TAPE

[Antoine8]

Originally Posted by joeq

what about it?

people with no experience of analog just lump it all together:

tube, tape, transistors, transformers, hardware, analog summing - you know all that non-digital "stuff".

What are you talking about exactly?

[audiogeek]

Originally Posted by Antoine8

What about recording through an analog console to a DAW? Letting your A/D Convertor do the work.

Will this make any difference to the sound you think? I have heard the results have been great when you mix OTB but still record into a DAW.

Will this make a difference? Compared to just going preamp-converter-computer? Absolutely. Whether its a good or bad difference is another discussion. And frankly depends on a slew of factors. Going through a Neve 80XX series in good condition might sound great. Going through an old noisy Mackie board in bad condition likely won't.

[kennybro]

Originally Posted by Lance Lawson

The best digital will ever hope to be is realistic.

I'm considering making this a quote at the bottom of every post.

[Antoine8]

Originally Posted by kennybro

I'm considering making this a quote at the bottom of every post.

do it

[Antoine8]

Originally Posted by audiogeek

Will this make a difference? Compared to just going preamp-converter-computer? Absolutely. Whether its a good or bad difference is another discussion. And frankly depends on a slew of factors. Going through a Neve 80XX series in good condition might sound great. Going through an old noisy Mackie board in bad condition likely won't.

Cool thanks for the reply.

I very much thought it would have an impact, and why i asked the question is because I am considering a nice little analog console.

[audiogeek]

Originally Posted by Antoine8

Cool thanks for the reply.

I very much thought it would have an impact, and why i asked the question is because I am considering a nice little analog console.

Yeah, I mean if you're trying to maximize the impact the analog electronics have on your signal, just be sure the audio goes through the whole channel strip before it goes out to your converter.

Depending on whatever console you're choosing, boards often have some sort of 'direct out' switch on each channel, which bypasses the channel strip entirely and sends the signal straight out the initial preamp stage to a line out. This design is intended to minimize the amount impact your analog board has on your audio signal.

That's the exact opposite of what you want, so make sure the 'direct' button (if there is one) is not engaged. Your audio signal will now leave the preamp, pass through the in-line EQ section, the other routing components (Aux section, channel fader, pan pots, etc). All of this will add a little noise or color to your audio signal, which theoretically is a bad thing, but effectively can be a very very good thing.

Plus, you get the bonus of now being able to use your board for mixdown, should you choose. Have fun.

[digitrax]

Tape is much more forgiving of overs.

You hit an ADC too hard, it just sounds bad - no other way to describe it.

You set your levels as carefully as you can, do sample runs, adjust and readjust, and then in the "magic take" (the one you'll never get nearly that good again), someone wails on a drum roll. There's nothing you can do in digital to save it - (well there is, but not completely).

Tape, when hit too hard, actually sounds good (to me), or at least not as bad.

I work almost exclusively in digital, but will always try (where budget allows) to get the rhythm section tracked to tape for the sound of tape occasionally being "pushed."

P.S.: Hey, this my 500th post - I clearly have too much time on my hands.

[Demonslave]

Basically to sum it up, if you don't have it, you will never know what you are missing. It sounds different running your audio through all those little parts and finally ending up magnetically on a tape reel. You will never know until you see and hear it for yourself. Period.

[Roy drage]

+1

Originally Posted by Demonslave

Basically to sum it up, if you don't have it, you will never know what you are missing. It sounds different running your audio through all those little parts and finally ending up magnetically on a tape reel. You will never know until you see and hear it for yourself. Period.

[Bullseye]

I spent the last 2 days recording a sax solo on Pro Tools. Both myself and the Sax player are musicians that have know each other for many years and started out recording when 24 tracks was still pretty much a big deal. Suffice to say it was tape recorders. There was no digital anything.

Considering the ease of what we did, the fact that we were able to do as many versions as we desired to be vetted out later, and the sound was clear, full and frankly very nice, neither of us have any longing to go back to the days of tape. It is extraordinarily impractical. When there was no other choice it was fine. But now, in 2012.

I just don't see why anyone needs to record to tape. If you absolutely must have the sound of saturated tape, then mix to tape if you must, must, must have natural tape distortion. Tape is just a luxury that is expensive and cumbersome and has more to do with ego and macho pride than sound. This is for people that listen to the gear more than the music to some extent. There are exception to be sure but for working pros that need to get things done, tape is just ridiculous nowadays.

I would add though that I would have no problem having something mixed by a mix engineer that uses tape. I might even desire it for certain types of music. But in general, its a rotary phone.....

[ofajen]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Tape is just a luxury that is expensive and cumbersome and has more to do with ego and macho pride than sound. This is for people that listen to the gear more than the music to some extent.

Wow, I had no idea. Thanks for clearing that up. I just thought that tape worked for me, and it's what I had. Now I've learned that it's about all this other stuff. However, I'll just have to live with the shame, because I'm too lazy and too cheap to buy a bunch of new digital gear.

Cheers,

Otto

[donnylang]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

I spent the last 2 days recording a sax solo on Pro Tools. Both myself and the Sax player are musicians that have know each other for many years and started out recording when 24 tracks was still pretty much a big deal. Suffice to say it was tape recorders. There was no digital anything.

Considering the ease of what we did, the fact that we were able to do as many versions as we desired to be vetted out later, and the sound was clear, full and frankly very nice, neither of us have any longing to go back to the days of tape. It is extraordinarily impractical. When there was no other choice it was fine. But now, in 2012.

I just don't see why anyone needs to record to tape. If you absolutely must have the sound of saturated tape, then mix to tape if you must, must, must have natural tape distortion. Tape is just a luxury that is expensive and cumbersome and has more to do with ego and macho pride than sound. This is for people that listen to the gear more than the music to some extent. There are exception to be sure but for working pros that need to get things done, tape is just ridiculous nowadays.

I would add though that I would have no problem having something mixed by a mix engineer that uses tape. I might even desire it for certain types of music. But in general, its a rotary phone.....

this is one of the silliest things I've ever read !

[audiogeek]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

I spent the last 2 days recording a sax solo on Pro Tools. Both myself and the Sax player are musicians that have know each other for many years and started out recording when 24 tracks was still pretty much a big deal. Suffice to say it was tape recorders. There was no digital anything.

Considering the ease of what we did, the fact that we were able to do as many versions as we desired to be vetted out later, and the sound was clear, full and frankly very nice, neither of us have any longing to go back to the days of tape. It is extraordinarily impractical. When there was no other choice it was fine. But now, in 2012.

I just don't see why anyone needs to record to tape. If you absolutely must have the sound of saturated tape, then mix to tape if you must, must, must have natural tape distortion. Tape is just a luxury that is expensive and cumbersome and has more to do with ego and macho pride than sound. This is for people that listen to the gear more than the music to some extent. There are exception to be sure but for working pros that need to get things done, tape is just ridiculous nowadays.

I would add though that I would have no problem having something mixed by a mix engineer that uses tape. I might even desire it for certain types of music. But in general, its a rotary phone.....

I don't disagree about the ease of workflow of digital.

The rest? Well... you just keep telling yourself that. Whatever helps you sleep at night!

[Keire]

tape sounds absolutely fantastic. it sounds better than digital. it is wider, has more depth, more tone and captures detail in such an incredible and musical way. recording to tape first makes digital tracks sound better too. and my favorite part about tape is working without a computer....people use their ears. they talk. they listen. they focus. they commit. its an amazing thing.

[gevermil]

I am macho

[spectrasound]

...but what is always overlooked is this; There are 3 important elements that have nothing to do with tape vs/DAW. The priority is as follows:

1. A good song.

2. A good performance.

3. A good space to record the song in.

The rest is "nuts & bolts" ..... right?

[Antoine8]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

I spent the last 2 days recording a sax solo on Pro Tools. Both myself and the Sax player are musicians that have know each other for many years and started out recording when 24 tracks was still pretty much a big deal. Suffice to say it was tape recorders. There was no digital anything.

Considering the ease of what we did, the fact that we were able to do as many versions as we desired to be vetted out later, and the sound was clear, full and frankly very nice, neither of us have any longing to go back to the days of tape. It is extraordinarily impractical. When there was no other choice it was fine. But now, in 2012.

I just don't see why anyone needs to record to tape. If you absolutely must have the sound of saturated tape, then mix to tape if you must, must, must have natural tape distortion. Tape is just a luxury that is expensive and cumbersome and has more to do with ego and macho pride than sound. This is for people that listen to the gear more than the music to some extent. There are exception to be sure but for working pros that need to get things done, tape is just ridiculous nowadays.

I would add though that I would have no problem having something mixed by a mix engineer that uses tape. I might even desire it for certain types of music. But in general, its a rotary phone.....

Sorry dude but you have obviously recorded to tape yeah?
Sorry have not gone back to read all the thread and I cannot comment on what sounds better really as I have never recorded to tape.

I am slowly moving from just ITB to OTB and I would agree on the cumbersome part. Damn OTB is really hard work and i can imagine tape would be even harder still.

Look i think what the tape guys on here say has allot of merit and so does the other side being digital.

Personally if someone stole My Mac Pro rig today from my studio I would be screwed, I would not know what to do. Lately I have been harsh on the whole computer thing, as you can all see from a previous thread i started...soft synths suck give me more analog now. In a way I am kind of regretting the thread as I feel I have not made any contribution to GS.

My point is, each has their place and I would love to see a day where both sides unite and less with the analoge vs digital thing.

I love analoge and have heaps of gear, however what I am starting to realize is that as beautiful as my analoge sounds, and how fantastic my ssl matrix is going to be I will still need my MacPro to accomplish my goals, which is make music.
Is it not what its about in the end of day, the final result even if it is mixed on a computer, or a hybrid set up or on tape with a $100k console?

What you decide to record to is up to you......I know most people cannot tell the difference. I am even sure if you get a master on Logic 9 he would even make it sound close to tape.

I love how i feel at the moment, respect to both sides. And this is how i will end my thread with respect to both the analoge and tape domain and respect to people who made it possibile to record 100 tracks on computer! Bless!!
Antoine

[joeq]

Originally Posted by spectrasound

...but what is always overlooked is this; There are 3 important elements that have nothing to do with tape vs/DAW. The priority is as follows:

1. A good song.

none of us have a "bad" song

2. A good performance.

none of us are "bad" performers

3. A good space to record the song in. The rest is "nuts & bolts" ..... right?

Dear God, no, not the "Good Song" again...

[donnylang]

Originally Posted by spectrasound

...but what is always overlooked is this; There are 3 important elements that have nothing to do with tape vs/DAW. The priority is as follows:

1. A good song.

2. A good performance.

3. A good space to record the song in.

The rest is "nuts & bolts" ..... right?

I think production and equipment used is just as important as song and performance, personally. certain things just can't be done without the right tools. and workflow can make the songs and performances better.

like tonight I'm a little bummed because my leslie speaker broke. I tried all kinds of ups and downs to make this guitar part work without it, and ultimately ... i can't get the right sound without the leslie.

atmosphere and texture is way important !

[donnylang]

also, why does everyone think that analog is more expensive than digital? The general attitude is that analog is out of reach and people that use analog only are some kind of elitist snobs who look down on everyone else.

my all-analog recording setup probably cost less than most people's digital rigs.

you can be analog only w/ a cassette deck and an sm57.

even high-end analog can be had for pennies on the dollar these days.

[erikdrink]

I like tape....

[Keire]

good digital stuff is expensive.

i got my jh24 for 3200 cdn. its in perfect shape. i would say that is not very expensive at all.

[spectrasound]

...when I said good song, good performance, good space...don't know why anyone took personally. I'm looking at this from an engineer's perspective, and although you might not have a "bad song", come on...as engineers we have all heard our share of songs that should have never been recorded, performed very poorly on bad instruments that don't belong in any studio. I grew up on tape and still love it, but I use PT HD everyday and love that too. Way too much flaming going on regarding this subject.

[audiogeek]

Originally Posted by joeq

none of us have a "bad" song



none of us are "bad" performers



Dear God, no, not the "Good Song" again...

Surely you jest.

[Trakworx]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

I spent the last 2 days recording a sax solo on Pro Tools. Both myself and the Sax player are musicians that have know each other for many years and started out recording when 24 tracks was still pretty much a big deal. Suffice to say it was tape recorders. There was no digital anything.

Considering the ease of what we did, the fact that we were able to do as many versions as we desired to be vetted out later, and the sound was clear, full and frankly very nice, neither of us have any longing to go back to the days of tape. It is extraordinarily impractical. When there was no other choice it was fine. But now, in 2012.

I just don't see why anyone needs to record to tape. If you absolutely must have the sound of saturated tape, then mix to tape if you must, must, must have natural tape distortion. Tape is just a luxury that is expensive and cumbersome and has more to do with ego and macho pride than sound. This is for people that listen to the gear more than the music to some extent. There are exception to be sure but for working pros that need to get things done, tape is just ridiculous nowadays.

I would add though that I would have no problem having something mixed by a mix engineer that uses tape. I might even desire it for certain types of music. But in general, its a rotary phone.....

Wow, this post...

Perhaps the best recordings are made by people who don't require 2 days and stacks of tracks just to get 1 solo. IME pre-production and practice make for better outcomes than comping in a DAW.

Mixing to tape is great, but doesn't do the same thing as tracking to tape does. When you print a mix to tape, only the loudest peaks in the mix get any transient shaping or saturation. When you print each track to tape you can dial in the appropriate amount for each one, and they also tend to blend together more easily in mixdown.

It's not "ego and macho pride" that motivate the AEs I know who use tape, it is results. I think your statement is more telling about your own ego and pride than anyone else's. If you can't hear what a good tape recording does for the music then my heart goes out to you. Believe me, neither I nor my clients who demand tape would bother were it not for the obvious sonic benefits which cannot be achieved any other way. It's not best for every project, but when it's good it's really good.

.

[+6/185]

Originally Posted by kennybro

Bullseye. I've done a truck load of work with Studer and Ampex 24 trk, 1/2 and 1" 8 trk machines, mastering to 1" Studer @ 30ips, etc, etc... That and performance was all I did from the 70's to early 90's.

I bailed on tape in about '93, over to DAW. I've had very good success and satisfaction with it. My clients agree. I have revisited tape a few times, when forced. Not worth it, to me.

Brad is dead on. DAW is a very different experience from traditional tape/console, and one that I embraced from the first day (with a lot of outboard gear). But that's me. Not many here at GS feel the same.

Of course, this has been beat to death here many times. There are multi-page threads you can reference to gather pro opinions on the issue. Another is probably not needed.

DAW in 1993? What could that have been?

[joeq]

Originally Posted by audiogeek

Surely you jest.

I am quite certain many people here DO have a bad song, but I am equally certain that they think it's great. It is also quite likely the best song they are capable of writing. In any case that is the song they are recording NOW and now they need to decide what the best GEAR to record that song is. Even the worst song will be better off recorded well than recorded poorly.

As stupid and repetitious as these tape vs digital threads are, even though they have not produced one new insight in ten years, people should still be allowed to have their "nuts-and-bolts" discussions of equipment and technology without the patronizing "reminders" about the Good Song.

Some of us are actually recording engineers with clients, not just self-recording musicians, and we have to record the song the client brings in. We have no say in "the song". We still need to choose our gear. We might want to discuss that gear in order to make a good choice.

Just because people happen to be deep into a discussion about gear, does not mean they are "overlooking" the song - and IMO, it is insulting to 'remind' them that they are.

Maybe from now on, every time someone asks a question about gear we should all demand that OP post his song and we will spend every thread critiquing the chord structure, the lyrics, and whether he really needs a 16 bar intro.

[filipv]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS???????

troll lvl: noob

[ofajen]

Originally Posted by spectrasound

...but what is always overlooked is this; There are 3 important elements that have nothing to do with tape vs/DAW. The priority is as follows:

1. A good song.

2. A good performance.

3. A good space to record the song in.

The rest is "nuts & bolts" ..... right?

Hardly overlooked. Indeed, the process required when tracking and mixing to tape forces me to put almost all my time and attention on these aspects and keep the recording process streamlined.

Cheers,

Otto

[kennybro]

Originally Posted by +6/185

DAW in 1993? What could that have been?

Synclavier 9600 with D to D.