Well...

I bought it because it was so cheap it seemed too good to be true and of course it is....

The interface works and it's not too bad sounding, but it has the worst monitoring ability of any device I've ever tried...

I want to return it but I can't find anything else to buy (that I can afford)....

I'm stuck running Vista64 on one machine and this is the only interface I've found with support for that.... I could skip this machine and wait another week or so to have Win7Pro installed on my Mac and then use a better interface there, but then this machine (HP) is dead in the water... I guess it could have some kind of use, but what a waste of money and time this piece of gear is to a typical user....

I can't even do one-instrument at a time as the monitoring is so bad it won't even allow reasonable monitoring of that let alone a 14 input session! <sigh>...

Sorry to rant, but I thought I should post this for anyone else considering buying this... All I can say is "Don't"... Me? I'm stuck and very unhappy...

Keni

keni,ASIO4ALL an option buddy ?
might make it better?

Thanks for the idea, but tha wouldn't change the monitoring issues this box has... Very poorly thought out, extremely limited and avoided in all sales info and conversations...

The box itself is working fine according to the manuf. It's bad design I'm stuck with here...

This coming week I hope to have more cash and possibly return it for a Presonus 1818VSL ($200 more)...

It sucks being so poor and spoiled. My SSL/Mixtreme 192 might be a decade old, but it's so much better it's hard to believe the gap!

Thanks for trying tho...

Keni

After my Saffire Pro 40 died, one of the interfaces I tried was a Tascam US-2000.  It seemed to work OK but the audio outputs for headphones and studio monitors were noisy (noisy with no input signal). I sent it back to American Musical.  

I finally settled on a higher priced Roland Octa-Capture, but it works great.  I also have an under $500 MAudio Fastrack Ultra 8R that is my "backup" unit and also used with Pro Tools MP9. 

Tascam =

I will not buy a tascam unit.  they still can't get it right.

What aspect of the monitoring capability is bad? Are the monitor or headphone outputs noisy or what?

Or are you complaining about the lack of an onboard DSP mixer (so you could, say, select certain inputs along with certain playback outputs from your DAW for monitoring)?

The way that interface is set up (same as my iU2), you use the "mix" control knob to set monitor source(s): all the way to the left is analog inputs only, all the way to the right is analog outputs only, and in between is a mix of the ins and outs.

The Mixtreme is nice, but doesn't play well with newer PCs (or more than 2GBs of installed memory).

Glad I bought the Zoom R-16.  Almost pulled the trigger on the Tascam.

In the unit I had, the headphone and line outs (connected to my studio monitors) had a high noise "floor" (noise with no signal input).  I tried various settings and couldn't get rid of the noise.  When there was signal the noise could still be heard.   It may have been that I got a defective unit, as I can't believe all are that way.   None of the other recording interface units I had or tried were noisy like the US-2000 that I got.

But, I'm happy with the Octa-Capture, even though it was more $$.

You are complaining about a feature that of cousre is not there at that price point. Did you expect a mixing board with aux sends for $300?

I know what your complaining about and if you need individual monitoring of each input then you have to be creative and use other external gear. All interfaces of this type are the same in this regard.
The only other solution is super low latency and monitor out the back door..not going to happen.

I record a live band with mine without any issue what so ever.
 
The Monitor output of the tascam will have a 100% mix of all inputs.
Because your goal is to have good record levels these are all blasting away at unity. There is no way to turn indavidual channels up or down without interfering with record levels----all these style of interfaces work the same. This is not a design flaw, it is expect that you will use a mixer to solve the problem.

The solution is to use the monitor output as PART of your monitoring system. Each musician then uses a headphone amp with blending or a sub mixer to acomplish a personal mix.
 Example . the bass player uses a sub mixer with a feed from the drummers sub mixer, the tascam, and his DI output.

FYI My Live set up:
Equipment:
Tascam us1641
Lenovo i5 Laptop Sonar 8.5
Yamaha 01v 16 channel digital Mixer - drums
Berhringer small mixer - bass
Yamaha 4 channel DJ mixer ( keyboards)


Ch 1 - Scratch vocals - to be re done properly
Ch 2 - Guitar Amp / iso booth , keep?? re do?
Ch 3 - Bass / DI xlr side
Ch 4 - Keyboard scratch - MIDI will be used for final mix.
Ch 5 - 01v left  out = Drum overheads and Toms
Ch 6 - 01v right out = Drum overheads and Toms
Ch 7 - 01v Aux 1 = Kick
Ch 8 - 01v Aux 2 = Snare
Ch 9 - 01v Aux 3 = Hi Hat
Ch 10 - Room mike ( near drums ) optional
MIDI - keyboards

I could put each drum on a separate channel but I have my sound dialed in this way and it works.

Singer /guitar player uses the Tascam's headphone Jack and the mix is close enough ( because it's me ) The guitar seems to cut through everything else and I don't care about the vocals.

Bass player, DI box XLR to record/ TRS to headphone mixer.  feed from 01v Monitor outputs and Tascam monitor send giving 3 channel control.
80% of the time he will re do later.

Keyboard - Split stereo out - Left to scratch record- right to headphone mixer. Feed from Tascam. MIDI used for keeper. Keyboard player not always at first sessions anyways.

Drummer uses 01v Headphones and Aux 4 to set a mix.  A feed from Tascam into channel strip and a feed from Bass Players AUX 1 output.