Anyone know why bouncing digitally from Protools to digital tape sounds better?

[Jules]

Do a search here on the key words "Bounce to disk" , "BTD" and "Masterlink" you will find a lot of info on this subject.

like here just to give one example.. http://gearslutz.com/board/showthrea...&highlight=BTD

[Riddler]

Thanks for the pointer Jules, but aren't these talking about a stereo mixdown? I got the impression that TLA was bouncing the entire multitrack out of protools and into the 3348 and then using that as the multitrack source.

Tim.

[Jim Kerr]

Originally Posted by Riddler

Thanks for the pointer Jules, but aren't these talking about a stereo mixdown? I got the impression that TLA was bouncing the entire multitrack out of protools and into the 3348 and then using that as the multitrack source.

Tim.

I think "uploading" rather than Bouncing would be the proper statement, right?
I've also wondered about this. Digital information > new machine = Same digital information. You would think its all about the playback pre/amp/speakers at that point.

[taturana]

well, it maybe could have something to do with jitter... i don't know..i remember from the dat days that digital tape is less susceptible to jitter, but who knows? just a guess...

[paterno]

Or maybe TLA just likes the sound of the 3348 converters. It could be that simple...

Plus, -- oh nevermind...

JP

[5down1up]

hes talking about using 24-bit digital Sony 3348 as the playback source.
its a digital tape machine being able to shoot of 48 tracks.
has nothing to do with the PT bounce feature.
its just his way of doing things i guess.

[Mike Caffrey]

I think Paterno's got it.

But read very carefully what TLA said and think about it for a moment.

Originally Posted by Riddler

"When I first used the 24-bit 3348, I immediately noticed that the top end didn't sound as choked. I love it when people bring in stuff on 24-bit Pro Tools and we go digitally into the 24-bit 3348, because it sounds awesome.'

When he first used the Sony machine, ProTools didn't exist. So if he noticed the top end not sounding choked when he first used it, it was not in comparison with ProTools.

The second sentence also does not compare the 3348 with ProTools, so there's not point at which he's saying he does it becuase it sounds better.

Both TLA and CLA do the same thing. They have assistants prep the track so that the drums come up in the same position on the console and they have a formula for how to sum tracks when there are more than 48.

They are such creatures of habit that CLA doesn't even change his compressors. If he doesn't like the sound he gets when plugging in to one, he just plugs in to another one.

After years and years of the formula working, they're not going to to change from a 3348 to ProTools for playback.

[Riddler]

Originally Posted by Jim Kerr

I think "uploading" rather than Bouncing would be the proper statement, right?
I've also wondered about this. Digital information > new machine = Same digital information. You would think its all about the playback pre/amp/speakers at that point.

This is what I thought - surely you're just moving all the 1's and 0's from one storage medium to another. This is what makes me think it must be because TLA likes the sound of the 3348s D->A converters rather than the sound of Digidesign D->A.

Tim.

[Mike Caffrey]

And the rewind time.

[Eide]

Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey

And the rewind time.

Definitely.
It seems that a lot of these cats who has always worked with tape has their routines based on the workflow you get operating with tape and not a DAW. Rewind time being one of them.

[T_R_S]

Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey

And the rewind time.

Funny I always thought that was road block to my work flow.

[NUVMUSIC]

Shoot me down in flames here but I feel tape generally sounds better when mixing down digitally.

[BillSimpkins]

Is anyone willing to do a null test here? Lets see if there is actually a difference..

[PRobb]

Originally Posted by BillSimpkins

Is anyone willing to do a null test here? Lets see if there is actually a difference..

Good question.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by NUVMUSIC

Shoot me down in flames here but I feel tape generally sounds better when mixing down digitally.

Care to explain what you mean here?

The thread is about DIGITAL tape - not analogue. You want to talk about how analogue tape is better, try a different thread.

The OP has things backwards anyway (all those years ago!) - it's the sound of the converters that's the defining factor here.

[NUVMUSIC]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

Care to explain what you mean here?

The thread is about DIGITAL tape - not analogue. You want to talk about how analogue tape is better, try a different thread.

The OP has things backwards anyway (all those years ago!) - it's the sound of the converters that's the defining factor here.

Hey psycho_monkey
May have been slightly off the topic but digital tape is exactly what I was referring to. Mixing down to 2 track digital tape sounds better in my experience. Why...? Who knows, but I do hear a difference.

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by NUVMUSIC

Hey psycho_monkey
May have been slightly off the topic but digital tape is exactly what I was referring to. Mixing down to 2 track digital tape sounds better in my experience. Why...? Who knows, but I do hear a difference.

Nah, that's on topic!

But through which conversion? And to what digital tape (format I mean, not manufacturer!)?

[popmann]

Yes, DA. I don't get why there's confusion? He's gonna be using 32+ channels of DA...to feed the ANALOG mixer...

No one ever claimed ProTools was used because it sounded better than the alternatives.