anyone with reel to reel experience recording drums

[littledoodler]

Tape and drums are a good mix, beats digital hands down. You are looking at $400-$500 for a decent 4 track machine,

[Geert van den Berg]

Drums on tape can sound great, but if you track direct to digital you can make it sound great too. Try it first before investing in something you might not need, if you think something is missing then you can always expand, but maybe some extra outboard would be a be a better bet. Make sure you find a good place to record drums, IMHO more important than the gear you use, those Josephson's c42's and a good room, might be all you need! (oh and a good drummer!)

[withintheflux]

thank you very much for the responses. I have checkout eBay for tape machines. looks like the Tascam TSR-8 is available quite readily. Do you guys vouch for that one (granting that its in good shape)? thanks guys! I think I would like to get one.. for more than just the sound benefits, but also to record in rooms separate from my control room.



thanks!

blake

[studjo]

Boys I dunno - I love tape too but a Tascam TSR8 isn't the best tape recorder ever made - actually I think it's a half decent machine.
Is half decent good enough for you? I own a MSR16 - its coming from the same line of machines - would I start to record to tape again?
never with this machine and believe me I never thought I'd say something like this. I'm a real analog lover. But to get better than a modern DAW it needs more than a TSR8 (something along the lines of a Studer A80 or a big Otari or a MCI or... you get the picture).

this is my very very very humble opinion.

try it if you can but don't spend too much money

Jo

[robmix]

I'm with you studjo, sure analog tape is great. But let's no confuse a Tascam TSR-8 with a Studer A-800. I owned a TSR-8 for many years and made some fun records with it that still hold up - that doesn't mean I'd toss out the DAW and go back. You're not going to get the same creaminess and impact from the TSR series as you would from a high quality 2" machine. Spend your money elsewhere - better mics, better pre's, better convertors, etc. This reminds of the posts I see on the musicplayer forums where young guys are so set against mixing ITB that they'll output their soundcard to a 20 year old Peavey live console. Sure as an effect or on an indie rock record that could be cool, but I think in most cases you're stepping over the dollar to pick up the nickel.

Rob

[Ted Nightshade]

It's a lot of work to record analog. Cleaning heads and splicing on leader and all that is a serious investment in effort.

So I don't think there's any savings in buying a cheaper machine. That initial investment seems minor compared to the ongoing cost of tape and the time and effort to keep the machine in good condition and the tape heads clean etc.

So I would get the best machine you can possibly manage if you are going to work analog.

Then, it could really be a fine thing.

[withintheflux]

thanks guys. the advise is nice. I may just save for some better mic pres and maybe save for convertors.. its just a LOT more money than this machine.

[Ted Nightshade]

To get digital converters that sounded as good as my lovingly rebuilt near-mint 1968 Sony 1/4" 4 track, which cost me $600 (total steal, especially rebuilt!), I had to go the Manley SLAM! with digital option. Cranesong HEDD wasn't even close. That is a LOT more money!

Trouble is, I had to have some way to mix down to digital from the reel-to-reel, so I needed converters anyway. Frustrating. My mixdowns to the HEDD never sounded anywhere as good as the mixes did of the tape machine. Whole takes that sounded great on tape fell flat on the HEDD.

Now I dispense with the reel-to-reel altogether and record it all live to 2 track on the SLAM!

Not an easy one- could be it's worth doing the reel-to-reel just for the experience of it, but again, get the best one you possibly can. They're so much cheaper than so-so converters it's not even funny. Maybe you can do the mixdown in a studio with great converters- that would rock.

[Jay Kahrs]

Yeah, unless you want a TSR-8 for what it is I'd skip it. Pop the money into mics, then pres, then converters last. Actually screw all that, spend money on new drum heads first, then mics etc. Sure, drums on tape sound great but you can't compare a Tascam to a Studer or MCI or the ilk. It's like comparing a Jaguar XKR to a Ford Escort.

As for portable, how about an Adat or Tascam DTRS machine? Portable, 8-tracks and under $500.

[chadly]

How about using VCR's instead? <grin> Stay away from ADATS, nothing but trouble.

You've got a DAW, go with it. Here's what I did when a client came to me for the analog treatment.

1) Tracked 16 track drums on my motu rig. Neumanns, Focusrites, etc. Not gold, but nothing to sneeze at.
2) Stemmed them back to 1/2 8 track. (Tascam 808)
3) Mixed the stems to stereo.

Whala. They were an Acid-Grunge type of band that was looking for that (and I qoute) "some guy in a basement with a reel to reel" sound.

That's one of the only times that I've used it, other then kicks.

Work on your ITB mixing first.

[wilcofan]

Unless you use a very good machine I'd say you are going to get more trouble than it's worth. Fat is one thing but Noisy and Distorted are another. I'd say get used to hearing the drums with more honest peaks tracked to DAW and buy a reasonable 2 track to mix to.

[dlmorley]

Originally posted by wilcofan
Unless you use a very good machine I'd say you are going to get more trouble than it's worth. Fat is one thing but Noisy and Distorted are another. I'd say get used to hearing the drums with more honest peaks tracked to DAW and buy a reasonable 2 track to mix to.

I agree.
On another note, I have an old ADR EQ (950) with fat transformers. Just passing audio through seems to make it sound nicer (more "real" for want of a better word) Seems to clean the edges. I have no qualms with sound of my motu or D2424 once I do things like that.
I'd still love a 1" 8 track though....

[Drumsound]

Maybe I'm nuts, but even a narrow track analog deck is a better sound to me compared to pro-summer digital. I just worked on a record out in California with Caldo71. We had his Otari MX5050 for drums and we're both convinced it made a difference. I think he's even been bouncing the digital guitar tracks (from the basics) to the Otari. And he's tracking all the bass, vocals and ear candy to it too.


Another cool thing we did was to run the deck in repro while tracking to get the very first "playback" to the computer. We ran a stereo drum sub for reference right to the computer.

I'll get him to come by and talk about it.

[Jay Kahrs]

The more I do this the less format matters to me. Though I still love analog for everything that it does and the options it does and doesn't present.

[Caldo71]

And poof here I am as promised like a mother****in' genie! This is a long, long post...hopefully it has some insight and is not all hot air:

I think that the Otari made a big difference, but as has been previously stated the Otari is not in the same league as the little Tascams and such. It's got really great tone from really great line amps and carefully designed and built circuitry and is very ruggedly-made in all ways. It is a 1/2" 8-track and you can't generally find 'em in the shape you'd want one in for less than a grand.

DrumSound had mentioned also that I ended up piping the digitally-recorded tracks through the Otari and then back to digital after the fact. I can't really put my finger on any clear sonic before/after difference, all I can say is that the guitars just never sounded like they fit in the mix with the drums before I did that, and afterwards they did. This is not to say that the analog stuff was decidedly better-sounding than digital, it's just that the hybrid sound wasn't doing it for me. It's possible that a fully digital recording would have been similarly pleasing...it just came down to one or the other. Drumsound has far more experience on fully analog multitracking, and the claim he and many others make is that analog stuff just "stacks up" better as you mix large numbers of tracks. I could believe this, and once again I defer to him. You could chalk that up to odd-order harmonics, organic tape compression, louder track gain before (bad) clipping, all three factors or a bunch of other ju-ju I'm too dumb to know about.

So then there's the converters. Mine are by way of the MOTU 2408 that I use. I know that these are not by any means high-end. Having never used really sweet ones all I can say is that yes, SOMETHING is definitely lost as soon as it gets recorded digitally, but it's subtle. I would say that what's lost is minimal as compared to what is gained. You can hear the analog-ness of the otari tracks even after the digital "dump".

It's also interesting to note that a lot more seems to be lost by the way that a DAW has to "sum" all those tracks down to a stereo mix than is lost just in the converters. There's a reason analog summing boxes are so hot right now. Try running multiple tracks from multiple outputs on your digital setup into multiple tracks of your analog mixer or analog reel-to-reel sometime. Listen in your headphones or monitors...you'd swear the tracks never touched a hard drive. Just being able to allow the computer to NOT sum all that info makes a big difference the way it reproduces music.

Bear in mind that even though I enjoy the sound and ritual of recording to analog, I very much support the "digital revolution" and am pretty saavy on using the computer. There are all those plugins out there these days that seem to emulate things like odd-order harmonics, tape compression, and all the other goodies that analog yields. I don't own any of the tape-emulation ones, but I will say this: if they haven't yet nailed that sound with a plugin (and they probably haven't), they will eventually...probably sooner than you think.

So, if you're not willing to spend a bunch of dough on a really GOOD analog deck, then do as everyone here says and spend your money on good mics and preamps. They are the first thing in your chain and ultimately they will make the most difference. In my mind one should embrace the techniques and applications of BOTH mediums becasuse they both have strengths and weaknesses and as always the best results are obtained from using the right tool for the right job, and a hybrid mentality is a good one. I know I'd be less happy if I didn't have the editing control of my DAW, and the tone of my 8-track. And I've heard some really fantastic-sounding music recorded to fully digital setups, even really crappy ones. But they started with really nice microphones and somebody with a great set of ears!


We came up with that cool scheme DrumSound mentioned where we sent all the drums through my little Soundcraft mixer before they hit tape (via the direct outs on each Soundcraft channel), but then we monitored and recorded using the stereo master outs on the mixer at the same time that we were recording the (muted) tracks off the repro head on the analog deck. It made things much easier as I was kind of dumping to digital as I went, and didn't have to worry about any kind of tape stretch when I was nudging the analog stuff into place with the digital. This could also be done with a simple stereo drum technique as you plan to do.

[Gie-Sound]

With threads like these... one question always seems to popup in my head: "What about Fatso?"
Let me first state, that I never had a chance to use Fatso myself, but it's on my list to check out. (But there's no dealer in this country, so it's difficult to demo.)
I always hear people like Jules say they track everything/a lot/all drums* with a Fatso.
I'm getting curious.

*=pick you method

[jazzius II]

Gie, you need to check out the Culture Vulture......i've just bought one.......a demo unit is available form www.joystick.be

[Gie-Sound]

Originally posted by jazzius II
Gie, you need to check out the Culture Vulture......i've just bought one.......www.joystick.be

I "assume" harmonics
But what does it do with transients?

[jazzius II]

Originally posted by Gie-Sound
I "assume" harmonics
But what does it do with transients?

Gie, yes harmonic thickening galore.

It soaks up/eats transients.......this is good!

[Caldo71]

Can you guys tell me what the Culture Vulture and Fatso are/do?

I've heard the names but forget.

Edit: Nevermind...I did a search and found 'em. That Fatso looks pretty damn awesome.

[Ted Nightshade]

Just a li'l reminder that just exactly WHERE you put that mic is bound to matter more than any of the gear... I'm talkin' "all mic placements being equal", this or that is a better bet.

[Caldo71]

Unless your mic is a Blue Ball.

[hourglass]

Originally posted by withintheflux
thanks guys. the advise is nice. I may just save for some better mic pres and maybe save for convertors.. its just a LOT more money than this machine.

Keep in mind your initial $400 investment isn't gonna be your only expense.

First off - tape is not cheap. Even at 1/2", you're talking $50 a reel for about a half-hour of tracking @ 15ips.

More important than that is the condition of the machine. Sure, you can get by with busted hubs and flaky knobs and/or connectors - god knows my 80-8 has seen better "cosmetic" days -- but you're worse off with an out-of-tune tape deck than you are with the cheapest set of converters in your first ever Soundblaster 16. (Okay, maybe that's harsh..._)

Keep in mind you have to:

1. Get a demagnetizer and use it correctly.
2. Get an MRL and use it correctly to align your machine.
3. If you don't have a big old console with a built-in oscillator you'll likely need a tone generator to get anywhere with step 2 above.


OR

You can pay somebody to do all of that for you.

The first time you align a 1/2" 8-track you can write off the better part of a day. Cuz when you get to track 7 or 8 you're gonna feel like you have a better feel for the process and you'll wanna do it again. And again.

Also - don't make the mistake I made when I got my machine. I thought I'd save a few bucks and get an MRL on ebay - too bad for me it was from 1987 and was stored improperly. Lemme tell ya - extreme tape shed doesn't make for accurate tone reproduction.



BUT -- don't let any of that scare you away. Sometimes it's fun to break out yer dusty ol' relic and run some tape.

I recently did a project for someone on the board here - they had some reels from '78 and no way to play 'em. So, I fired up the 80-8, with it's jerry-rigged hub and it's freshly aligned (with a newer MRL) electonics, and transferred a bunch of songs so they could have a go at them in a DAW.

Let me just say - I have no idea what was in the room when the bass player was doing his thing. No idea what sort of rig or mics... all I know is the fatness of that 15ips low-end was unbelievable.

And it was still nice and fat when it was transferred to digital.

ryan

[Gie-Sound]

Originally posted by jazzius II
Gie, yes harmonic thickening galore.

It soaks up/eats transients.......this is good!

Well, I better contact RAF.....
(BTW Jazz, did you get to fool around with the Fatso yet?)

[Wiggy Neve Slut]

Rob mix kinda nailed it... As much as i love tape to death, i think that in the long term you will be better served with better things like pre's, mics ad/da etc.

Having said that if you wish to go down the tape path.. the Otari 5050's are cheap and good sounding little workhorses... just try and turn off the 'noise reduction'. I have a fried that has one and it a 10 hr a day, type of machine which is pretty damn miraculous for something like that with ok, but definately not Studer 827/820 type transport!

Cheers
Wiggy

[TriTone Digital]

Originally posted by Ted Nightshade
had to go the Manley SLAM! with digital option. Cranesong HEDD wasn't even close.

Hmmm, I've heard them both and had the opposite reaction: to each his own! The SLAM was good, very good, but the HEDD, to me, was better. Especially for rock and roll. Really the same league though, so it's all which flavor floats your boat.

If you want to really hear the difference between tape and digital for yourself on drums, take that money, rent a good studio for a day and track the drums and bass for your project to both mediums simultaneously and see what YOU think and what YOU hear. It'll get you great tracks and provide you with some information you can really use.

Damon

[Jay Kahrs]

Originally posted by TriTone Digital
If you want to really hear the difference between tape and digital for yourself on drums, take that money, rent a good studio for a day and track the drums and bass for your project to both mediums simultaneously and see what YOU think and what YOU hear. It'll get you great tracks and provide you with some information you can really use.

True, but on the flip side a good AE will pick mics and pres to compliment either format. Analog needs a different approach then digital does.

[TriTone Digital]

Originally posted by Jay Kahrs
True, but on the flip side a good AE will pick mics and pres to compliment either format. Analog needs a different approach then digital does.

And a better AE, in a great studio that they know, will create a setup and sound that kills whether your sending it to a cassette, Roland VS-80 or....



Seriously, I haven't found drum and bass tracking techniques to vary THAT dramatically between my work in either format, ASSUMING high quality converters for the digital side and a well maintained, quality deck for the analog side. Certainly not enough to make one approach a failure for the other format for a test like this. And definitely not when you only have a day to track drums and bass for an album.

Example: Neve or Great River for the kick and snare, API's for the toms, Avalon or Millennia for the overheads, Flamingo, Focusrite and RCAs up your sleeve if any of the above don't work, etc. Manley or Avalon DI's to a RCA BA21 tube pre (kills) for bass. Basic recipe for success for either format? Usually.

I may be more likely to pop some high end boost where needed pre-tape for analog, and my overhead selection and placement is sometimes different, but other than that, good mic placement, mic selection, preamp selection, gain staging, EQs and comps will get the job done for either.

And by not changing the setup, you get to hear the differences between the what each medium does when presented with the same source. The source may not be completely optimized for the medium, but you DO get to hear the differences, which was the point.

Damon

[Caldo71]

Hey, backtracking a bit:

Does anyone know where one goes to purchase a good-quality (i.e. NEW) MRL tape for a 1/2 machine like my Otari? How much do they cost?

I've had my Otari for a bit less than a year, and embarrasingly I've never re-calibrated it since it came back from my tech the first time! The things are built like tanks and I've never noticed any difference in sound quality, but I still need to teach myself how to do this. Especially since the controls are so easy to get to on that model.

The guy who sold it to me also gave me the MRL reel, but warned me from the get-go that it was old and possibly worn out.