Aahh! the romance with tape or just too many Tape OP articles?

[Jamz]

I've run into a fair number of musicians/engineers that have a fervent admiration...damn! almost militant love for 2" tape. Although when some were questioned the actual use and experience of 2"seemed elusive in their recording routine. One talented young graduate from a fairly well known and expensive college with a very good audio program asked me..."What would the Beatles be without tape?". Interesting way of viewing the talent chain.

So...just curious.
How many Gearslutz have actually used 2" tape and set up tape machines...especially, those Slutz still in their 20's?
At one time every good assistant engineer had to know how and do normal stuff...
- Threading the tape
- Setting up the machine
- Laying tones and record pad
- What does MRL stand for?
- Aligning heads
- Splicing tape
- Cleaning heads

extra points
- Baking reels

[drBill]

Well, I'm not 20. But I've aligned more tape machines that I could ever possibly count so I figure I can answer the beatles question and a couple of others. The Beatles on digital???? They would be the Beatles. It wasn't the tape that made them who they were. I can also 1000% guarantee you one thing. IF digital had been available, George Martin would have utilized it to some degree. No doubt in a highly creative way.

It's not the arrow, it's the indian as they say.

Analog tape is cool, definately has a vibe. But it also has a bunch of negative stuff like:

Tape noise
Distortion (can't get rid of it if you WANT to. You can minimize it though)
Wow and Flutter
Head wear / Azimuth issues resulting in some tracks not performing as well
Bleed between tracks.....Oh man, if we could only have avoided THAT
HF loss with multiple playbacks. The more OD's and playbacks, the less HF left on tape.
Compression when you didn't need it.
Saturation when you didn't want it.
Lack of transparency when you DID want it.
And on and on.

Every format has issues to deal with and problems to conquer. Digital, Analog and no doubt whatever we move too after our current configurations.

Human nature always makes us think we can create genius if we only had what the greats had: A Neve console, the room at Olympic, and an Analog machine....you fill in the blank. The reason for so much of the Tape Love is because those espousing it have never had much experience with the real deal. I have and although I miss it from time to time (nostalgia is for old men, right??) if I never have to align another machine or bake another tape, it's WAAAAAaaaaaayyyyyy too soon.

There's no doubt that if you had a time machine and went back with a digital machine to those sessions and took away their toys, you'd get something a bit different, but equally brilliant.

With the tools that are readily available and inexpensive today, the only reason someone is not creating GREAT MUSIC is themselves. Gear just is no longer an issue.

Great music is great music is great music and it stems from the soul, the envrionment and the mind - it has pretty much ZERO to do with what you record it on. Certainly certain forms of music certainly call for either a digital or an analog approach. It's up to the engineer and producer to decide what best suits the music. But neither digital OR analog is a magic panacea, and both have their advantages, problems and workarounds.

Geez, where would today's crop of musicians/bands be without beat detective and autotune???? tutt

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by Jamz

I've run into a fair number of musicians/engineers that have a fervent admiration...damn! almost militant love for 2" tape. Although when some were questioned the actual use and experience of 2"seemed elusive in their recording routine. One talented young graduate from a fairly well known and expensive college with a very good audio program asked me..."What would the Beatles be without tape?". Interesting way of viewing the talent chain.

So...just curious.
How many Gearslutz have actually used 2" tape and set up tape machines...especially, those Slutz still in their 20's?
At one time every good assistant engineer had to know how and do normal stuff...
- Threading the tape
- Setting up the machine
- Laying tones and record pad
- What does MRL stand for?
- Aligning heads
- Splicing tape
- Cleaning heads

extra points
- Baking reels

I actually just pulled a reel out of the oven when I saw this post!

I am in my 20s and regularly calibrate/clean/use a pair of Studar A827's and occasionally a Sony 2inch.... and a few tape 2-tracks.

Tape is not that special. People make it out to be the most amazing beautiful thing ever. Kind of a pain in the ass really.

Ill stick with the 192's for 90% of all my recording.

All the tape-era engineers around here would rather NOT calibrate the machine/deal with all the problems and just start working on their next sonic masterpieces.

[Jamz]

Originally Posted by drBill

Well, I'm not 20. But I've aligned more tape machines that I could ever possibly count so I figure I can answer the beatles question and a couple of others. The Beatles on digital???? They would be the Beatles. It wasn't the tape that made them who they were. I can also 1000% guarantee you one thing. IF digital had been available, George Martin would have utilized it to some degree. No doubt in a highly creative way.

It's not the arrow, it's the indian as they say.

Analog tape is cool, definately has a vibe. But it also has a bunch of negative stuff like:

Tape noise
Distortion (can't get rid of it if you WANT to. You can minimize it though)
Wow and Flutter
Head wear / Azimuth issues resulting in some tracks not performing as well
Bleed between tracks.....Oh man, if we could only have avoided THAT
HF loss with multiple playbacks. The more OD's and playbacks, the less HF left on tape.
Compression when you didn't need it.
Saturation when you didn't want it.
Lack of transparency when you DID want it.
And on and on.

Every format has issues to deal with and problems to conquer. Digital, Analog and no doubt whatever we move too after our current configurations.

Human nature always makes us think we can create genius if we only had what the greats had: A Neve console, the room at Olympic, and an Analog machine....you fill in the blank. The reason for so much of the Tape Love is because those espousing it have never had much experience with the real deal. I have and although I miss it from time to time (nostalgia is for old men, right??) if I never have to align another machine or bake another tape, it's WAAAAAaaaaaayyyyyy too soon.

There's no doubt that if you had a time machine and went back with a digital machine to those sessions and took away their toys, you'd get something a bit different, but equally brilliant.

With the tools that are readily available and inexpensive today, the only reason someone is not creating GREAT MUSIC is themselves. Gear just is no longer an issue.

Great music is great music is great music and it stems from the soul, the envrionment and the mind - it has pretty much ZERO to do with what you record it on. Certainly certain forms of music certainly call for either a digital or an analog approach. It's up to the engineer and producer to decide what best suits the music. But neither digital OR analog is a magic panacea, and both have their advantages, problems and workarounds.

Geez, where would today's crop of musicians/bands be without beat detective and autotune???? tutt

Well said. We must be around the same age
BTW I do enjoy Tape Op.

Originally Posted by mayor99

I actually just pulled a reel out of the oven when I saw this post!

I am in my 20s and regularly calibrate/clean/use a pair of Studar A827's and occasionally a Sony 2inch.... and a few tape 2-tracks.

Tape is not that special. People make it out to be the most amazing beautiful thing ever. Kind of a pain in the ass really.

Ill stick with the 192's for 90% of all my recording.

All the tape-era engineers around here would rather NOT calibrate the machine/deal with all the problems and just start working on their next sonic masterpieces.

Real experience...cheers!

[basho]

You must applaud bands like Autechre, Tortoise etc for making records that are actually advancing the digital medium, instead of simply referencing the past as is so often the case nowadays with the craze for all things "vintage".

I would hazard a guess that this militaristic fetish-ization of tape is simply a knee-jerk reaction against the great swathes of auto-tuned, Pro-tooled garbage that constitutes the majority of released mainstream music. Unfortunately, the great advantages of digital recording nowadays almost always tend to direct the work processes towards a direction that is extremely hackneyed and cliched.

Put it this way, if Brian Wilson had had the editing possibilities of Protools way back, he would've finished "Smile" with time to spare in 1966. Where are all the Smiles and Bitches Brews and Tomorrow Never Knows of today that are blowing kids' minds? Instead, all we have to show for our technological marvels are Paris Hilton and Hillary Duff records that are a close shade away from the vocal stylings of Stephen Hawking. So laughably tragic.

Sorry for the rant, a bit too much festive drinking going on in the household...

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Jamz

Well said. We must be around the same age

LOL I'm sorry....

Originally Posted by Jamz

BTW I do enjoy Tape Op.

thumbsupthumbsup Me too!

[Bob Olhsson]

FWIW George Martin quipped to a few of us around ten years ago that if they'd of had Pro Tools, Sgt. Peppers probably still wouldn't be finished!

I love and really miss tape. I don't miss the sound as much as I miss the hard boundaries and the need to start making decisions early in the process. Having technical limitations means frequently having to choose between which is better, approach A vs. approach B, rather than having the flexibility to put together something more closely resembling your concepts.

I recently went over all of the fifteen or twenty mixes I'd done over the past year. I found the best were the ones where I'd been experimenting with only using the Waves API 550 eq. plug-ins on every track because I felt I had done some of my most satisfying mixing on API boards during the early 1970s. The fixed frequencies and 2 dB. steps had put me back in that choosing mode that I'd almost forgotten about.

[Steffmo]

Bob,

Thats a great observation.

But, as you also illustrated it can be dealt with with discipline and commitment.

I feel very comfortable with the tones that I'm getting going into the rig. But I do feel that getting the soup to gel will perhaps always be a bit easier of tape and a console. That being said I think the future is obvious and it behooves me to make myself the best ITB mixer I can be, allowing for as much analog outboard as is available.

[dbbubba]

Wwell. most of my assistants from back in the days of analog have gone on to great things.
A BIG salute to both Chris and Brian, but I wouldn't have wanted either of them them to do a tape machine alignment much less "aligning heads" without me supervising closely!

Chris would have figured it out on his own and so would Brian, but Brian would be fussing over it to this day fifteen years later!

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

I don't miss the sound as much as I miss the hard boundaries and the need to start making decisions early in the process.

Bob, that's something I try to guard against as much as possible. Sometimes impossible due to clients demands, but like you, I find often that the things I enjoy the most about songs/mixes are the things I had to make a hard decision about and regretted the decision, only to come back later and have it be my favorite part. Without boundries, those joyus times never happen. Or rarely.

[Fleaman]

I miss the imperfections of what's captured to tape, meaning the non-perfect performance of the real humans making music (what tape production forces you to do).

That said, tape has a sound. You can get that sound with the Anamod and even better, you can get it w/o the negatives of tape (hiss, wow/flutter, tape wear, etc.). Problem is the Anamod ain't cheap, but neither is everything that encompasses using tape.

As funny as Sir George's comment about Sgt. Pepper never being finished if Pro-Tools was available? Unfortunately, I don't think he was kidding

[thenoodle]

....." Kind of a pain in the ass really...."

I agree. Tape is most magic for those who can't get their hands on it. For me, I grew up with it, I still have a bunch of multitrack 8, 16, and 24 track machines that I sometimes fire up. But mostly ... not.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by Fleaman

I miss the imperfections of what's captured to tape, meaning the non-perfect performance of the real humans making music (what tape production forces you to do).

I don't buy the "imperfection" excuse one bit. The beginning of a sample or a transient is not the beginning of a note. Only synthesizers have ever been perfectly equal tempered which really means only sort of but never really in tune.

Making real music sound like it was sequenced and played out of a sampler is stupid. It's a process that can only turn musical train wrecks into muzak.

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

I don't buy the "imperfection" excuse one bit. The beginning of a sample or a transient is not the beginning of a note. Only synthesizers have ever been perfectly equal tempered which really means only sort of but never really in tune.

Making real music sound like it was sequenced and played out of a sampler is stupid. It's a process that can only turn musical train wrecks into muzak.

Not sure if you misunderstood me....or me you, but what I meant is I miss the limitations of the post production aspect of tape. Having computer jockeys sitting in front of a DAW screen for hours on end manipulating the 'music', 'song', etc. to major label perfection takes much of the soul out. I miss the production limitations that tape provided at the time.

I do realize the Genie is out of the bottle though

[vernier]

Beatles, Doors, CSN&Y, Sinatra, Nat Cole, Patsy Cline, Led Zeppelin, (fill in a hundred others) wouldn't sound close to what they did if not for tape. Music is vibe, and tape captures it.

And btw, working with tape is routine and fun ..and simple compared to the myriad of unmusical related detail that plagues digital.

'

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by vernier

Beatles, Doors, CSN&Y, Sinatra, Nat Cole, Patsy Cline, Led Zeppelin, (fill in a hundred others) wouldn't sound close to what they did if not for tape. Music is vibe, and tape captures it.

And btw, working with tape is routine and fun ..and simple compared to the myriad of unmusical related detail that plagues digital.

'

I have a feeling that the Beatles, Doors, CSN&Y, Sinatra, Nat Cole, Patsy Cline, & Led Zeppelin sounded like the Beatles, Doors, CSN&Y, Sinatra, Nat Cole, Patsy Cline before tape ever entered the picture. (Live performance anyone?).

Tape is a tool. Simple as that.

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by Mayor999

Tape is a tool. Simple as that.

But it's a simple tool with limited options....those limitations kept a lot of base tracks vibe intact. The current trend is to mechanically perfect the song/recording by computing out the vibe (grid edits, autotune...you know the drill).

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by Fleaman

The current trend is.....

Who cares? You don't have to buy it. You don't have to do the edits. You don't have to autotune. Pass on the next gig that has an artist who wants you to do that.

The trend will pass.

The fact that people record digitally does NOT mean that its autotuned/edited.

The fact that people record onto tape does not mean it doesnt get bounced into PT and edited/autotuned then bounced back onto tape.

I can calibrate the Studer A827 to be pretty damn close to ruler flat and sound pretty much indistinguishable from digital... does that mean the "vibe" is gone?

So i guess I don't understand your point?

(Sorry... i get punchy when I have to fly on airlines.... just left on a trip & its late at night...i mean no offense!)

[judah]

I turned 30 a few months ago but I had a 2" machine (Tascam ATR80) for about 6 years in my first studio (from 2000 to 2006). I used to calibrate the machine in the morning while preparing coffee and setting everything up. I had an MRL tape (the shortest version, 3 tone) and was able to calibrate 8 channel in one pass. At the time I was running the studio with a D&R 4000 24 channel, a few compressor, a couple fx, a bunch of mics and a computer to print mixes to.

I miss tape. I always look around for old Studers or MCI and would like to get a 16 on 2" sooner or later. For my way of working it is the best support out there. I love threating the tape around the take up flange, hit play and whatch the needles jump. BTW, I had my share of problem with the Tascam, it was hard to calibrate with SM900 and close to impossible with GP9, a couple pinch rollers died on me, the PSU heated up too much causing the machine to drift badly, return to zero was alway off by a mile and so on.

[themaidsroom]

i have a great little studio in new york - i am lucky. with access to both tape and
digital 24/7, there is something amazing about tape that does not exist anywhere
else. it is soft and detailed simultaneously. it has great low end. radar sounds pretty
good. still not tape. go somewhere that has both for a week and really listen.
for me, the sound is everything, but i also agree 100% with bob. the process.
i have an electric pencil sharpener, big erasers and track sheets in my control
room - you hit 23, or 15 or 8 and you must make choices.



be well


- jack

[geeek]

I'm in my 20s and It's been hard for me to get the experience I desire with equipment such as tape.

I recently set out to make sure I understood the physics and principles of tape, and gain real experience with it.

I had someone show me how to line up the machine, thread the tape, do tones.. and work with tape in a creative way.

I had a little time to experiment with different ways of using the machine (at different speeds, different types of tape, hitting the tape at different levels etc etc)

If tape was cheaper, and the methods and ways behind using tape were clearer (which they are to me now) Then I think it would be used more widely by young engineers like myself starting out.

I had read about the sonic differences, but actually wanted to understand it.. It just so hapened I was working on a project that would benefit highly frm tape.. So I made sure I used it.. For the project, and myself.


For me.. The music I like to work with.. It's what I want to be using. There's something about the way tape handles sound.. Transients are defined but less piercing... The way tape "compresses" audio, allowing sounds to sit with other sounds in a way that to me feels "organic."

Plus the fact that everything matures over time.. As tape does.. But in a totally digital world, it doesn't. Tae will sound different on different machines, at different humidities and different ages etc.. Digital is digital is digital.. It's a recreation in 1010101 or something that was once movement of air.. In the same respect that tape utilizes magnetism, which is a product of nature.



One of the big problems with tape (aside from the physical size of the machines/tapes and the costs) is the mysticism and bollocks surrounding it... Such as that suggested slightly in the OP.

Tape is not that hard to work with.. I agree, it's hard to master.. Splicing/aligning quickly/dropping-in etc.. But it's a mechanical piece of equipment.. Which can be learned by anyone who thinks in such a mechanical way imho.

People are scared off by such posts.

It's like cutting a vinyl... I was taught by an awesome mastering engineer recently, the intricacies of cutting a 7".. It's genuinely not that hard to do.. To master it, and make it your best craft, comes with patience and time, and practice.. But so does anything.. You gotta work with the gear to get to that point tho.. Which is why people end up specialising in certain things.


I think the facts and help should be there for people.. And the hierarchical bollocks as exhibited by many posters on GS and the like needs to end.

People are curious, which is why they ask.. They need the help to learn what it can do to sound.. If it's for them, then they can go for it.

It seems a lot of older engineers see the tape thing as an elitist club.. when it shouldn't be.

I agree the hype around what tape can do to sound is a bit crazy.. The difference is rather subtle on program material..
But when it comes to stacking. the difference is huge imho.. But it's obviously one thing in a brilliant chain of hype word gear (valves, transformers etc) that gets the sound people crave (such as the sound of any late 60's - 70's Leonard Cohen recordings, or Beatles records from the same era) But these records do sound fantastic, and tape is a big part of it.

With CD's/mp3's and other compressed shite being churned out daily.. I think tape is ever more important to add some form of realism back into the sterile shite on the shelves.. Disposable music needs to end.. Ad tape is one step in the right direction I think.

Also.. I think we're used to a world where hard disk soace is worth shit, and you can scrap it and arrange and pro-tools the cock off whatever take you've got.. So the musician does a lackluster performance and some twunt "fixes" it in pro-tools.. It's ridiculous.. People should play it right or f*ck off.

Viva tape! And helping people to use it right, or creatively.. Being supportive is the way forward imo

[vernier]

Well done, binary.
'

[dbbubba]

It is a double-sided coin, but with digital there is a whole area of control over your sound you loose that is there with analog tape.

With tape you have all kinds of options when it comes to your actual recording medium.
With digital you have different converters, but they really only range between sh*tty and pretty damn good sounding.
With digital you have the choice of sample rates (44.1, 48, 96K and so on...) and bit depth (16, 24 bit.)
Still, these are pretty subtle compared to your choices with analog tape.

With analog tape you have choices that are MUCH more apparent.
They effect your sound way more than the digital choices.

Track width
Tape Speed
Tape formulation
Record level
Equalization curve
Noise reduction (or not)

Of course, these options allow people WAYYYY more room to f*ck it all up, too!

I promise that I am not trying to sound elitist saying this, but...
Analog tape really isn't for the casual recordist.
This is why personal studios have flourished.
The hard stuff is already done for you.
MUCH fewer choices!
.... and this is why I believe people fuss over stuff like "stacking theories."

[Jim Williams]

Nostalgia ain't what it used to be.

I've never used an analog tape machine that was precisly and correctly aligned. They all needed a touch up with the Audio Precision as all the bias points listed by the tape manufacturer's are wrong and will vary for each channel. Just to get a flat response requires careful compromise.

Once precisly aligned, THD drops to .15 % from .55% and the results start to sound more like the hard drive with great converters, without the transient response. I don't miss the 4~5% THD at 5k hz and 100 hz though. .0006% THD just sounds better to me.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[drBill]

Tape is a tool. It's that simple. So is digital. Both do something the other doesn't. Given the mandate to choose only ONE, for me, it would be digital. I've learned (mostly now) how to overcome the issues I don't like about digital. With Analog, I COULDN'T physically overcome the issues it brings to the table. They are each tools and should be approached accordingly. Reach for the one that suits the job you're doing. All the tape nostalgia and elevating tape to godlike status makes me laugh so hard. I remember clearly when digital came on the scene in LA. As a matter of fact I did one of the first sessions on a digital machine in LA. (Was it soundstream or something like that?? Can't remember.) The brand never came to market if I recall correctly, but engineers were SO EXCITED to ditch analog and it's problems they were falling over themselves to record digitally. Now mind you, these are the very engineers you analog worshiping guys see on all your beloved albums that you believe couldn't be done digitally. In retrospective, we now know digital has it's problems as well. Maximize the benefits, minimize the problems. THAT'S your job as an AE.






Now, that said, if I could seperate "tape" from the "machine", I'd be able to get along with it better. Unfortunately, both work together and fighting the machine requires a much higher hassle to vibe ratio that I'm willing to put up with these days.

My thoughts on MCI tape machines in response to Danny on another thread, leaving them running and the joys of ANALOG TAPE life :




I was scared to leave her turned on. I never knew what she might get into while I was out of the house. One time I came in and found her flapping tape like a fish out of water. That was an ugly scene. Ultimately I hold myself responsible for that affair as I left her turned on and alone with that good for nothing lousy tape in her slot. Yeah, I just couldn't leave her turned on and sleep at night. My electric and AC bills couldn't take it. On or off. Didn't matter. I thought she was going to milk me dry. And since I'm not a tech, it was several hundred a month average to keep her styling like she wanted. Sometimes a lot more. And that was years ago. Yeah, she was a cranky @!$%# either way - on or off. I think she didn't respect me because I didn't have a big osciliscope. Ultimately, I'd only leave her turned on if I was working on her late into the night, knowing that I would be back to tend to her needs first thing in the morning. Yeah, we had a passionate love/hate thing for close to 15 years until I finally put a bullet in her and pulled the plug. Put her out to pasture for in exchange for the younger hotter alternative - Digital Tape and then her ultimate hotty replacement - PT.

Over the years???? Logic, transport, one motor, remote issues, intermittents, capstain, blown card electronics, bulbs galore, logic, transport, etc. Rinse and repeat. Oh yeah, and I replaced a couple dozen 10 turn pots thanks to that bum that used to keep her aligned before me. I can't tell you how many times I've watched a tech lift up her skirt - staring blankly and wondering what was wrong with her. Aarrgh!!! tutt

She needed someone who could tame her and give her the love she deserved. Idylldon is that guy. He's completely rebuilt her, and she'll be seeing action again soon I think. thumbsup

Do I miss her? Sometimes. Usually late at night on a cold winter evening, when my bass just begs for a little slamming compression. Or maybe when I just want a little tape slap at 15IPS. But every time I think about her, I just look over at my tweaker tool and check the balance on my check book. That brings me right back into reality!

But hey, that's what you get with "old tape machines" like the OP asked about. They need and deserve love and care and a firm hand. You've gotta be a tech like Danny or Don to keep em happy and out of trouble. Otherwise they will RUN YOUR LIFE!!! Oh yeah, and it helps to have a big oscilloscope!!!



bp

[BudgetMC]

In '93, when I, my Brother, and a friend decided to set up a small studio. None of us had any real engineering experience, though my Brother and I had both run sound years. We had a long conversation about what sort of medium we would record to. The main choice was ADAT or 8-Track Tape. I lobbied long and hard for tape. My main argument was that tape machines were at the peak of their development curve, yet realtively cheap thanks to the sudden popularity of ADATs. My argument carried the day, and we bought a half-inch 8 Track. Within a month, we traded it out for a Blackface ADAT. Why? Tape costs, slow set-up, and cumbersome handling. Yeah, it looked pretty cool, and it sounded good when we occasionally got everything lined up right... but as part-timers, we didn't have time for all that.

As basement bozos, the ADAT was a thing of beauty for us. Slap in a Super VHS tape ($4 each! Woohooo!), arm those tracks and go! People slag ADATS all the time, now, but we sure cut a lot of good music on ours...

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by Mayor999

Who cares? You don't have to buy it. You don't have to do the edits. You don't have to autotune. Pass on the next gig that has an artist who wants you to do that.

The trend will pass.

The fact that people record digitally does NOT mean that its autotuned/edited.

The fact that people record onto tape does not mean it doesnt get bounced into PT and edited/autotuned then bounced back onto tape.

I can calibrate the Studer A827 to be pretty damn close to ruler flat and sound pretty much indistinguishable from digital... does that mean the "vibe" is gone?

So i guess I don't understand your point?

(Sorry... i get punchy when I have to fly on airlines.... just left on a trip & its late at night...i mean no offense!)

Sorry, but basically this is Wrong in todays world.

Major Labels require perfect to near perfect edited/timed and autotuned mixes.

The artist usually doesn't have much if any say in this.

Most everyone doesn't have the luxury to 'pass on the gig'.

Yes, to me, this Trend takes out much of the Vibe.

You are right in a sense...there are smaller indie artists that can buck this requirement, but except for some of us here and their small fan base, the general public would never know of them.

I do know that the A827 can be pretty uncolored, especially if you don't hit it hard. But if your working on a Major label act, you will be editing and fixing said Studer base tracks in a DAW (with very few exceptions).

Even if you don't 'do' major labels, it still trickles down, not to mention bands I like who happened to be on, or move up to major labels, will get the de-vibed treatment to some extent.

This is what I miss about tape. And I also miss realizing that some of the bands/musicians that I idolized as a kid were not perfect, their imperfections forever laid to albums that I now know had human flaws, but that makes it more unique to me, less homogenized. Now everything is super-human.

I don't think this 'trend will pass'.

I will admit that back when I started (which was with tape), I thought punching-in was cheating

.

[MasterTrax]

"Instead, all we have to show for our technological marvels are Paris Hilton and Hillary Duff records that are a close shade away from the vocal stylings of Stephen Hawking."

How unfortunately true !!!!!!!!!

Stephen Hawking for godsakes.....ROTFLMMFAO ....but I'm pretty sure that boy doesn't NEED to autotune....

As for me, I missed tape until digital came outta its dark ages and made it to 24/44.1 and up. The first digital machine I heard that did not make my recordings sound like they were etched in glass was a cool and welcome breeze.

I keep the tape machine around...sometimes a guitar track or something needs to be puffed up, and mixes done on tape sound especially nice sometimes.

[Bob Olhsson]

I think people confuse the effortlessness of working with pro electronics vs. prosumer electronics for analog vs. digital. Most common digital gear does not have that great big fat effortless sweet spot that a pro analog recorder has. Prosumer analog recorders had the very same tiny tiny sweet spot problem.

And Jim, I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who rarely encountered properly aligned machines!

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by Fleaman

Sorry, but basically this is Wrong in todays world.

Major Labels require perfect to near perfect edited/timed and autotuned mixes.

The artist usually doesn't have much if any say in this.

Most everyone doesn't have the luxury to 'pass on the gig'.

Yes, to me, this Trend takes out much of the Vibe.

You are right in a sense...there are smaller indie artists that can buck this requirement, but except for some of us here and their small fan base, the general public would never know of them.

I do know that the A827 can be pretty uncolored, especially if you don't hit it hard. But if your working on a Major label act, you will be editing and fixing said Studer base tracks in a DAW (with very few exceptions).

Even if you don't 'do' major labels, it still trickles down, not to mention bands I like who happened to be on, or move up to major labels, will get the de-vibed treatment to some extent.

This is what I miss about tape. And I also miss realizing that some of the bands/musicians that I idolized as a kid were not perfect, their imperfections forever laid to albums that I now know had human flaws, but that makes it more unique to me, less homogenized. Now everything is super-human.

I don't think this 'trend will pass'.

I will admit that back when I started (which was with tape), I thought punching-in was cheating

.

You misunderstand me. All the major label stuff I work on goes straight into the 192's and I LOVE it.

I am merely saying that if you are going to bitch and moan (which YOU aren't but some people are) about editing and tuning then its hypocritical to continue to work on such projects. Turn down the gig if you have such a huge problem with it!

I am going to continue doing highly edited/tuned projects. Mostly because I enjoy this type of music.... sue me

I just hate when people whine about it yet continue to do it on their own projects.

Tape VS. Digital does NOT mean "Real performance" vs Editing/timed/tuned performance. Great musicians will sound great no matter what you record them on. Tape makes no difference in the way Paul plays bass... i am fairly certain that the beatles would still kick ass if they were recorded on a DAT.