Tascam Model 12/16/24 owners, can you confirm my issue?

I just got my Model 16 a couple of days ago, and I’ve noticed what I think is a bug, and I wonder if any other owners might check it out for me?

It’s very simple - run a percussive signal into any live input channel. Send that signal to the built-in FX processor. Choose either the Delay or Ping Pong Delay FX. Set the delay time for a long delay. Now feed the FX to the main output. Do you notice something wrong?

On my unit, I always get an initial repeat after a very short delay time - almost a slap back echo - before the actual repeats begin at the designated time intervals. This initial echo is not coming at the dialled-in delay time. It is not noticeable at delay times of 100ms or less.

As you can imagine, this makes the delay all but useless for most purposes outside of covering “Instant Karma”.

This happened both before and after updating the firmware to the latest version (1.20 and 1.30 respectively).

So how about it? Thanks in advance.

Yeah, I see what you mean. It does almost a double-trigger before it gets to the delay. I never really use the internal effects, so I hadn’t noticed. I’m using a 24, so it seems they are the same.

1 Like

Thanks for checking that. Seems strange that this has persisted across firmware updates without Tascam catching it. Maybe it goes to show how many people aren’t bothering with the onboard effects. I suppose it’s not a loss, since using the (mono) FX out breaks the connection to the internal processor, so I can plug a delay into that. Still, I would have liked the convenience of the built-in delay for quick composing and tracking.

1 Like

For sure. Maybe we should send some re-triggered feedback Tascam’s way. You could be right that nobody has even pointed it out:)

2 Likes

I just filled out a support inquiry form with them.

1 Like

They’ve got at least two now.

1 Like

I haven’t tried it yet, but a new firmware was just released that purportedly fixes the delay issue. :slight_smile:

6 Likes

I thought I followed up on this. Make that “definitely”.

6 Likes

anybody still using or recently started using one of these?

How are you liking it so far and what about those issues if there are any at this time?
which one is best out of the three?

1 Like

I’m using two. I have a Model 16 and a Model 12. They are quite different and those differences are worth considering before buying, each has its strengths (besides the obvious number of channels, which isn’t a different as you might expect).

The Model 12 is a digital mixer, and offers a few more options, such as the ability to internally swap tracks. It also can accept hi-z inputs on every channel, whereas the Model 16 only allows them on the first two.

The Model 12 has a built-in click output. Like the Model 16, it facilitates Bluetooth devices, but unlike the Model 16, you can turn it off, route it to channels 9/10 or the main outs. On the Model 16, Bluetooth is always assigned to channels 13/14. Speaking of which, on the Model 16, channels 13/14 are not fully featured, lacking EQ and input gain controls. They do, however, offer a pair of RCA inputs, something lacking on the 12.

All channels on the Model 12 offer the full range of features and, because you’re not forced to dedicate channels 9/10 to Bluetooth or TRRS jacks (as you are on the 16 - with the additional option of RCA), the Model 12 effectively only one pair of full channels short of the Model 16. And even then, the Model 16’s 9/10 and 11/12 stereo channels offer less EQ functionality and no compressor.

That doesn’t mean that the Model 16 doesn’t offer enough to justify the difference in price, though that depends on what you need. The 16 is an analog mixer. That means fewer conversions if you want to send it to another interface for recording. It also offers more I/O. It offers three aux outputs as opposed to two on the Model 12. On each unit, there is one aux output that has a switching jack and using that output will result in bypassing the internal effects. That’s not such a problem on the Model 16, where three auxes means that you can use the internal effects while simultaneously routing a full stereo pair out to an external processor. However, on the Model 12, using the internal effects means you only have a single aux channel remaining, so external stereo effects can’t be employed at the same time. You can, however, use the internal effect along with a mono external effect.

Both units can be used as audio interfaces. The Model 12 can also be employed as a HUI/Mackie control surface. A nice bonus.

Oh, another thing to keep in mind. Presumably because the Model 16 is based around an analog mixer, there are some limitations when it comes to the built-in multi-track recording. Each track is hardwired to its mixer channel. You can’t, for instance, assign track 1 to record the signal on any other channel. As I said earlier, the Model 12 offers ‘track swapping”, so it’s not an issue with the smaller machine.

The Model 16 has an internal power supply, while the Model 12 has an external supply. The Model 16 has a USB B 4-pin USB connector, while the Model 12 has the smaller USB C jack.

Likewise, any bouncing of tracks or sub-mixes must be done the old fashioned way on the Model 16, i.e. using cables to patch a submit back into another unused channel(s) to be re-recorded. The Model 12 offers a virtual stereo mix-down track and bouncing to this virtual track(s) is handled internally.

As an analog mixer, the Model 16 is a good deal., offering a good selection of options for a reasonable price. Multitrack recording is a great bonus, and the ability to use it as an audio interface is icing on the cake.

The Model 12, however, is a screaming bargain for what it offers. A great little machine that I can easily (and often) recommend.

9 Likes

thank you scot, man I can see why you have them both :slight_smile: , which one do you gravitate towards mostly?

1 Like

At the moment, I can’t say, since my studio is disassembled! However, given that the Model 12 is now on the table with my most-used synths, it’ll probably be that one.

1 Like

Thank you but also whyyyy u do this to me!!! Now I want to sell my komplete audio 6 and get a model12!

1 Like

Looking at a model 12/14 vs Soundcraft MTK. Soundcraft literature talks about being able to use plug ins live through a low latency usb routing. Any thoughts on this vs what the tascam can do? Tascam much newer so usb implementation in theory better but they don’t mention anything about low latency round trip audio routing over usb for live use.

Any thoughts here? Tascam is newer but more expensive and has things I don’t need like the onboard multitrack recorder (does anyone use these anymore when um…laptops exist). Being able to use plug ins live would be great. Any thoughts much appreciated :slight_smile:

The only thing I use the Model 12 for is multitracking. If you’re not going to multitrack with it, it seems kind of a waste? Just get an audio interface.

1 Like

I want a mixing desk for live jamming and composing, and to be able to record that to ableton per track, not just stereo mains. Also want to be able to add live effects via plug ins if possible which is what the Soundcraft can do. The Tascam is way newer but doesn’t look like it has a per track USB return like the soundcraft.

Sorry, realised my first post wasn’t clear at all! The multi channel usb out is exactly what I’m after, with a mixing desk to stay out of the computer for as much composition as possible. I meant not sure what people would use the onboard recorder for when you can just track to laptop so that you’re already in a DAW for production and mixing. I’m sure there’s plenty of situations people are recording live performances etc though where not having to use a laptop would be a blessing.

Well, if you want to print the internal effects, the internal recorder is the only way to do it–the usb audio only sends the dry signal. But of course if you’re sending to your pc, no you can use effects in your DAW (and the Tascam effects are basic at best)…

1 Like

I’m considering a Model because I DON’T want to use my computer (much) for music making. Some musicians don’t use laptops/desktops at all (those weirdos with their noisy sticks and tubes).

There’s other options for mixers without onboard multi-track, but with digital I/o, The Korgs look pretty nice: MW-2408/1608 - HYBRID ANALOG/DIGITAL MIXER | KORG (U.K.). They’re more expensive than the Tascams. Likewise some 2nd hand Midas desks (more spendy still). I thought the Soundcrafts also had multi-track recorders: “MTK” meaning “multi-track”…

1 Like

Thanks for the comparison, very helpful!

One question : can the "Main’ output be routed to ‘Phones’ on the Model 12?

1 Like