TASCAM Intros Model 24 Multi-Track Live Recording Console

The TASCAM Model 24 digital multitrack recorder

TASCAM today introduced the Model 24 digital multitrack recorder, which offers 24 tracks of 24-bit, 48 kHz audio capture (22 channels and a stereo main mix) and 22 playback tracks, via either USB 2.0 or to the unit’s onboard SD Card recorder.

The SD Card recorder offers one-touch recording and includes transport controls, auto and manual punch in/out, and overdub capability.

Key features include a 22-channel mixer with 100 mm long-throw faders, two monitor returns, subgroup bus, and stereo main bus.

The Model 24 also provides a variety of signal processing options. Each of the 12 mono channels include a one-knob compressor, a low cut filter, and 3-band semi-parametric EQ with sweepable midrange. The compressor and low cut filter are pre-Routing Mode selector so they can be applied to any recording track. The stereo channels include a low-cut filter and 3-band fixed EQ. A stereo 7-band graphic EQ with easy-control toggle buttons and instant bypass can be applied to the main mix or monitor outputs, enabling you to shape your mixes and prevent monitor feedback. And an onboard stereo multi-effects processor lets you apply 16 preset effects, including reverb, delay, chorus, and flanging.


  • All-in-One, Multitrack Recorder with 22 channel Mixer and USB Audio Interface
  • WAV 48kHz/24-bit, 24 channel multitrack recording to SD, SDHC and SDXC cards
  • Built-in USB Audio Interface to send/receive audio data to/from DAW
  • 22 Inputs (20 Balanced, 12 Monaural, and 4 Stereo)
  • 16 TASCAM Microphone Preamps
  • Input Mode switch on every input channel
  • TASCAM Ultra-HDDA Mic Pre-amp (Channels 1 to 12)
  • Preamp Gain Controller with Overload indicator (Channels 1 to 12)
  • 3-band EQ with a sweepable mid-range frequency (Channels 1 to 12)
  • 100kHz Low-cut Filter (Channels 1 to 12)
  • 7-band Graphic EQ
  • 16 Pre-set Effects
  • 100mm Long-throw Faders for precise adjustment
  • Mute, Main/Sub, PLF switches on every input channel
  • Bluetooth input supporting both AAC and SBC codecs
  • SUB Outputs via XLR Balanced and RCA Unbalanced connectors
  • LINE Inputs via RCA Pin and 1/8-inch Stereo Mini jacks
  • 3 AUX Outputs (Monitor 1, Monitor 2, FX)
  • 1 Stereo Output for Control Room
  • Phantom Power (+48V)
  • 1/4-inch Stereo Headphone Output
  • Backlit buttons for key operations such as REC and Play
  • Multi Jog-dial for quick menu operation
  • 12-segment LED Output Level Meters

Pricing and Availability

The TASCAM Model 24 digital multitrack recorder is expected to be available in the fourth quarter of 2018. Pricing is still to be announced.

30 thoughts on “TASCAM Intros Model 24 Multi-Track Live Recording Console

  1. Looks like this is an analog mixer with a bunch of AD/DA so you can use for digital recording and i/o for a computer DAW.

    The above blurb refers to the compression & EQ as “processing options” which would indicate a digital mixer. But with no mention of presets (other than for the effects section), or automation, and the way the features are laid out, I’m guessing it’s analog.

  2. One step forward (following Zoom) in dawless (not necessarily but possibly) multi track recording, but still missing info in some of the features.
    Still waiting for a bare bone all – instrument (e.g. no expensive microphone pre-amps, no expensive elaborate eq sections (simple 3-band will do)) console with SD or USB memory stick recording that has as many inputs as tracks and allows individual selection of record / playback / mute per track.

  3. i wonder if the digital conversion can be post-eq / post-fader – or is simply post-gain as in most of these analog/digital hybrid consoles

  4. it would be ace if one of these hybrids eventually implement post fader recording, switchable.
    there’s not a single hybrid mixer out there offering that feature, which is a pain in the ass for the segment of electronic musicians who record jams or record multitrack / live in general. and I think that’s not such a small sent after all. of course you can always go the old school mixer / interface route, which in most cases is more expensive, blocky and complicated as well. I’ll have my fingers crossed.

    1. The Mackie Onyx-i series did but has been discontinued. I have the 820i which is only 8 channels. I’ve wanted to upgrade for a while but it has proven very difficult with what is on the market currently.

      I bought the Soundcraft MTK 22 which I thought was absolutely rubbish. I don’t see the point of setting everything up the way you want it to sound, only for it to have flat untreated files. I understand the studio logic of wanting pure files for mixing and no dodgy frequencies muddying it up but sometimes you have things set up the way you want it to sound with minimal post mixing to be done. You can bounce the mix down down in the traditional style but it always sounded a bit low and weak to my ears even after post processing.

      The Mackie sounded sweet without much work at all.

      I can’t really afford to get into having a separate mixer/audio interface for the level I would like at the minute so a hybrid is a great option.

      1. absolutely, i mean I get that one part of the target group is bands who would want to record their rehearsal or maybe a small live gig, so they have a stereo recording of their gig plus the raw untreated stems. BUT I think a large part of buyers makes electronic music and as you said, probably sets up everything in advance in order to be able to jam and record, at least that’s what I do and everybody else I know, and it’s quite a few people releasing music. I’d be happy to pay 100 or 200 euros more to have a pre/post switch on every channel, it would make everything so easy πŸ™‚ every other year I hope that someone finally implements this logical feature, but nope. I wrote tascam and I hope they did, fingers still crossed.

  5. Seeing this makes me wonder if Allen&Heath will ever modernize the Zed-R16 with a multitrack recorder and some connectivity that isn’t FireWire.

    Now THAT mixer was a hybrid done right.

  6. I currently own a Tascam DP-24 that I really like. I ‘get’ the big portastudio concept.

    A shortcoming (for me) with the DP-24 is the lack of inputs (8). Or more specifically, the fact that returns from external effects take up input channels aa there are no dedicated aux returns. This means I have to use a mixer (Mackie 1402) in addittion to the DP-24 so that I can add effects as I record. This therefore means that I can only record a maximum of 4 tracks at once (the 1402 has 4 outputs) even thought the DP-24 can record 8 tracks simultaneously. The workaround is to overdub, which is no big deal (the DP-24 has MIDI sync) but it would be great not to have to use a mixer in addition to the DP-24.

    While it warms the cockles of my heart to see a new hardware recorder about to be released, the Model 24 seems to have the same shortcomings as the DP-24 – not enough effects sends and and no dedicated returns.

    Still not quite the all in one solution. Otherwise I’d probably buy one.

    Err, actually, on reading further, I probably wouldn’t. It doesn’t appear to have MIDI!

  7. I use a Tascam DP-24, so I’m familiar with the big portastudio concept.

    I like the look of this, I like the additional input channels, but there’s not enough aux sends for external effects.

    And NO MIDI!

    Please excuse if this is a rehash. The interweb ate my previous post.

    1. The 2488 is an amazing machine but it’s main drawback for me is that because it’s really just a computer (hence the VGA out) it means you have to wait five minutes for the stupid thing to boot up before you can hear anything you have plugged into it. It’s a total shame.

      1. Ya, I have the 2400CD…..in my closet. I liked using it with the monitor and mouse but its super slow in comparison. So getting away from a computer is nice, until your using a slower computer with hardware components and deep menu diving to do something as simple as routing and setting up group tracks. Got it for 100 bucks so not that big a loss.

    2. I would be extremely happy if TASCAM included a VGA out insteading of forcing users to use the small screen. Not great for dark locations. The ability to use a computer monitor would be great.

  8. no bouncing, same as the zoom live track it’s channel = track
    no midi either…such as shame
    livetrack has per channel/track metering..tascam…nope

  9. Glad to see the trend growing. We had a lot of multi-track innovation going on a decade or so ago and mostly seemed to be abandoned.

    Constant irk: “Semi-parametric EQ” claims when it’s two fixed bands and one sweepable band without any control over the bandwidth (Q).

  10. what this mixer/recorder does that a behringer x 32 isn’able? wondering why this is not considered as a competitor in the posts….

    1. The Behringer is not a multitrack recorder, is it? Not in the way this is, at least: being able to overdub, add track etc. as on a traditional tape recorder.

      1. the behringer records directly on usb memory just two tracks (or the mix) but just connecting an iphone you will record all the tracks, of course with an ipad the daw interface is better. So talking of portability but also flexibility and power, seems to me a real alternative. Just adding a phone for me still classify in the “all in one” portable solution.
        By the way, I came from the pre-daw visual interface era….of porta something stuff or adats, I have to say I absolutely never want to come back to that just ear support for cuts, count in , navigate the track, cut and paste, overdub, punch in etc etc… it was an art but also big pain in the ass. 90% of that art is useless if you have some visual control and real interface to the tracks.
        Just feel that with a connected device, phone or notebook, I have a better control of what is happening (when you are recording a one shot event as a concert, an accidentally mute track or not armed to record button happens, and, with all the live chaos and pressure, you will notice when is too late, so any extra visual feedback is very relevant to me, shit happens.
        So, apart of the specific x32, I don’t see the advantage of these new old style digital recorders, I mean, if have to be a field instant and portable solution, just record the separate tracks and then go to the studio to edit, the form factor is the selling point to me, it have to be really small respect an already compact x32 or competitor, otherwise I don’t see the point.
        my personal opinion of course.

  11. I like this concept, but Tascam should add midi support to it. That should be possible in a firmware upgrade at least via USB.

    Just think: would anybody really want to buy a multitrack recorder without being able to sync to midi? Maybe if you only use it to record all tracks at once for a live gig, but in the studio you need midi.

  12. I don’t understand why TASCAM didn’t include a VGA output so you could get a better view using a computer monitor, especially in low-light conditions. Reading the manual, you can’t use most of the functions while the USB connector is connected to a computer. I don’t understand why? The connection is strictly for transferring Wav files to computer.

  13. I recently just purchased the model 24 and enjoy using it for my band so far, works great as a live mixer and can record individual tracks into logic at the same time. However, I am unable to simply figure out how to pan each track left to right post recording, it’s always in mono and either cuts out completely when panned right, or volume boosts when panned left, also faders and mute buttons don’t do anything when connected to daw.

  14. Volume may not be everything but tell me if I’m on to the right track, Yes, the Tascam Model24 is a great American product, im sure is very nice, but it goes up to 48 kHz when the Presonus goes to a mega 96 kHz, am i seeing that the Presonus is much louder, while I say, volume may not be everything, like there’s headroom and other things that are good,,,,,,right? Just to be sure the Tascam isn’t as loud as the Presonus then….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *