2inch Analog Recording VS Hardware Recording?

[GL Respect Due]

HDGuru:

While I agree you have to know how to operate/maintaince a tape machine (if you can't do it yourself, or don't know a tech, don't buy a tape machine), I disagree that you need to have a fat chain to accompany it. A friend of mine who's been recording for about 30 years, cut what i'd call a "Psychadelic Hillbilly" LP on a 1" Tascam with a Sun systems console w/ SM57. I'll tell you this, that sh-t sounds like an old Mama's and Papa's LP. Straight up. If I didn't tell you what they recorded on, you'd never ever know it. They didn't use any compression. Just some tape delay, and some guitar pedals. Sounds great, levels are great, everything sounds dynamic and present, really gives you something to think about!

[Mike Derrick]

Checkmate,

IMHO, the best way to capture the warmth and punch and depth of what the beauty of tape provides is to record on tape and mix with tape.
For myself, my sonically favorite albums I've recorded and mixed were done this way.

It is a rewarding experience to hear music done on the pro tape medium.

To clarify about the sales of tape,...yes Quantegy shut down for a short period of time due to what I understand was mismanagement and a change of ownership. <---not 100% sure about that, however...
They are back up and running and making tape.

Yes I agree with the previous posts about the 3D quality of sound coming from using the analog tape medium.
And yes IMHO that 3D quality suddenly flattens out as soon as it hits the digital medium.

RE: re-using tape,...if you are worried about print-through, erase the tape you are about to re-use once completely engaging all tracks without running any signal to tape, this should ensure that your tape is clean for the next time you actually record. (basically you will have erased the tape twice before the start of your next recording.)

Checkmate it's worth trying to record to tape and mix from tape.
This limits you in some ways, but that would be very old school and will push
your performers/musicians to be better,.....no editing (unless someone is gonna start slicing up your tape!!!!! lol)

~ mike

[Mike Derrick]

oh yeah one more thing,...some may suggest recording all digital and then dumping the mix of the song from digital onto tape and then back to digital....
IMHO that really doesn't do very much to your sounds, about maybe 10% (analog advantage) compared to recording first onto analog tape and
then dumping individual tracks into computer.
Because if you dump a whole mix, the sounds of your mix which will benefit the most will be those which are mixed loudest and even those will not achieve the same saturation and additional harmonic content tape can provide because no sounds in your mix can be as loud as one sound by itself,..(hope I explained that reasonably clearly...?)
And tape colouration is achieved and maximized by hitting the signal to tape as hard and loud as you can.
you can do this with individual tracks/instruments, but not as well with a whole mix, since everything in the mix will be quieter than it would be by itself/soloed.
Although there are probably some who would dispute the degree of advantage....that's my humble opinion from my experience.

~ mike

[GL Respect Due]

Mike Derrick:

"Checkmate I dare you to record to tape and mix from tape.
This limits you in some ways, but that would be very old school and will push
your performers/musicians to be better,.....no editing (unless someone is gonna start slicing up your tape!!!!! lol)"

Couldn't agree more.

Mike:

"- to become aware through the senses "

I was aware of tape sounding warm prior to running signal into it.

[Checkmate Muzik]

Originally Posted by Mike Derrick

GL,
you mistook my use of the word perceive...

perceive - to become aware through the senses (Webster's Dictionary)

Your bass guitar before going to tape has a certain sound, after tape it will have another sound becuase of what the tape did to it.
That extra sound is perceived because it wasn't there before and now it is.
So I am saying the same thing as you, yes tape actually makes it warmer.
I didn't mean perceive in the sense of something that fools you into being something it is not. (grammer lesson over )

Checkmate,

IMHO, the best way to capture the warmth and punch and depth of what the beauty of tape provides is to record on tape and mix with tape.
For myself, my sonically favorite albums I've recorded and mixed were done this way.

It is a rewarding experience to hear music done on the pro tape medium.

To clarify about the sales of tape,...yes Quantegy shut down for a short period of time due to what I understand was mismanagement and a change of ownership. <---not 100% sure about that, however...
They are back up and running and making tape.

Yes I agree with the previous posts about the 3D quality of sound coming from using the analog tape medium.
And yes IMHO that 3D quality suddenly flattens out as soon as it hits the digital medium,....wish I knew why.

I have done personal comparisons of straight to digital with straight to tape side by side, and tape always wins.
RE: 1/2" 16 track recorder, i owned a Fostex G-16 1/2" and it had nearly the same sound as my Apogee Rosetta converters IMHO. I currently have a MCI 1" 8 track and it kicks butt all over the Rosetta as far as fatness and 3D quality IMHO.
But that's all subjective personal experience....take it for what it's worth.

RE: re-using tape,...if you are worried about print-through, erase the tape you are about to re-use once completely engaging all tracks without running any signal to tape, this should ensure that your tape is clean for the next time you actually record. (basically you will have erased the tape twice before the start of your next recording.)

Checkmate I dare you to record to tape and mix from tape.
This limits you in some ways, but that would be very old school and will push
your performers/musicians to be better,.....no editing (unless someone is gonna start slicing up your tape!!!!! lol)

~ mike

thanks mike and also the rest of you, good lookin out on da info.


only thing i wanted to track in PT was vocals and the beat cause of more editing capabilities in PT ofcourse.

after readin all this. since all of you said the sound suffers from tape to digital, i am gona see if my engineer gota way around that. usin a tape was was the main reason for the sound and if the quality suffers then whats the point.

i am gona try it out both ways regardless. dumpin into digital format and mixing straight from it to see how much sound difference there is. since my engineer suggested the idea, hopefully he gota plan to go around that

[BigAl]

Hey Mike Derrick,
no one could say it any better. You are da man!!!
To me, analog tape will always be King.
If anyone finds out what happens to the 3D quality when music hits digital, please let me know.

--Al

[Mike Derrick]

Checkmate,

Yup best thing is to try it, see what your ears tell ya about the differences...
some engineers I know actually prefer digital, others of us prefer the analog tape.

So if you have the chance, rent some studio time to maybe put together a simple demo recording of one song using a tape machine and see what you think.
Recording bass guitar and drum sounds will reveal the most difference in character between digital and analog tape.

~ mike

[dshay]

I'm having some of the most fun ever with the tascam four track cassette recorder I just got off ebay.

[Mike Derrick]

Hey Checkmate how's it going?

Have you had a chance to record to tape?

If so, what were your thoughts on what you heard?

And did you have a chance to record both digital and analog tape at the same time, which the ability to a/b?

Did you try drums and bass?

~ mike

[Checkmate Muzik]

not yet homey. i will soon. cant wait to find out the difference in sound. i am sure it will be good.

i am just tryin to release this album first. havent recorded any new songs lately. btw, you should check out some of the music www.myspace.com/checkmatemuzik

[Sounds Great]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Studers and Ampexes.


Next on the list would be Otari and Sony MCI.


And when you dump tape to ProTools it loses its "mojo" so that is another thing to deal with.

Soundwise? Don't forget the 3M, and the Tascam 2" machine. And the Scully, if you can make it work.

[Checkmate Muzik]

Interested to hear Mike Dean & Segal opinions on this discussion

2inch tapes Vs. Protools Recording?? Pros & Cons

Is there a big difference in sound in your opinion??

what 2inch machines you prefer or use? what do dre use?

do you prefer Protools over 2inch or vice versa?

[max cooper]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

Yeah it may beef it up(roll of the transients) but what if you need the snare to poke someone's eyes out?


Digital for all its flaws handles transients really well.


Also you can't just lay it down and expect it to sound magical.

Also, tape sounds different ten minutes after you record the drums compared to five days after you record the drums.

Anything that looks like a spike requires a more flux to hold over time.

Nice idea to record the drums to tape and dump to PT.

[themaidsroom]

tape is amazing....
it has a 3-d sound to it that can find its way to vinyl,
but never into digital in my opinion....
i love watching the circles....
people who would only work on pro-tools 3
years ago are now working only on tape....

i would like to buy a second A827
there are three tape manufacturers right
now.
i have tape from all three here today as i write this
all can be readily purchased in nyc every day

i don't take records seriously if they are not recorded on tape: i don't like
to think when i listen to music - digital makes me think - it reveals itself
as digital very quickly - tape sounds like a record

i also prefer sounds coming from tape - i would lock to pro tools if something
needs something - fly everything analog that can be analog - dumping something into pro tools also means dumping
all of the space and largesse and dimension....

it is a great time to buy a tape recorder if you think you are going to be
involved with making music for the next 5-10 years.....
the studer has not caused 2% of the headaches that the hd2 system has.....



be well


- jack

[the russian]

Originally Posted by dtrax

i prefer 2inch because it seperates the bedroom engineers from the real ones.

I don't agree with this statement.

[P. Rene]

great topic and it was a nice read and i know the feeling from tape to digital. I would compare it to an sp1200 to mpc2000, the oommmph level just evaporates point blank. But the sp1200 had limitations in samp time sorta like analog has its limitations but the joys of both were the punchness.

I've tried the two track dump too tape and let me say its a waste of time, but another factor too look at is recording digital but mixing via analog with outboard mixer. I know hit factory in north miami is running this hybrid also studio center had if i can remember an ssl running 888's.

And fot the tape comment, ive seen dudes with roland 880-1680 that can give your best hd setup a run for its money. So as the saying goes its not the gear its, its that swear he knows what he's doing fool you mess with.