PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production Affordable gear and method for making Music with no hassle

Best Home and Mobile setup for under $400

These external fully contained digital multi-track recorders are ideal setups that are affordable, no steep learning curve and are focused on making music without the necessity of complicated, costly computer studios while still providing full integration between a computer DAW and the unit.

Particularly well suited for recording tracks without any difficulty, latency or compatibility.

If you're looking into upgrading or are new to recording with BIAB without having to invest in costly equipment and software and will be able to quickly begin to record tracks to complete songs that have BIAB backing tracks without any hassle.

Uh yea... No. The arbitrary $400 ceiling is just laughable.

I have no problem with the Tascam DP3 but the Zoom R8 gives you a choice of 44.1/48 and 16/24 for the same price—can also be used as a 44.1/48/96 24 recording interface (not that I would).
Zoom R8 Recorder/Interface/Sampler

Those microphone recommendations are whack. The mic pres are just wrong for dynamic microphones rated at 150Ω output impedance. Plenty of mics are far superior for not much more money. The AKG D5 C @ $109 is my favorite dynamic under $700 for just plug in without an additional preamp and has a 600Ω output that is far better matched to either the TASCAM or Zoom.
AKG D5 C

Although I'm not a fan of cheap, Chinese condensers when starting out, many are. These are as good as any, I suppose.
MXL microphones

Heck.... my microphone alone was that entire $400 budget.

So much for that....

I hear you there.

I have no problem with putting a bare-bones studio on a budget but it can be done without crappy microphones.

$400 is just for his YouTube video. It's not his studio. His point (and dozens of others) post these lists for demonstration that complete studios can be had for less than $500 that can produce audio on par with expensive setups.

I've owned an R8 and it's a nice machine but the Tascam has better Preamps and much better recording/editing so one it's main benefits is to cut the USB cable between recorder and PC. Tascam's can be connected via USB but it's not necessary - In the intent of the video, Tascam works better because it focus's on being a digital recorder whereas the R8 attempt is to be more versatile and assumes most editing will be done on a PC.

In a direct comparison, Tascam wins here because the budget mark of $400-500 couldn't be met because of the R8's dependence on connection to PC. With Tascam, connecting to a PC is a choice, not a necessity.

Yep, so much for meeting the goal of a $400 studio. The same is true for other videos of this type with recommendations that require IOS device, PC or laptop. There's a big difference between buying a $400 mic or this $300 stand alone digital multi track recorder if you're just starting out.

On what planet in this universe is a PC required to use an R8? None that I know of. It's more versatile because it can be connected, that's all. It also handles different sample rates and greater resolution than the DP-03. Earth to TASCAM: 44.1 isn't the standard anymore. BTW, both list for the same $299 new. Because of the recent price drop, I wonder if TEAC will be dropping it and introducing a new version at Summer NAMM.

When someone is recommending mics like the SM48, the supposedly superior mic pres of the DP-03 (based on what, exactly?) won't make a difference.

Again, my problem with the video was not the DP-03, it was the microphones he recommended to hit the $400 price point.

26 years ago, when I got into digital, it was a FOSTEX FD8 and a Mackie 1604 connected via ADAT through a MOTU 2408 in between so that I could enable eight simultaneous record channels on the FOSTEX. You needed a card table to lay it all out.

I've always been a fan of portable digital recorders but I mix on my Mac, never in the box. I still have my R24 but am looking at the newer stuff that offers 32 bit float. Even though I can, I have never used my R8/16/24 as an interface. I dump the tracks via the SDHC card.

It sure beats loading an Ampex 300 into a van for remote work or a TASCAM 80-8 as I did in the 1980s.

That the R8 is more versatile because it can be connected, ships with Cubase DAW software and is an audio interface and control surface are not pluses in a PC/DAW-less home recording studio. The R8's on board, internal editing is limited to divide and trim. Anything more advanced than that is totally dependent on transferring the audio files to a DAW.

For tracking, either the Tascam or Zoom work great.
For Tracking and transferring files into a DAW and integration with a PC/DAW, it's the Zoom hands down.
For a home studio with no PC and DAW, it's the Tascam, no contest.

I know that you want to give good advice but you can't praise one machine over another when you have no idea what either of them can and cannot do.

I'm guessing that you don't swap files with a lot of other people. In my work, I send and receive with dozens. Many use an assortment of portable recorders that are never hooked up to a computer. This is big and more than enough to tell users to avoid the DP03 (and ancient Korg and Roland with the same specs).



Another advantage the R8 has is that it can be run on batteries if you want while the DP03 cannot.




That is incorrect:


Yes, really, it can do all that.
R8 Manual


Although both can transfer files via USB, the TASCAM's app requires a PPC for Mac users — which Apple stopped shipping in 2006. The DP03 is a tired, old obsolete machine that should have been updated years ago.

DP03-SD owners manual


An advantage the R8 has is that it can be run on batteries if you want while the DP03 cannot.


Again, really, I don't have a problem with the TSSCAM other than I would never, ever recommend buying one new. For the same money, the R8 is superior whether you agree or not. That the reviewer doesn't know this makes it yet another, ignorant fanboy rave that can be safely ignored without harm. If the DP03 was a hundred bucks less expensive, I wouldn't be so hard.


My original objection to that video still stands and that's the crappy, mismatched mics.

Rated output (both) 150Ω

Ideal output, dynamic: for the TASCAM 600Ω or higher; for the Zoom 300Ω–600Ω

Rated input impedance, mic pre — TASCAM 2400Ω; Zoom R8 1500Ω. Although not much of an issue with condenser mics, it's a big deal with dynamics. The Shure is much better matched to the R8. Again, that the reviewer doesn't know this tells me he doesn't know much at all.

I learned this stuff from Ampex engineers including my dad in the late 1960s. Here's an excellent article on the subject.

Impedance, Dynamic Mics, SM57

Either unit will work fine in a $400 studio. My thought is the reviewer chose the Tascam DP-03 over the R8 to not invest money into an audio interface, USB, or controller there's no intent to ever connect to a PC and the fact the Tascam has robust audio editing where the R8 has practically none. Navigating and operation of the Tascam is less complicated and easier.

From the Video summary:
"Budget Friendly, mobile, internet safe, reliable, and easy to use, this home studio setup solution will outlast any PC software-based DAW platform on the market. Watch all of this video now to see how you can have a great enduring home studio setup without any of the hassles or risks of using a personal computer and or spending a lot of cash."

I believe either unit is up to the task but with the R8 shipping with DAW software, built-in audio interface and controller, Zoom is optimized to be used in conjunction with a PC. The DP-03 is optimized to be a stand alone home recorder.

I really don't get why some people think using a computer is a hassle or why it is difficult. I suppose they've either never used tape or don't remember much....

Byron.
I agree with you …further whether a R8 , a pc, or mac…or if one loves tape sound..and has bought an old Scully or ampex or stephens or studer machine…if one isnt willing to learn the gear..then one is going to face problems.
Thats the honest truth. Even with a dp03 or r8 one needs to learn menus etc.
ive lost count the number of fellow musos whove said to me "i'm a muso/songwriter dont wanna learn that tecchy stuff"...to which i reply "then you'll probably have problems....even at the dp03/r8 level."

why people have probs these days is they often use any
old laptop one drive, and try and load it with the kitchen sink.
the KEY is carefull computer selection/config.

frankly for me on pc i'm at a happy place right now..
with no latency problems. i AM looking to upgrade ,..but in a measured way as sample libs demand pretty decent processors /ram/ssd's etc etc.


Best/peace out.
om

< ive lost count the number of fellow musos whove said to me "i'm a muso/songwriter dont wanna learn that tecchy stuff"...to which i reply "then you'll probably have problems....even at the dp03/r8 level." >

Your first paragraph pertains well to this discussion about affordable computer free recording. What's your experience with entry level digital stand alone multitrack recorders that you have such an opinion?

Speaking from personal experience with stand alone digital, multitrack recorders, a recorder like the DP-03, comes with a formatted SD card and its recording inputs and track assignments defaulted so when the machine powers up and the record/play buttons are armed, levels adjusted, the unit records when the play button is pressed. Nothing else is necessary.

For the musician/songwriter or anyone that doesn't want to learn techy stuff, the Dp-03 should put him or her in their happy place.


Charlie

Charlie.

Much as i respect you..on this topic i somewhat disagree.
Some people wont even read a manual…the new generation of new standalone mtr’s manuals are upwards of 70 plus pages ?
By comparison , and i know its different …but for a low learning curve my audient audio interface came with a simple card…with simple instructions…
I was up and running in a few secs flat….simplicity itself.

Dont get me wrong the standalone mtr’s are great value for money with nice features.
But as ive used standalone mtr’s in the past i would prolly use one on a holiday with my wife....
to get rough song ideas down….and as the muse strikes me.
my personal preference is a pc daw rig running bb/rb/reaps.

Right now i’m deep at looking at vi’s/vsti’s. The mtr’s wont run them...as far as i know.


best/happiness
om

<"Much as i respect you..on this topic i somewhat disagree.">
Well, actually, you never get around to disagreeing with me about the topic.
The topic (YouTube Video and this discussion) is affordable gear that provides a method to make, archive and render music with no hassle. The video presentation is specific to define hassle to mean cutting the cord from PC's and internet.

<"Some people wont even read a manual…the new generation of new standalone mtr’s manuals are upwards of 70 plus pages ?">
About manuals, the DP-03's manual is 76 pages including a Quick Start Chapter of 11 pages with diagrams/ pictures from pre-power up to total shutdown. In comparison, The R8, which is designed with PC connection intended, its manual is around 140 pages. Cosiderably more complex than the DP-03 due to computer connections. The entry level Audient EVO audio interface's start guide is 6 pages.

Only folks with no experience with any audio recording will likely need anything more than the quick start guide. The DP-03 ships completely ready to record straight out of the box without any setup or audio connection. Knowing how to set the physical gain knobs, arm the physical record buttons and use the physical transport buttons is all that's needed to start recording.

<"By comparison , and i know its different …but for a low learning curve my audient audio interface came with a simple card…with simple instructions…
I was up and running in a few secs flat….simplicity itself.">
Yes it is different and there's no comparison. Your Audient interface is a single element of a daisy chain of connections, cables, software installs and configurations. It has very limited functionality to the overall studio setup. It's not a recorder nor a stand alone device.

<"Dont get me wrong the standalone mtr’s are great value for money with nice features.
But as ive used standalone mtr’s in the past i would prolly use one on a holiday with my wife....
to get rough song ideas down….and as the muse strikes me.">

This is on topic and in this instance, you are in agreement. Multi Tracks work exactly as you detail above. In comparison, carry only your Audient interface on holiday, nothing else, and that's musically what you'll get, nothing. It doesn't function independently alone.

<"my personal preference is a pc daw rig running bb/rb/reaps.">

That's fine. There are affordable PC/Mac bundles in the price range from many manufacturers similar to a multi track stand alone device that meet the needs of a budget studio. None of them can operate without a PC connection. This discussion is for anyone that prefers to avoid PC.

<"Right now i’m deep at looking at vi’s/vsti’s. The mtr’s wont run them...as far as i know.">
Since VSTi's are completely embedded into PC architecture, no Multi Tracks won't natively run them. However, today's multi track recorders can all be tethered to a PC. Some are also MIDI compliant. Some have built-in FX's, amp models and external sends and receives so any VSTi composition can easily find it's way into any stand alone, digital multi track song project.

I appreciate your perspective and think you are spot on to a major strength of stand alone recorders for remote recording. You mention it and remote recording is also mentioned in the video link. Two things stand out in comparison between an affordable PC bundle and the affordable DP-03 stand alone device.

First - Obviously, in the studio or remotely, the PC Bundle is shackled to a computer and is part of a daisy chain of devices, cables and software.
Second - The DP03 stand alone can operate within a studio environment with the option to not be connected or be connected to a computer. Remotely, the DP-03 is self contained with only headphones or speakers for monitoring.

Here's an imaginary lifelike, remote scenario comparison:

Audient:

You're on a holiday cruise with your wife.
You have a new, unboxed Audient EVO Bundle. (interface, cables, mic and headphones)
You have access to rent wifi, internet and a laptop
The rental cost is exorbitant, spotty and unreliable.
You're barred from loading drivers and DAW software onto rental equipment.
If it's a Mac and is compatible without adding software, you still don't have a mic stand, or pop filter.


DP-03:

You're on a holiday cruise with your wife.
You have a new, unboxed Tascam DP-03.
You have access to rent wifi, internet and a laptop - Unnecessary
The is cost is exorbitant, spotty and unreliable. - Unnecessary
You're barred from loading drivers and DAW software - Unnecessary
You don't have a mic stand, or pop filter - Unnecessary
You can record live stereo.

Usage:
The DP-03 works ideally with BIAB Tracks, stems and mixes and you've loaded 40 tracks of live instruments, BIAB RealTracks and VSTi synth renders to work on during downtime on your cruise by adding Vocals, BGV's and guitar if brought it along.

Both PC connected or stand alone hardware devices can handle this project.

But here's the difference: The DP-03 doesn't need anything but a power outlet and headphones. Take it out of the box, power it up, arm tracks and it's instantly ready to record because it's two included condenser mics are assigned by default. Only beginners with absolutely no knowledge of recording with any type recording device will need a quick start guide. Using your previous multi track recording experience, you'd intuitively know how to operate it.

Add to that, imagine the cruise ship has a killer sax player in the band willing to provide solo and riffs to your song for a beer. Meet up with the player and record direct into a built in condenser mic. If the player happens to be a guitarist, the DP-03 has a Hi-Z direct input or mic the player's amp.

WRONG!!!!

All of you are WRONG!!!

When I am working with my top shelf clients they demand that I have and use the BEST. And I work with HUNDREDS of top name superstars every day.

And I use THIS!!!

I am going back to work because I have mixes to do!!! So there!!!

Oh, man, you forgot the cassette tapes! What now?

Originally Posted By: Byron Dickens

I really don't get why some people think using a computer is a hassle or why it is difficult. I suppose they've either never used tape or don't remember much....

It's easy. A complete budget home recording studio Like the Audient EVO Recording Bundle, has multiple components that require multiple accessories, cable connections and several layers of configuration. It's completely dependent on a PC connection. (Note in my comment above, if OM went on a cruise and carried nothing but his new Audient interface, he would have much musical recording success on his cruise.)

Configuring systems, optimizing systems, connecting systems and maintaining configurations, optimization, connections and avoiding former high end systems becoming obsolete with nothing more than a new OS release. An audio software like Pro-Tools can be very picky, cumbersome, and extremely difficult to master. It can be CPU hoggish and very irritating having to deal with subscriptions and dongles. The aggravation of updates that reset user personal settings over and over.

I'd guess you know these things but find the hassle to be worth it. The pros outweigh the cons for most people. Even though there's a high level of complexity, great results can be achieved. That's ok but this forum thread is directed toward those that want to focus on music and not tech stuff as OM pointed out.

Charlie.
Someone running bb creating traks with a pc and trading such with a dp03 is going to need to have some pc knowledge/win os knowledge anyway…no getting away from that.
Same on mac.

For me i can see myself taking a dp03 on hols…as its less gear to lug around.
Then i would transfer the traks from dp03 after hols to my main rig pc at home that runs bb/rb/reaps.

But i agree i wouldnt lug a laptop/mic/interface/cables etc on hols...been there done that.
The dp03 has an advantage in this respect.

Best
om

Beat me to it.

Strawman. Know what else your "standalone" recorder needs? Multiple accessories (like microphones, instruments and storage media) and cable connections.

"Several layers of configuration" is largely once and done.




Strawman. Once and done.



You must be a Mac guy.



Strawman. 1) If you can learn to use BiaB, you can learn to use a DAW. 2) One does not have to "master" a DAW to make good use of it.




Untrue.



Ad hoc. Both can be avoided.



Ad hoc. That behavior can be suppressed.




Once again, you're forgetting that the audience you are addressing is already focusing on a certain amount of "tech stuff," as you so eloquently put it, in order to produce music.

Your whole argument here is totally ad hoc.

One would think that if one were bringing a "new, unboxed Audient EVO Bundle" on a cruise with the intent of doing some recording that one would also bring the laptop to go with it - any necessary software already installed. Not to mention anything else necessary.

< "Your whole argument here is totally ad hoc." >

Yes. my post was intentionally farcical.

Here's why:


Byron Dickens quote:
<"One would think that if one were bringing a "new, unboxed Audient EVO Bundle" on a cruise with the intent of doing some recording that one would also bring the laptop to go with it - any necessary software already installed. Not to mention anything else necessary.">

Of course I know an audio interface requires other equipment. I also know OM is aware of that. He says,"... ive used standalone mtr’s in the past i would prolly use one on a holiday with my wife...." just after saying, "By comparison , and i know its different …but for a low learning curve my audient audio interface came with a simple card…with simple instructions…
I was up and running in a few secs flat….simplicity itself."

"i know its different" - He understands the obvious difference between the self contained DP-03 and his multi-component PC. He made an ad hoc statement for comparison between the two systems. Needless to say, he knew an audio interface isn't comparable to a stand alone digital multi track recorder for remote use. You didn't catch it.

I'll rephrase your sentence to reflect his ad hoc point.

One would think that if one were bringing a "new, unboxed Tascam DP-03" on a cruise with the intent of doing some recording that one would know it's unnecessary to also bring a laptop to go with it - ALL necessary software is already installed, configured and assigned.

His subsequent post #715505 acknowledges he would choose to carry a DP-03 over a complete PC system on holiday.

Byron Dickens quote: "Know what else your "standalone" recorder needs? Multiple accessories (like microphones, instruments and storage media) and cable connections."
1. microphones -
Nope. The DP-03 has 2 built in mics.

2. Instruments -
Nope. On holiday, he may plan to only do vocals. (See item 1)

3. Storage media -
Nope. The DP-03 includes a formatted SD card.

Everything needed except headphones/earbuds is enclosed inside that "new, unboxed Tascam DP-03".

I remember my first Tascam Porta-1. That was game changing. I had previously had a Teac 4 track reel to reel and sold it. It was a PITA to work with. Funny story... the guy who bought it was running a bootlegging operation back in the days of 8-track tapes. He ended up in federal prison when they caught him and his compadres. He had a whole room full of tape machines like mine for his duplication process.

The P-1 worked well but was track limited to 4 unless you wanted to bounce.... which ended up sounding like one muddy mess. Then, my first computer based DAW running on Windows 95. Cakewalk Pro 8 deluxe and a midi-man card. I was in hog heaven until I had to upgrade the OS, whereupon the midi-man was totally incompatible.

So after a time, I decided to get a portable digital recorder. It was a 16 channel Korg something or other. No computer needed. What a freaking nightmare trying to record music. It didn't do midi and trying to play a decent piano part was an exercise in frustration not to mention how difficult it was to do the drums. I think I battled with that portable desk for a few months before it went on eBay to the highest bidder.

At this point, I figured to get into music recording and do it halfway right, I was simply going to have to buy the proper gear. A new laptop, Cakewalk's Music Creator 4, and a Focusrite Saffire interface later, I was back in the game. Drums were still an issue but I was learning how to write drum tracks from scratch using midi.

One day, a friend told me that he used BB for drums and bass and when I took a look.....well.... that was a pivotal point in music creation for me. I built my own custom desktop DAW some time later and loaded it with everything, and that's where I'm at to this day.

I have blown past that wishful $400 ten times over as I was building the studio setup that I currently have between the hardware and the software..... oh yeah.

Can you record for under $400? Absolutely. Is it ideal? Nope.


I'm a firm believer in two sayings.

1. Use the right tool for the job.

2. You generally get what you pay for.

I have Band-in-a-Box, Cakewalk by Bandlab and Audacity on my computers. But, as my signature suggests I also have a Zoom digital 8 track recorder with a built-in microphone as well as drum and bass machines. Each serves a purpose and I'd hate to be without any of these tools.

I enjoy playing with the digital recorder drum machine while I'm sitting on the steps. It inspires me. When an idea strikes I can use the bass machine to get on key and sing or hum into the built-in microphone to capture the moment.

Any audio I create is recorded on my digital recorder. That eliminates the need for an audio interface, ASIO drivers and latency issues.

Cakewalk by Bandlab is my audio production classroom and playground. I learn about loops, VSTs, virtual instruments, effects, editing and mixing.

Audacity records internet audio, performs file conversion and trims audio files.

Band-in-a-Box provides session musicians.

Since I import my audio into the computer I can have Band-in-a-Box, Cakewalk, Audacity and internet audio all going at the same time without driver or latency issues.

The recorder gives me the freedom to be creative away from the computer and eliminate computer driver and latency issues. Love my computers but love my digital recorder too.

In some ways this discussion appears to advocate the choice is limited to either computer or digital recorder. There is room for both.

I agree. You can't have too many toys if you are a musician and songwriter.

I had a nice Roland 8 track once that was stolen and I wish I still had it.

Anyway, I use a lot of the tools you mention, and each project is different. I also have a lot of instruments. At any given moment I might mic a djembe--or anything else. You just never know.

It also drives me a little nuts when people go on and on about what you have to use, or have to do and so forth. (Especially if you can find no Internet evidence that they have ever produced a song.)

I think as an artist you can whatever in the heck you want to.

I’ve been delving into the world of vi’s for a time now.
Theres a lot out there.
At the same time heres whats going thru my mind…
..ok so i got 100 kik drums…or a 100 whatevers <<name your instrumen//sample.
What one sounds the best for the song even after ive knocked the 100 down to 10...? how to choose.
..the above i’m going thru right now..after going thru a slew of bb rt’s ive got 40 final candidates
For ‘the backing band’ BUT i only need 10…eek ! but i like all 40…lol.

What i’m trying to say having recorded with everything from nig studio gear like 2 inch 24 trak mtrs//big consoles down to junk stuff…how much gear does one need…?
For me personally i find i do better when i have fewer choices.
The coming of daws//pc’s//bb//rb//reaps freed me frankly from big gear i once used.

What i’m trying to say in conclusion is we all want the best for any song we are working on…but how much gear do we need ? how does one pick the best kick drum or whatever instrument //..sample …out of the 40 one likes ?

Thus i’m gonna be prudent with vi’s…sometimes less is more...
my granpappy used to say 'everything in moderation includeing moderation'.
lets not forget the time it takes to go thru a zillion of some instrument//sample....and the menus etc.

Best
om

Your whole argument is still ad hoc. You keep coming up with ever increasing conditions on your fictitious scenario which are dubious at best.

Now you are taking one person's extremely limited use case and trying to extrapolate a broad generalization from it.

This is in addition to your strawman arguments about mountains of cables "complex, ever-changing configurations" and needing to completely "master" a deep, robust and complex application in order to produce anything useful. (I'm paraphrasing)

Not that the standalone recorder might not suit someone's needs perfectly. But the idea that a computer based DAW is too difficult or cumbersome is bogus.

Even my technophobe wife, with the help of a few tutorials, figured out enough of Cakewalk to record a guitar track and a couple of overdubs in the space of a couple hours.

I quote: "that was so easy! I don't know what I was afraid of."

As far as cumbersome tangles of gear, the Athanor Sound Labs mobile consists of a laptop, two channel interface and at most three cables.

I can't say enough about the Tascam line. Not long ago, I replaced mine with a Zoom R-16. Now, you'll have to double check me on this, but, the last I looked, SD storage medium and the CPU had become outdated -- the CPU able to handle limited data. I don't recall the specs. With thousands of those units in use around the world, Tascam was not about to do a major redesign on the DP-03. Looking around Musician's Friend, I see they have now the TASCAM DP-03SD 8-Channel Portastudio. It claims a capacity of 32GB. It's marked down from 350$ to 300$. Note the change of name to 035-SD. In addition, Tascam was slow to adapt to the digital transfer. With the Zoom, the BAIB tracks can be rendered and transferred via thumb drive to separate tracks on the recorder. Don't even think of the hassle that is to transfer to the original DP-03.

Annoying is that the user finds this out on his own, since the Music Centers are not about to mention these features. Many times, I had the unit stop cold, a little "overload" message popped up. Of course, Tascam has great new up to date recorders for sale.

Again, I'm no expert, just a user. Still, I advise the musician look before leaping with respect to the DP-03.

My first recording was in 1965 in a studio a buddy and I leased to record the garage bands we were managing. Off and on over the past 57 years I went through most all of the emerging technology (at the consumer level). In 2011 I purchased a Mac and bought Logic Pro for $199 for life with zillions of free and frequent upgrades, sounds, fx, etc. I respect everybody’s work flow as great music is produced in a multitude of approaches … but I never look back.

And a huge FWIW,

Bud

Charlie, have you ever run across a service that can extract tracks that were saved on a Fostex 16 via its proprietary format? I foolishly used that format instead of saving them as wav files, sold the unit and now 20 years later don’t have access to them. Several years ago I bought a used unit to load them and save as wave’s but the unit failed. Thanks

Bud

Hey Bud, not for the Foxtex but I had the same circumstances with my tracks done on a Boss 1200cd more than a few years ago and there was a service that converted audio files for several different formats located in Charlotte NC. I had 4-5 backup CD's I had completed on my unit that was in the Boss proprietary format but I thought their pricing was too high and opted not to use them. I don't recall the company name but they also did video conversions and had good reviews.

Fostex has a Mac software conversion program for some of their devices they may read your discs and allow conversion. It's called WAV Manager.

You are a wealth of info. I will look into the wav manger. Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Bud

FOSTEX Wave Manager supports only one type of their proprietary files, that generated by the Fostex MR series Multitrackers. Those with the original MR-8 needed to update their firmware to 1.08. The app is 32 bit but the current version was updated to run on Intel as well as PPC — no system requirements are listed.

FOSTEX WAV Manager

If the manual is to be believed, you may have to import them from the formatted CF cards but there may be a way to trick that. I converted my MR-8 files on import years ago. CF card readers are easy to find on Amazon if needed.
WAV Manager Manual

Unfortunately, other FOSTEX digital compression formats such as that used by my FD8 are unsupported and there's no conversion app that I know. Fortunately, I had selected 44.1/16 .wav back in the day and never had to deal with that.

Thanks. Unfortunately my VF160 predated the MR models - was using it in 200o. Looks like my only option is to find an operable unit. Guess I can start checking fleabay.

Bud

Reverb has a couple. Only one claims to be working, however.

Fostex VF-160 on Reverb

Good luck!

What is the proprietary format file extension?
just curious

Not really a valid question.

FOSTEX used a few. All were compression algorithms designed to conserve drive space. Some recorders could also save files as 44.1/16 .wav including my FD8 in Mastering mode (required for using an ADAT converter to record 8 tracks), otherwise Normal mode used ADAC.
SOS Review FD8
FDMS and FDMs3 were earlier compression schemes. These were stored on the drive and you accessed them as audio from the recorder. If you hooked the drives or diskettes up to your computer, there was nothing that could read them.

The MR series stored files on removable CF cards (if you could keep the pins from getting bent). By using the aforementioned Wav Mgr app, you could import the files as 44.1/16 .wav from the CF card. It was the only way to import files recorded to the proprietary Extended mode but Songs recorded in Normal mode allowed Mac owners to just drag to the desktop (the USB port worked with PCs only).
SOS Review MR8

I bought and sold many FD8s over the years and was able to trick them into accessing 6GB on a 2.5" ATA drive. FOSTEX only supported up to 2GB on an internal hard drive or SyQuest externals. A MOTU 2408 in standalone mode was my analog to ADAT converter. With a Mackie 1604 mixer, it took up a card table, didn't weigh that much and was, by far, the most portable 8 channel recording rig that I could buy—or even imagine—23 years ago. That, of course, changed a few years later.

FOSTEX never got the firmware right on the original MR8. I bought mine 19 years ago but found it to be less than satisfactory. It's on perma-loan to a buddy and I never, ever want to see it again.