 a while back.

I wonder how many of the boards for home use will still be viable 20 years from now?

I can't find a spec sheet, or Manual for these boards. But I would suggest that anyone looking for a board, with lots of function, at a price close to or better than todays, These should not be ignored.

How are the pres?

The pres are nice and clean, in my experience. They boost the level, in a clean kind of way. Not colored, Not thin and crackly.

I believe that all of the drums recorded on anysong in my sig were through those pres to tape. Granted there was some effecting later. But....

If I am not mistaken it was a D112, on kick, 57 on snare, and AT811s for overheads.
The only cymbles(sic?) being Hi-hat and ride.

8 track, dtrs, no fuss no muss.

The M-512 wnet for around 4 grand when it was released, in 1984. This was not toy.

I will try to have a snare, a vocal and an Acoustic up in the next couple days. Just clean, to DA-88, to MP3. NO nothing, but level.

Question. When I do this, should I just go to CD? if so, and I rip to MP3 will the compression skew things for the listener? or is there a better way?

I wouldn't do this just on my account. I'm not in the market for a mixer.

If you want to do it anyway, you should know that MP3 does do funny things to the high end and is not the best format for pre comparisons. You might want to consider posting very short 24 bit .wav clips.

I already did it. Straight to CD.

I will try to figure out how to do the wavs.

Sorry I can't for the life of me figure out how to put a non mp3 file up.

I am a luddite. I admit it.

What software are you using to make your MP3s?

I usually use dB PowerAmp

Tascam M-520

Click to view attachment

It is pretty, isn't it?

The meters light up and the knobs all do stuff.....

Seriously, for me. A wonderful board. I get sticker shock when I look at newer stuff.

Hi,

I just recently purchased an M512 and I love it. It's a great match for my Teac 80-8.

I do have a few questions about working methods with the board that maybe you can shed some light on.......

When I'm going to mixdown to 2-track I have been doing the following....

Returns 1-4 from the Teac 80-8 get routed to channel 1-4 on the M512 and bussed to 1-2. These are usually the L/R overheads, snare and bass drum.

Returns 5-6 are routed through channels 5-6 to buss 3-4. These are usually guitar and bass.

Returns 7-8 are routed through channels 7-8 to buss 5-6. These are usually backgroud vocals/guitar solo and Main vocal.

My effects (SoundWorkShop stereo spring reverb and Deltalab delay) are returned on the line inputs of ch 10-12 and routed to buss 7-8.

Str Master A runs out to my power amp/monitors and Str Master B runs out to my 1/4" 2-track for mixdown.

In the Tascam M512 manual they indicate that during mixdown returns 1-8 should all be assigned to channels 1-8 respectively and then all routed to buss 1-2 and sent of to the 2-track.

My question is what is the advantage to the latter method Tascam descibes vs the method I have been using. What method did you use on the M512?

The board is very quiet, so i'm not worried about any noise build up by using the busses. So i'm wondering what the advantage of the Tascam method?

I hope I have been clear and any input you can provide would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

enen,

i've never been a fan of boards. i tolerate them. i find a technique that makes sense to my brain on a particular board and stick with it. the advantage of the method you are using is that it works for you.

Sorry I didn't see this sooner!

We send the drum tracks to their own channels andset levels, EQ, pan, effect, etc and then assign to 1 & 2 on the busses. Maybe compress the drum mix there.

We tend to use the busses to set levels for like things in the mix.(e.g. gtrs go to 3 & 4) Can still ride the board.

I don't see much difference other than that. I would feel limited not wxploiting the busses for all they are worth. Just using the first 2 seems kinda silly to me.

Did I answer your question?

I agree what works for you is nest for you. But understand your wanting to understand your options.

Hey thanks for the response, you did answer my question.

Using the busses to their fullest works for me also. For what i paid for the board it is great, very flexiable and sound excellent for the $.

The point of doing what works best for you is true, but seeking input from other is also important as they may be doing something that you would have never thought of, which may then become what works best for you.

Thanks for all the input.