No respect? Tascam US-144 USB 2.0

[weetabix]

This interface seems to get little respect. It has a good set of features. For the number of tracks it can handle, USB 2.0 is as good as Firewire. User reviews aren't bad at all, better than some. The price is good. So, why isn't it more popular?

My own theory is that Tascam is regarded as a certain type of musical-products manufacturer, and really a specialized and therefore serious "interface maker." Tascam = Roland, and a few others.

Well? Waddya think?

[hewhoiscalledj]

Its entry-level consumer gear... I'm sure it does the job just fine, especially at it's price point... but thats like asking most car enthusiasts why Kias and Hyundais dont get the proper respect they deserve. Meahwhile, the auto snobs are cruising around in Ferraris and Lambos and laughing at the rest of the crowd.

I dont get what you were saying about Tascam = Roland. They arent related to my knowledge. I believe Tascam is or was TEAC. Roland and Boss are related though.

[Nanashiwanderer]

yea tascam doesn't equal roland

roland = edirol= boss. I think its fine for the price but not something for serious production. You have to look at things for what they are. USB 2.0. Limited I/O. Limited expansion its a basic barebones interface meant for a singer song/writer. If it was Firewire and Tascam had a better reputation for Drivers/support you'd see a lot more recommendations.

[Tweak]

Tascam was, from my research the first to get working USB 2.0 interfaces out the door. Tascam makes audio interfaces as their main game. Roland does not. Their division Edirol does make them alongside many other consumer musical instrument products. Having USB audio interfaces on several of my roland products I would much rather run with Tascam, but that is a preference more than it is based on careful comparison.

[Big Tim]

For the number of tracks it can handle, USB 2.0 is as good as Firewire.

I've italicised the key point in your sentence. Tascam has been one of the first people to make a good, solid device that can actually utilise USB2 well. But the fact is that until recently PC hardware (processors & mobos in particular) could not really handle the levels of data transfer required by a 16 channel audio interface correctly over USB2. USB requires CPU cycles, meaning it uses system resources and is subject to queuing for those resources like other system processes. This means it doesn't get the same levels of consistent data throughput as FW. It can *peak* higher, but not maintain consistent levels as high as FW.

So, for the 16 channels the Tascam handles, you're pretty much maxing out the usable limits of USB2. You couldn't daisy-chain another one to it and get 32 channels, it just couldn't handle it acceptably.

So yes, the Tascam is a really good device, but for people who want to grow beyond 16 channels, its limitation is USB2. You need to move over to FW (or PCI) in order to get higher numbers of channels.

[Nanashiwanderer]

Bingo, big team hit everything at on the head. The key to understand Firewire designed with the idea having multiple streamin bandwidth channels in mind. Its data management technology is far superior ot USB. USB 2.0 was created as an afterthought due to Intel getting fedup with Firewire royalty schemes (which are a mess). The USB technology was never intended for high bandwidth, it was just a plug and play way of hooking up things you'd have originally hooked up over serial port. e.g. printers/scanners. They upped the bandwidth so that it could handle speeds needed to manage common consumer devices that were until then Firewire only. External drives. They sold it to the public as being faster than Firewire, and now we have to write the same dman post 10 times a year. Average performance of USB Hard Drive is 35MB/S v.s. Firewire is 47MB/S for FW400 (94% of its max speed) and for FW800 its almost native speed (around 70MB/S). Latency on Firewire is still betterh than USB 2.0. Now what USB 2.0 had done for the market is bring a lot of quality 2 in 2 outs interfaces that can be used with latency. USB has better driver compatibility than Firewire does, and for consumer audio there is a lot of potential. I think USB 2.0 is fine for guitar players who want to to turn there computer into a simple way to record scratch tracks. I would not buy USB interfaces then spend 2000 $ Building a DAW, and run it with 1000$ monitors.

[Beau]

I like Tascam. I have the US1641 and it works well. I've NEVER regretted the purchase. Much easier than soundcard and mixer approach. Lots of rear inputs for leaving fave gear attached and plenty of front panel inputs/preamps for when guests are around or I just want to grab a guitar or bass (or do whatever ...) I really love the 1641.

As I was using an m-audio Fast Track USB with my old lappy (USB 1.0), I have retired them (plus a guitar and cheap USB keyboard) to Mom's house so I don't have to take anything with me when I am there. Bluejeans and a shaving kit in my bag and I am happy.

My new lappy has 4 USB 2.0 ports (one of which is an ESATA/USB combo). So I am going to replace the Fast Track with the Tascam US144. I already know I like the Tascam drivers, and now I'll have the added bonus of midi --just in case I'd like to drag a synth module around when I am portable.

SO ... Having worked with M-Audio's 192 PCI card and the Fast Track USB, I can say I am happier with the Tascam US1641. And I fully expect I'll enjoy the US144.

That's my 2 cents ....

--Beau

(Oh yeah ... new lappy has a Seagate 7200 rpm hard drive and another hard drive bay for expansion ... am so STOKED!)