Tracking through tape to daw or mixing to tape?

[Ronski]

I´ve been wondering which is better, to track through tape to daw (split the signal to tape and direct to daw, then move the track in sync with the original), or just mix to tape. I have two Telefunken M15 1/4-inch 2-track recorders and one Otari 5050 8-track 1/2 inch, so that is 12 tracks of tape I can record simultaneously. However, my AD-DA convertors are not so good (digi 002 and motu 8pre) so I guess I should avoid every extra AD-DA conversion I can... So what do you think, how would you do it? The M15´s are fine, calibrated and so on... only very slight crosstalk between left and right channels.

[Brad McGowan]

I can't tell you which one is better because I think that's really an aesthetic choice that has to be made. But I will tell you that you don't need to slide anything around to make this work. There is a better way. If you using a DAW that allows VST plugins and has automatic delay compensation (don't they all at this point?), then you can insert the free Voxengo Latency Delay plugin on your input channels that are connected to the tape deck outputs. By doing a simple loopback test or by sending the same source directly to the DAW and also through the tape deck and then to the DAW you can determine what the delay is due to the record-repro head gap. You type that number into the Voxengo plugin. Now you can record tracks through your tape deck (output set to monitor repro head) simultaneously while recording additional tracks straight to disk. Because of the way the automatic delay compensation deals with the delay reported by the Voxengo plugin, the DAW will essentially pull all your tape tracks back in time for you.

Give it a shot. Let the technology do the work for you. Why more people aren't doing this is beyond me. Manually "dumping" tracks seems like a big hassle and waste of time in my book.

As for the AD and DA conversion....don't work about it. Enjoy the sound of tape and make music.

Brad

[The Reel Thing]

yeah, dump the digi stuff and use your tape recorders. and enjoy life!
best,

tom

analoghaus :: studio label verlag - home

[PhilE]

For me I love to track to Tools, mix OTB down to tape... or just scrap the tape all together.

[Atari]

As I have been thinking about buying a 24track to use in combination of my HD system I always thought it was best to track to tape(especially drums) first. This way your transients are captured by the tape and not by the converter. Which I have always find anoying.. I mostly record 24 bit and I feel like I still have to turn the input gain for the snare track in PT all the way down to still capture the highest transient. I hoped recording to tape first would solve this problem..
I know a lot of people are mixing TO tape to get an overal tape saturation sound but I think you better buy a HEDD then.
You have all the tools you need to check it out yourself.
Good luck!

[Brad McGowan]

Recording snare to tape has been one of the biggest eye openers for me. I think out of all the drums, this is the one that tape imparts the most "magic" upon.

I'm about to bounce a bunch of previously tracked (to digital) drums to tape, so I should be able to let you know what my impressions are about the tape before digital versus digital before tape thing. My thought in the past is that it shouldn't matter even though I've read many people say that tape first sounds better. Based on a quick test I did the other day, let's just say I am keeping an open mind.

Brad

[DannyMac]

the question was; to track to tape or mix to tape. No matter how much of a pain in the ass it might be, I'd always track to tape then mix from.

What is good practise is to record to tape, and at the same time take a feed off the repro head straight to your DAW. Overdubs can also be done in this manner. NO sync to worry about.

[Mike H]

Normally I track to Pro Tools, then mix 100% OTB thru lots of outboard gear, then thru summing units directly to tape (ATR 102), then transfer the mix from tape to Pro Tools via Lavry Gold.

Sometimes I track in parallel to both tape and Pro Tools (using simple mult on the patchbays), then A/B to determine which I prefer. Usually hitting tape at both tracking and mixdown is too much tape effect for me......but again, I have lots of colored analog gear.

(BTW, it is also a pain in the butt to track to tape, if you end up with repeated takes before it turns out right. "Wait a minute, we need to put another reel on.")

I always run the mix to both tape (ATR Magnetics tape) and directly to Pro Tools, then compare the results. Tape always seems to win.

[Brad McGowan]

Did you guys not read my post above about how to use tape in a hybrid setup while tracking? I described a much better way then what you are talking about.

Brad

[Mike H]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

Did you guys not read my post above about how to use tape in a hybrid setup while tracking? I described a much better way then what you are talking about.

Brad

Whose comments are you referring to, Brad............mine?

Like I said, I normally go to tape only with the mix, so I have absolutely no interest in delay compensation.

I might go to tape more than once, harder, easier.......to see what I like. I prefer to get all the mixes on tape first, then transfer afterwards, rather than transfer from tape while I am recording.

You like your approach, I like mine.
Vive la différence

[TomD]

I'm in the middle of tracking a project where we recorded drums, bass, and gtr through lots of vintage gear (or novo vintage gear like Chandlers) to Studer 24trk....then dumped the takes to ProtoolsHD.....it sounds really great...Helps to have a great front end....Neve Pres, Distressors, ADL tube comps, RCA ribbons...did it at the Clubhouse in Rhinebeck NY.....I come from the tape days and pretty much didn't want to deal with it but I have to say, it makes a difference for the bass and drums. BTW, we recorded at 15ips, CCID, no noise reduction....I NEVER would've done that 15 or 20 years ago....somehow, the slight amount of noise adds to the charm. Gives things lots of bottom and color. The project really has a SOUND......

TD

[Quint]

So do any of you guys track to the DAW and then dump to 2" tape? Also, I don't mean dump to 2" and then back to the computer for mixing. I mean track and edit in the computer and then dump to 2" where it stays analog for the duration of the project (mixdown fom 2" through console to 1/2").

If so, what sampling rates are you using? It seems to me that 96K or, better yet, 192k would be good to use during tracking for this type of approach. I know that some people have said that this approach sounds different than the opposite (tracking to tape and dumping to DAW). I'm curious, however, if anyone has used the DAW to tape method, I mentioned above, while using 96K or higher and how much difference they noticed between that approach and the opposite tape to DAW method.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by TomD

I'm in the middle of tracking a project where we recorded drums, bass, and gtr through lots of vintage gear (or novo vintage gear like Chandlers) to Studer 24trk....then dumped the takes to ProtoolsHD.....it sounds really great...Helps to have a great front end....Neve Pres, Distressors, ADL tube comps, RCA ribbons...did it at the Clubhouse in Rhinebeck NY.....I come from the tape days and pretty much didn't want to deal with it but I have to say, it makes a difference for the bass and drums. BTW, we recorded at 15ips, CCID, no noise reduction....I NEVER would've done that 15 or 20 years ago....somehow, the slight amount of noise adds to the charm. Gives things lots of bottom and color. The project really has a SOUND......

TD

Did you go through a console for tracking or just go straight from your outboard pre's/compressors to your Studer? I guess you used the output attenuators on your pre's and/or output controls on your compressors if you tracked without a console right?

[TomD]

Did you go through a console for tracking or just go straight from your outboard pre's/compressors to your Studer? I guess you used the output attenuators on your pre's and/or output controls on your compressors if you tracked without a console right?

There is an old Neve, I believe 8058?, in the Clubhouse and we used those pres (which I think were modded by Rupert Neve in the 70's) along with Chandler TGs and LTDs with assorted comps...distressors, SSL, ADLtube, Daking....yes we went directly from the pres into compressors into the Studer and monitored through PTHD into the NEVE console.
That way you're set up to load in your takes right from the repro head. A little time consuming but very smooth. We did attenuate from the comps and hit the tape pretty hard. The music is not heavy rock. but a hybrid of pop, jazz, rock...Wilco-ish but heavily influenced by Tom Waits with a little Kurt Weill thrown in. The dark-ish sound of the tape running at 15 with all those Neve-ish pres really imparts an old/new vibe.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by TomD

There is an old Neve, I believe 8058?, in the Clubhouse and we used those pres (which I think were modded by Rupert Neve in the 70's) along with Chandler TGs and LTDs with assorted comps...distressors, SSL, ADLtube, Daking....yes we went directly from the pres into compressors into the Studer and monitored through PTHD into the NEVE console.
That way you're set up to load in your takes right from the repro head. A little time consuming but very smooth. We did attenuate from the comps and hit the tape pretty hard. The music is not heavy rock. but a hybrid of pop, jazz, rock...Wilco-ish but heavily influenced by Tom Waits with a little Kurt Weill thrown in. The dark-ish sound of the tape running at 15 with all those Neve-ish pres really imparts an old/new vibe.

Wilco and Tom Waits huh? Well those are two of the biggest influences on my band as well. Now I'm really curious to hear this stuff. What's the name of this band and where can I hear some of their stuff?

[TomD]

Eric Margan and the Red Lions.... my space
MySpace.com - Margan & the Red Lions - New York, New York - Jazz / Indie / Classical - www.myspace.com/theredlions

the stuff that's on My space is not the same versions of the music that we're recording now.

Good stuff!

[Jay Kahrs]

I love tracking to tape.

It's for the methods as much as anything else...

Sonics are up there, not secondary... but maybe.

Anything to keep that Pandora's box of DAW microedits closed... at least while cutting the very basic tracks on any given session.

I've tracked to tape & then dumped once we have a few keeper takes of a given song. I've also tracked to tape and had the output of the tape deck hit the DAW a second later... muso's tracking w/o cans in that case.

Good stuff.

I always track at 88.2 if possible... and run 2" 16 or 2" 24 at 15ips.

How any of this applies to your rig, who knows... best to record a lot & figure it out.

I do love tape though...

[GYang]

I hate tape.
And tape recorders.
Nothing to be excited about in terms of workflow, servicing, required space, blah, blah....
But mixdowns go to tape only nowdays, I just didn't find better way to retain original sound of great analogue mix for mastering.
DSD or DXD might help in the future, but for now tape is only way not to spoil mixes.
I don't talk about tape's effect on sound, as IMO all the sound is already reached in tracking/mixing process (without tape, as I hate to work with it - laziness).
2-track masters sound better than absolutely anything ever invented in recording industry.
In ideal scenario, with good musicians and plenty of time, I would record drums and bass to tape (going straght to analogue mixer) and everything else, as usual to DAW.

[userofgear]

Originally Posted by Mike H

Normally I track to Pro Tools, then mix 100% OTB thru lots of outboard gear, then thru summing units directly to tape (ATR 102), then transfer the mix from tape to Pro Tools via Lavry Gold.

Sometimes I track in parallel to both tape and Pro Tools (using simple mult on the patchbays), then A/B to determine which I prefer. Usually hitting tape at both tracking and mixdown is too much tape effect for me......but again, I have lots of colored analog gear.

(BTW, it is also a pain in the butt to track to tape, if you end up with repeated takes before it turns out right. "Wait a minute, we need to put another reel on.")

I always run the mix to both tape (ATR Magnetics tape) and directly to Pro Tools, then compare the results. Tape always seems to win.

hello,

good to hear someone else does that. its cool to put up the 2-inch tracks right alongside the pro tools in sync, and then choose between analog and digital for any given track. analog does not always win, even for bass.

this is way different than tracking through the tape machine to pro tools, because if you use mults [or the console is otherwise capable] then you get first generation analog and first generation digital. if necessary, you can correct small tracking errors by doing small "fixes" in pro tools and then flying little sections back over to tape on the tracks that cut better onto tape.

to make it work with mults, i find you have to calibrate the pro tools inputs differently than the stock -18. otherwise, in order to get enough level onto pro tools you end up smashing the tape too hard.


userofgear

[Tony Shepperd]

If you can mix really well ITB and own a 002, then track on analog and mix in Pro Tools.

It's an adaptation of the old adage of tracking on a Neve and mixing on an SSL.

The yin and yang of both formats gives a nice balance to just about any style of music.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

Recording snare to tape has been one of the biggest eye openers for me. I think out of all the drums, this is the one that tape imparts the most "magic" upon.

I'm about to bounce a bunch of previously tracked (to digital) drums to tape, so I should be able to let you know what my impressions are about the tape before digital versus digital before tape thing. My thought in the past is that it shouldn't matter even though I've read many people say that tape first sounds better. Based on a quick test I did the other day, let's just say I am keeping an open mind.

Brad

So did you ever run this comparison test and, when you did, did you bounce it back into the computer or did you remain in the analog realm and mix off of tape?

[The90049]

i just did this with tape.

6 mics 312A's to apogee and logic (last year)
transfer to PT
PT to Studer
Studer to PT
PT to outboard- 550A's and 610's and 1176's
to wav, then mp3

http://AnalogMode.com/lrblues.mp3

any pointers would help me a lot.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by The90049

i just did this with tape.

6 mics 312A's to apogee and logic (last year)
transfer to PT
PT to Studer
Studer to PT
PT to outboard- 550A's and 610's and 1176's
to wav, then mp3

http://AnalogMode.com/lrblues.mp3

any pointers would help me a lot.

What sampling rate? How hard did you hit the tape? So you used outboard compressors but still mixed ITB?

[The90049]

96/24 to logic originally. put it in pro tools at the same rate then sent to tape with no plugins and kept the levels at zero. it hit tape at various levels, but the guitar hit at +12 most of the way through. i thought it would distort more, but it seems ok. the bass was +3 and overheads were about +3 to +6. at 30ips.

this is the only track I sent to tape from digital, so it's just a messing around thing. I'm not a pro anyway. the tape even had about 20 runs on it so far.

then i recorded to PT at 192 just for fun. found out i can't do sh*t with 192 so i made a new session at 96 and converted to 96/24 again.

used the PT inserts to go to 550A's for kick and snare. inserts for guitar, bass and overheads went to 6176's with 610 EQ's and 1176 comp.

just did a quick mix ITB with a L316 at the master output.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by The90049

96/24 to logic originally. put it in pro tools at the same rate then sent to tape with no plugins and kept the levels at zero. it hit tape at various levels, but the guitar hit at +12 most of the way through. i thought it would distort more, but it seems ok. the bass was +3 and overheads were about +3 to +6. at 30ips.

this is the only track I sent to tape from digital, so it's just a messing around thing. I'm not a pro anyway. the tape even had about 20 runs on it so far.

then i recorded to PT at 192 just for fun. found out i can't do sh*t with 192 so i made a new session at 96 and converted to 96/24 again.

used the PT inserts to go to 550A's for kick and snare. inserts for guitar, bass and overheads went to 6176's with 610 EQ's and 1176 comp.

just did a quick mix ITB with a L316 at the master output.

That sounds pretty good on my headphones. Gotta check it out on my monitors. It's got a little bit of vibe going on there. The guitar sounds good. What kind of tape did you use?

[fuddfar]

Originally Posted by Ronski

I´ve been wondering which is better, to track through tape to daw (split the signal to tape and direct to daw, then move the track in sync with the original), or just mix to tape. I have two Telefunken M15 1/4-inch 2-track recorders and one Otari 5050 8-track 1/2 inch, so that is 12 tracks of tape I can record simultaneously. However, my AD-DA convertors are not so good (digi 002 and motu 8pre) so I guess I should avoid every extra AD-DA conversion I can... So what do you think, how would you do it? The M15´s are fine, calibrated and so on... only very slight crosstalk between left and right channels.

For Drums we come out of Neves and API 312s to comps, if needed, to the Studer 15 IPS CCIR The patchbay is normaled to PT HD ins and we record both the analog and digital. No one has ever picked the digital kick, toms, or snare....ever. I have no problems with digital cymbals. Line up the Analog tracks to the digital tracks by grouping them. Even with track punches it doesn't take more than 20 seconds.

[The90049]

Originally Posted by Quint

That sounds pretty good on my headphones. Gotta check it out on my monitors. It's got a little bit of vibe going on there. The guitar sounds good. What kind of tape did you use?

thanks. By vibe I assume a good vibe? nothing beats some old school blues. tape was Quantegy 456.

I reckon that the snare is a bit loud? I seem to have a problem with my eyes. I make my snares loud enough where my eyes naturally blink.

[NathanEldred]

Tracking to multitrack tape is more obvious overall; just mixing to 2 track glues things together and IMO gives the overall recording more depth but it's more subtle than the multitrack. For multitrack, I think drums and electric guitars are the most important, neither of those instruments sound the same or as good straight to digital.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by The90049

thanks. By vibe I assume a good vibe? nothing beats some old school blues. tape was Quantegy 456.

I reckon that the snare is a bit loud? I seem to have a problem with my eyes. I make my snares loud enough where my eyes naturally blink.

Yeah, I like the 456 and, yes, it's a good vibe.

[vernier]

If there's a tape recorder around, use it all you can. More tape, less digital weirdness.
'