TAPE

[Bullseye]

Don't understand why people would want tape just for the incidental sonic preferences and to me, they are preferences for which adjectives like "warmer" do not necessarily have definitive meaning.

The point seems simple when put thus: ANYTHING YOU CAN DO ON TAPE CAN BE DONE ON A COMPUTER. MOST THINGS EASILY DONE ON COMPUTER ARE IMPOSSIBLE ON TAPE....

Caveat: I do understand going to tape as a final stage of mastering or mixing just for the sonic character but that is a long way to go for a little bit of sound quality that can possibly be mostly achieved otherwise.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS???????

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Don't understand why people would want tape just for the incidental sonic preferences and to me, they are preferences for which adjectives like "warmer" do not necessarily have definitive meaning.

The point seems simple when put thus: ANYTHING YOU CAN DO ON TAPE CAN BE DONE ON A COMPUTER. MOST THINGS EASILY DONE ON COMPUTER ARE IMPOSSIBLE ON TAPE....

Caveat: I do understand going to tape as a final stage of mastering or mixing just for the sonic character but that is a long way to go for a little bit of sound quality that can possibly be mostly achieved otherwise.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS???????

Oooooh - you are trying to wind people up, aren't you?

.

[Brad McGowan]

Bullseye,

What is your real world experience using tape? Have you ever made a record only using a tape deck and a console? Its a very different experience than using a DAW, sonics aside. I don't mean this in a condescending way.

[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.

[ofajen]

It's OK that you don't understand. Just make music your way and those of us using tape will do it our way.

Cheers

Otto

[Peacock]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS???????

Some of us like tape.

I personally stopped using tape for tracking 2 years ago but still track the same way only with Radar in place of the MCI. For me the decision was based on the unfortunate fact that my tape deck became harder to maintain.

The sonics of tape is great and imo superior to digital despite the specs in my hands. That being said Ive heard really great recordings far superior than anything I have ever done that are all digital itb

We still mix to tape and our workflow does not involve a DAW. No computer in the studio unless you count the Radar as one.

The reasons are mostly love of the workflow and the ability to concentrate more on the capture and performance because there are many great recordings that are warm 3D etc that are strictly itb.

Use what you want to and what you prefer. The future is itb as you are now doing.

[drezz]

Ok, i'll take the bait because i'm bored.......
This subject has been done to death around here ad infinitum, and anyone who's familiar with my posts will know my preferences but here goes.....

As already said, it seems very unlikely that the OP has done sessions on analogue kit alone, i'm talking about tape, console, outboard.
There is something in that approach that transcends the limitation of the kit (as opposed to DAW & automation, controller etc, etc)...the process itself, for certain types of music and players anyway, is almost as important as the sound.
The capturing of live rhythm sections, drums, bass and whatever, getting the vibe and energy right, knowing that you're going for a keeper take and playing it the way you mean it, going the extra 110% rather than fixing it in the mix later on and comping take after take after take makes for a completely different recording experience. It can be extremely vibrant, loaded and spontaneous. This is only half the story really, the atmosphere when tracking thru a good console onto a 2" studer or the like is exciting stuff.
I know detractors will try and point out that you could do this easily enough tracking to pro tools, but it's never quite the same, there's a certain magic missing.
Plus there's the fact that mixing from tape theu a decent console makes for a very 3d sound with great separation and glue thnks to what the tape compression is doing.
I could go on, but it gets kinda boring and theres so much of this stuff on this forum already.
Of course for certain styles of music are concerned, where automation, and perfection are desired the old school approach is not the way, but personally i'm not really interested in these kind of approaches, which brings my to the point that it's all really subjective: horses for courses!!!
I love tracking to tape, the sound, the process, the vibe, the holistic experience......if you get it right it's glorious!
I can also understand why people want the total control of digital processing.
If you're curious about tape, try it, but dont diss it without any 'real' knowledge of what you're talking about.......there's so much inexperienced noobness spouting crapola all over this forum that it curls the toes of those who have the knowledge and experience. There are also some very knowledgable veteran engineers and producers here who really know their sh*t!
The OP was a bit inane and presumptous in my opinion, but i'm not trying to pick a fight here, and i'm not inviting insulting flaming posts, and i'm also not trying to be patronising, i dont want this to come across that way, just expressing an opinion, take it, or leave it...

[brill bedroom]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS???????

You're funny.

[Slikjmuzik]

I have a 2-track Otari that I like to track room mics or overheads, Kick/snare, guitars, vocals, etc...I run the signal to tape and record it into my DAW. ANY signal that hits tape before the daw, in other words, instead of just mic->pre->comrpessor->Lynx converter->DAW, if I slip tape in between the mic/pre/compressor and Lynx, to my ears, those signals are much easier to work with once in the box, than those that did not see tape.

I picked up that 2-track Otari machine for $200 and I have about 6 rolls of tape that I picked up on clearance from when I worked at Guitar Center for all of $5 a roll. I have 2 12" rolls and a bunch of 8" rolls.

I have yet to hear a modern day converter that gives you goose bumps like tape does just listening before capturing. Closest thing I've heard is the Burl Bomber and the Radar stuff, but they are still not the same and both of those are VERY expensive.

Is tape a pain in the ass to use? Yes. This would be why for most clients I don't bother turning it on, never mind hooking it up and adjust levels. I pretty much only use for my band and a few key clients that I know are 1-2 take groups that make working with tape worth it. Most bands end up tracking guitars, bass and vocals in sections as opposed to the old days when they would literally run through the whole song and that was considered a take. Can't do that with everyone.

[kennybro]

OP. Do not get the idea that all professionals (i.e. making money) demand tape, and think that it is the superior way to go, or that you offended anyone with your question. This is not true. The reality is much larger and more individual than that.

To each, his or her own, is the only answer. You might find that you need it, or maybe not. No way to find out unless you try it.

[audiogeek]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Don't understand why people would want tape just for the incidental sonic preferences ...

ANYTHING YOU CAN DO ON TAPE CAN BE DONE ON A COMPUTER. ...


WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS???????

Hmmm....

[Bill Way]

You can pretty much get tape's EQ and compression effects from plugins, but I have yet to hear any digital hardware or software that gives the imaging properties of tape. With the right kind of music, generally small group stuff, tape "encapsulates" the image and makes it float in the middle of the room. It can be pretty amazing.

WW

[RedWallStudio]

1) I record to tape almost exclusively. The musicians that I work with know this fact and I feel it brings out their A game because it is more difficult to do overdubs and punch ins on tape. When the same musicians come in recording to the DAW, I will almost always get the "well you can just copy and paste that, right?" line.

2) Tape captures subtleties in the process that, IMHO, sound artificial in DAW. Harmonic distortion in guitars is a biggie for me. It sounds natural and unobtrusive on tape, but gets in the way and has to be notched out in PT. Drums (particularly room mics & overheads) just sound weird to me in PT vs. Tape. Yes, I am biased.

3) Tape is much more fun. The music and musicians I work with are largely influenced by music of the 60s and 70s, so it makes plenty of sense to use the recording medium of the same era. Working in PT exclusively becomes work. I'm in front of a computer enough already...

4) It's my choice.. and I am biased.

[Antoine8]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Don't understand why people would want tape just for the incidental sonic preferences and to me, they are preferences for which adjectives like "warmer" do not necessarily have definitive meaning.

The point seems simple when put thus: ANYTHING YOU CAN DO ON TAPE CAN BE DONE ON A COMPUTER. MOST THINGS EASILY DONE ON COMPUTER ARE IMPOSSIBLE ON TAPE....

Caveat: I do understand going to tape as a final stage of mastering or mixing just for the sonic character but that is a long way to go for a little bit of sound quality that can possibly be mostly achieved otherwise.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS???????

From my previous experience with threads such as this someone is going to have you kicked out of gearlsutz

You are skating on thin ice man.


My thoughts on this subject is, you would get a different result from a computer to what you would get with tape. Yes i know the computer has the ability to sum up all these crazy algorithms and then do its counting, ones and zeros or what ever you want to call it, and thus emulate tape therefor not making sound any different from the original tape sound.

What I say, want tape buy tape, get the real thing. Simple solve.
Want to use a computer to emulate tape sound fine.

However do not do the latter and make a suggestion that is sounds better then the original, as you are asking for trouble. To me this is counter intuitive and yields to nothing but crazy arguments that lead to no where, apart from high blood pressure and a heart attack.

Now make some music!

[Antoine8]

Originally Posted by audiogeek

Hmmm....

ha ha yep.......

[leonardmog]

ok,

Redwallstudio has it I think.

Recording to tape is about feeling. Feeling the sounds , not just listening to
audiophile frequencies that can be analysed. I think the full frequencies are present in analogue and the body senses this. Not a calculated AD-DA representation. I wonder....all the mics, monitors and hardware are designed to work with analogue frequencies are they not, is that why we get ear fatigue complaints with monitors from using AD-DA and digital music??

Just been listening to the radio here ( UK) and a programme about how vinyl records are becoming more and more popular/ record players sales etc. All analogue.

I am not making a comment about workflow, wow and flutter, distortion etc etc etc. spare parts for machines, calibration and so on.....

Music is passion, atmosphere, group playing etc ....

I love mixing with tape, there is no doubt that it feels and sound so good and is great fun to use!

Who wants to look at a computer monitor and all the graphics and millions of choices?
LM

[analogexplosions]

Tape smells better than Pro Tools.

[lungboi]

I will share a recent experience. Just mixed a 23 minute piece of music that is to be released on vinyl. It was recorded in Samplitude and mixed OTB through a Neotek series 1 to a Korg DSD recorder and my newly restored Ampex 351-2 1/4" running RMG 911 tape simultaneously. I gave the client the files labeled "mix A" and "mix B" without telling him which was which. They picked tape over DSD. It was my preference as well. The DSD sounded fantastic, there was just something special about the mix to tape.

It is hard to put into words what tape does to a mix. You just have to experience it. This was eye opening to me to be able to compare the 2 side by side.

Lungboi

[Antoine8]

Originally Posted by leonardmog

ok,

Redwallstudio has it I think.

Recording to tape is about feeling. Feeling the sounds , not just listening to
audiophile frequencies that can be analysed.

Just been listening to the radio here ( UK) and a programme about how vinyl records are becoming more and more popular/ record players sales etc. All analogue.

I am not making a comment about workflow, wow and flutter, distortion etc etc etc. spare parts for machines, calibration and so on.....

Music is passion, atmosphere, group playing etc ....

I love mixing with tape, there is no doubt that it feels and sound so good and is great fun to use!

Who wants to look at a computer monitor and all the graphics and millions of choices?
LM

Agrees 100%.

It is so much more fun when you use many methods to capture the sound you want, in particular outboard gear.

I use both methods, ITB and OTB and my computer is still my recorder, however I look at it so much less these days. If i could have it my away i would do away with the my mac pro for my music entirely however I know realistically that is not going to happen.
I think it is not just about the sound, but the creative results that come from not using a computer.

For this reason I plan on purchasing a console, so I can look at my computer even less in 2012.
How ironic that as technology grows I continue to shy away from it!

[leonardmog]

When I record using digital- etc I just feel there is a 'barrier' between me and the recorded sound, even though it goes through an analogue desk, a kind of artifice, 2 dimension.

I don't get that feeling with tape.

Yes, tape is a pain, it's dirty, expensive, no good for paying your mortgage, editing limitations and so on, 'out of date technology' etc....
But, there yer go.....

LM

[joeq]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Don't understand why people would want tape just for the incidental sonic preferences and to me,

Caveat: I do understand going to tape as a final stage of mastering or mixing just for the sonic character but that is a long way to go for a little bit of sound quality that can possibly be mostly achieved otherwise.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS???????

I agree you are probably a troll

but on the possibility that you are simply a clueless newb, I will give you my thoughts.

I am no longer a 'tape guy' and I don't use tape much except as an occasional mixdown medium. But I totally understand where tape people are coming from, and it is the same place that all conscientious recording people are coming from: There is no such thing as "a little bit" of sonic character if that character is not truly obtainable by other means.


There is no such thing as "a long way to go" if your goal is excellence and that long way is how you get there. To a professional who knows what he wants, no sonic decision is "incidental".

It's not about "_tape", or _tubes, or _analog, or this mic, or that mic, or this amp, or that guitar. It's about chasing the sound you hear in your head. As I mentioned, it's not the sound I hear in MY head, but I totally understand what that sound is, and I totally understand that the 'substitutes' for that sound are not perfect substitutes. There is no puzzlement in my mind of why some people "go to the trouble" .

I go to different trouble, but I have different goals.

Mediocrity is its own reward. If you actually _want a sound, and it's possible to get, and you don't go for it, simply because it's "too much trouble", then you suck.

[decocco]

I like tape. I like DAWs. They are both good.

Great sound is possible with both. Terrible sound is possible with both.

I really like how with tape, there is no staring at a computer screen. My eyes love this! My vision gets weird after looking at the computer screen for hours and hours. Console and tape machine VU meters are much easier on the eyes.

My eyes prefer tape.

[PdotDdot]

When I began recording, I had a Tascam MS16 and a Tascam M520 Board. I abandoned all this for Pro Tools. Certainly editing is more convenient in PT as is the ability to use multiple instances of a plug-in during mix down.

A while back I discovered an old tape I had made years ago on Tape and realized that there was something special about the sound of the drums in particular that I had not really noticed was missing.

As a result, I have reconnected my old Tascam M16 and am now beginning my tracking on Tape and then dumping it into PT for editing and eventual mix down.

I like the results and am glad my old multitrack is no longer a large paper weight in the corner.

Since this only required the expense of having the MS16 properly aligned for me, it was a no brainer. If I did not have the machine I doubt I would have been able to justify the expense but it came cheap.

We're all at different levels of expertise, gear, talent and I think what ever works is good.

[kennybro]

Originally Posted by joeq

It's not about "_tape", or _tubes, or _analog, or this mic, or that mic, or this amp, or that guitar. It's about chasing the sound you hear in your head. As I mentioned, it's not the sound I hear in MY head, but I totally understand what that sound is, and I totally understand that the 'substitutes' for that sound are not perfect substitutes. There is no puzzlement in my mind of why some people "go to the trouble" .

Very well said. This could easily work as the second and final post of every box vs tape thread that pops up.

[Bullseye]

Loving how many folks have devolved into ad hominem attacks. why presume anything about me. Isn't it possible the question and thread was just baiting to see whether the supporters could in fact support their arguments? Isn't it also possible that it was meant to expose the level of bias that is involved in gear decisions? To wit: I use is so its better.

When I started recording there was no digital. Everything was tape. My personal feeling is I would happily record everything in a DAW and maybe, depending on the music, mix to tape for some saturation effect. However, for modern productions that require many, many tracks, tape is insufficient without multiple decks and then it is very unwieldily.

Today I heard a concert of Organ and Violin. The organ was in the chapel at Union Seminary on Broadway in Manhattan across from Columbia University. This organ was made of wood, the keys were wood. some of the pipes were at least 40-50 feet tall, there were horns, literally feel shaped horns similar to ancient trumpets coming straight out below the pipes, and there were reeds (had to be for some of the sounds). I have been playing piano, keyboards and synths for over 40 years and this was one of the best sounding keyboards I have ever heard. YET IT WOULD NOT BE USEFUL IN A MODERN POP PRODUCTION TO THE EXTENT A DIGITAL PLUG IN SYNTH WOULD.

Does the organ I heard have "better' sound. Why yes, in fact it is and was astonishingly beautiful. But in context.

So again, this is about motivation and bias. A subject I am mildly interested in. Sorry if it offends anyone here. Easy does it....

[Bullseye]

By the way, I refrain from saying that those that take the easy way out and simply name call like saying "Obvious Troll" are, for instance "Jerk Offs" because I am not like that. I think name calling is offensive.....

Never presume anything on the internet...

[Bullseye]

By the way, I don't assume pros use tape. As for chasing he sound you hear in your head, how do you think that sound got there? Do you presume it is some sort of congenital function of your ultra audio brain. You are merely listening for some ideal stored in you memory that has an emotional connection. You do not, in fact, hear a sound in your head, you imagine a sound you hear through your ear drums, and that imagined sound is based upon prior stored knowledge. In other words, you like the sound and feel and smell of tape because or stored associations in your brain as to what constitutes a "real" studio experience. Now, of course, I could be entirely wrong, in which case I humbly withdraw all of this thread forthwith....

[joeq]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

why presume anything about me. Isn't it possible the question and thread was just baiting to see whether the supporters could in fact support their arguments?

Yeah, because nobody has ever had a discussion like this before. Your angle is SO unique , your approach SO original.

just baiting

where I come from, "baiting" is just another word for Trolling.

nice to see you own up to it, at least.

[George Necola]

Tape adds something to your mix. Usually it makes tbe lowend more stable and adds a shimmer to the bighend. (which is not the case with all the plugjn emulations).)

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9100 mit Tapatalk

[stagefright13]

I was lucky enough to use tape for many many years. It's A totally different experience than digital. Sonic's aside It is A different world. Editing with A Razor blade... Spot erase.... 3 people on the board trying to mute verbs in A song section for A Master all at once. Flipping reels for reverse reverb and stuff. Crazy stuff. And so much fun.

John