Tape Speed & Fidelity

[soupking]

Does increasing the tape speed when recording affect the fidelity of the recording at all?

Like is recording at 30ips better than 15ips for some reason?

[Benmrx]

It's a different sound altogether. You'll get more bass response at 15 ips, you'll get less his at 30 ips. There's others, but those 2 are the most obvious...at least to my ears.

[soupking]

K, so it's kind of like the mini mouse effect, just less dramatic. right on.

[elpezpr]

Or you could get Dolby SR for every channel and still record without hiss @ 15ips.

[soupking]

The problem I have with Dolby SR is that all the ones I've seen are connected through unbalanced RCA cables. If I find any that are balanced XLR, I might make the purchase...As long as I'm not spending insane $.

[Benmrx]

Or just slam the tape so hard that you're WELL above the noise floor.....which is how I usually operate.

I've always been a bigger fan of 15 ips

[soupking]

Or just slam the tape so hard that you're WELL above the noise floor.....which is how I usually operate.

I've always been a bigger fan of 15 ips

Cool, that's what I planned on doing. Being balanced gets me entering the tape at 4+ as opposed to -10 like many reel to reels. That can't hurt I imagine.

I was just wondering if 30ips would help this angle in any way.

Thanks man.

[mymuse77]

A faster tape will always capture more detail.

[Brent Hahn]

I've always noticed a big difference in the amount of harmonic distortion on vocals -- there's way less of it at 30, all else being equal. Especially noticeable in long, drawn- out vowels. A rock lead vocal might be better at 15, but a choral thing or a jingle is usually better at 30.

There's also more fidelity in the wow-and-flutter sense at 30. You might not want it, though. Speed anomalies are a big part of many classic records. I'd swear that for "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" they yanked the flywheel off the capstan.

[max cooper]

The low end effect is the "head bump".

http://www.endino.com/graphs/

[wilcofan]

At 15ips you are naturally closer in cycles to the lower frequencies and I always find bass seems to resonate better. But the transients and air are further away (relative to 30ips) and of course the noise is usually the deal-breaker.

I never found the choice to be without compromise.

[themaidsroom]

i really love both 15 ips
and 30 ips - they are very individual sounds
the sound is also related to trackwidth
2" 16 track 15 ips is a great sound
there are many different sounds with
the leval that sounds are printed......
slamming the tape can be a great sound,
but not printing anything above - 10 can
provide alot of air and space....
there are many variables
i find the new rmg 900 to be
amazingly quiet at 15 ips


be well


- jack

[stevep]

Studer 820 at 15 ips With Dolby SR here, RMG Sm 900

[u b k]

Originally Posted by mymuse77

A faster tape will always capture more detail.

for me, it's more accurate to say a faster tape will capture *different* details, and capture them differently.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[Drumsound]

I find the both speeds are cool for different reasons. 15ips is thicker and gooey-er, 30 ips is more crisp. I switched my machine to 15ips CCIR/IEC (the Eoropian standard)a while back after using 15ips NAB (N. American standard). IEC is quieter than NAB and I like that about it. It still has the really nice bottom often associated with 15ips.

I've been using 15ips a lot lately, so I'm kind of jonesing to do something at 30ips. I think a project coming up will go at 30ips.

[soupking]

Thanks for all the responses everybody.

That rocks!

[nandoanalog]

Tape sucks....

Why not just put the compressors in your tape machine before they enter your ADC? You`ll get "tape" compression anyway....

[soupking]

Tape sucks....

Why not just put the compressors in your tape machine before they enter your ADC? You`ll get "tape" compression anyway....

nuance

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by mymuse77

A faster tape will always capture more detail.

I think this is pretty well covered above but to recap:

• Faster tape speed means better high frequency capture but reduced bass capture.
  
• Slower means better bass and less high end.
  
• There's always hiss (in a sense) -- but with higher speeds, the pitch of the hiss is shifted up and more of it becomes inaudible.

[vernier]

Hiss is not worth mentioning ..the greatest records were sans Dolby, mixed at either 15 or 30. Its all good.

[soupking]

Hiss is not worth mentioning ..the greatest records were sans Dolby, mixed at either 15 or 30. Its all good.

Yup, and it wasn't all 2" either.

I'm not a fan of cassette tape, nor on the PT witch hunt.

It's just what I dig personally, like cheesy 80's flicks that use gooey/stringy blue screen effects instead of CGI. Not that it's better.

You can fake the real thing in a number ways, both sides are really wrong cuz it isn't real anyway. That's why the arguments regarding PTools and tape quality hit the rafters.

[s.d.finley]

Originally Posted by elpezpr

Or you could get Dolby SR for every channel and still record without hiss @ 15ips.

You'll need both encoders aswellas decoders!

[max cooper]

Originally Posted by vernier

Hiss is not worth mentioning ..the greatest records were sans Dolby, mixed at either 15 or 30. Its all good.

Agree.. Sometimes the hiss is an element of the mix. Check out Dylan's Lay Lady Lay. Vibe city.

[Drumsound]

Originally Posted by nandoanalog

Tape sucks....

Why not just put the compressors in your tape machine before they enter your ADC? You`ll get "tape" compression anyway....

First off...
Have you ever wrked on a good deck in good shape?

Second,
Tape is about a lot more than "tape compression" \

Third,
"Tape compression" doesn't sound like any outboard compressor I know.

[nandoanalog]

Tape is about hiss, maintenance, 500$ for 5 minutes of media (that will wear with usage), compression, rewinding, changing media, aligning, lame headroom, bla bla bla.

In the end it will go through an ADC anyway.

No thanks.

[Drumsound]

Originally Posted by Drumsound

First off...
Have you ever wrked on a good deck in good shape?

Second,
Tape is about a lot more than "tape compression" \

Third,
"Tape compression" doesn't sound like any outboard compressor I know.

Originally Posted by nandoanalog

Tape is about hiss, maintenance, 500$ for 5 minutes of media (that will wear with usage), compression, rewinding, changing media, aligning, lame headroom, bla bla bla.

In the end it will go through an ADC anyway.

No thanks.

So I guess the answer is "No" you have not worked on a good deck.

[nandoanalog]

No good deck can scape from it.

Have you ever worked with a good ADC?

Faster, cheap media, incredible headroom, maintenance free, far more loyal to the sound source bla bla bla....

Tape is a major PIA.

[Drumsound]

Yes I have worked with great ADC. I have and love my RADAR 24 nyquist. I'm not dogging digital. I just also see the quality of analog as well.

You see, I have used both and I have an informed decision.

[nandoanalog]

I also see the quality of analog. But I also see the cons of analog.

In the end it will go through a ADC no matter what. End of story.

Get a lavry gold or something in the same league and then compare it to your fancy tape machine (everything wise).

Tape machine will lose big time.

[Mike Caffrey]

I've done that. Tape wins every time.

The analog working process kills digital every time.

To create and arm 24 tracks in protools I have to use three fingers and press three keys, then press "2" and "4". Then press enter. Then I may have to do some routing. Then I have to label all of the tracks, I can't do it during the takes because then the first takes will say "audio 1, audio 2...". Then I have to option click to arm all the tracks, unless of course there are others in the session which menas a lot more clicking.

To do the same in analog, I slide one finger abotu 8 inchs under the 24 arming switches. I can do that in under one second and then start recording. I can do documentations while the take is happening.


Then there's also levels etc. Tracking a band to tape is far faster than tracking to digital. There is an inherent difference in the process that has a positive effect on the performance, so even if tape didn't sound better, it sill beats digital when it comes to making great records.