Sync Pro Tool- Analogue Tape-MH 2882

[Steffmo]

I'm not sure why you say "of course analogue is the master" because honestly, it makes more sense to go the other way, assuming you are using a an analogue machihe that has a Lynx profile and that you can find a single Lymx module or a microlymx on Ebay. They show up fairly regularly if you are on your toes.

Why do I say this? A DAW is by nature very stable speed wise and can provide very stable time code. It is already locked to its own digital clock.

A multitrack tape machine speed is governed by a capstan that holds at pretty much 15 or 30 ips plus of ,imus an acceptable PC of variation, very slight, but there. Using a Lynx module or similar to lock the capstan to the very stable closk of the DAW actually improves the performance of the tape machine.

Anyway...you seem to understand the issues of going the other way, which is based on the concept of reading the timecode off analogue tape, determining the speed fluctuations by calculating the variation in speed of the timecode....for instance 30 FPS plus or minus whatever at any monent, and regulating the speed of the DAWs digital clock by that same variation. This is called resolving the clock.

With PTHG I'm pretty certain you need a Sync i.o to do this. With PTX I have no clue. You might be able to get an LE rig to run in the manner you are clocking Logic. I've never tried it, but if the inyerface has an external clock inpit....I would seem it would work.

Hope this helps.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Steffmo

I'm not sure why you say "of course analogue is the master" because honestly, it makes more sense to go the other way, assuming you are using a an analogue machihe that has a Kymx profile and that you can fins a single Lymx module or a microlymx on Ebay. They show up fairly regularly if you are on your toes.

This ^^^^

When syncing Analog tape and DAW, the DAW should always be the master, or the clocking on the DAW will be jittery and all over the place. With PTHD, you need the Sync i/o to do it either way, but again, PT/Sync i/o as master code generator, and the analog machine locked and resolved via Lynx or similar is the way to go.

[ecolleno]

Thanks for your interesting opinions.

Well, I have an old Otari MX80, and I have been using it as Master during two years with Logic 9. I followed recommendations of people of this forum and of Timelock´s builder Mr. Rosehndal. Probably it could be possible to use Daw as master, but I spent money to buy a Time Lock Pro and a Unitor and I want to use in the same way that I use in Logic 9 . If it is possible in Logic, Wouldn,t it possible in Pro Tools?

[ecolleno]

This is what the Steinberg Time Lock Pro designer told me about to synchronize my gears. I think I only have the problem in the step 5, the same thing on Pro Tools:

(1) first you have to record a 25 fps timecode track on your Otari, normally track 24 is used for timecode.
Disable noise reduction systems as dolby sr... on this track 24.
Generate a 25 fps timecode signal from software (i am not sure if LOGIC can generate timecode on oudio outputs?) or get a timecode audio file you can playback. Record this timecode signal with not too high level (- 20 dB) to avoid crosstalk to your audio tracks.

(2) connect the output of your tape machine track 24 to the time lock pro RCA time code input.
Play back the recorded timecode track and the LTC and LOCKED LEDs must go on continiously. Running timecode will be displayed.

(3) Connect the wordclock output from the timelock pro to your metric halo word clock input.
Set the sample rate on the time lock pro (44.100 x1 i think is best for music recordings)
Configure your metric halo to receive sync from external word clock..... may be there is a locked LED.

(4) You need a MIDI interface to feed the MTC output from the time lock pro to the computer.
Swisssonic, M-audio....

(5) Configure your Logic software to synchronise to Midi time code.
Please refer also to the time lock pro manual.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by ecolleno

This is what the Steinberg Time Lock Pro designer told me about to synchronize my gears.

I don't doubt it for a minute - there is a lot of mis-information and compromise out there. It will WORK, no problem. But it will compromise your DAW sound with a very jittery clock, as the clock is determined by the capstan speed of your tape machine, and the AC driving the capstan motor. I have done this for year with all possible configurations, and ultimately, there really is only ONE correct way.

Again, as I mentioned earlier, the best and most professional way is to have your daw generate code. In PT, this is done with a Sync i/o. That feeds a lynx timeline or similar module as code only master, which in turn the 24 track (or other tape machine) slaves to. There are MULTIPLE threads about this on GS if you want to know more.

If I did not have that facility, I would put a 2 pop - front and back - on the 2 inch across ALL tracks, and transfer tracks into the DAW and line them up with the 2 pop. I would not slave the DAW to tape. Hope that helps.

bp

[Musiclab]

Originally Posted by drBill

This ^^^^

When syncing Analog tape and DAW, the DAW should always be the master, or the clocking on the DAW will be jittery and all over the place. With PTHD, you need the Sync i/o to do it either way, but again, PT/Sync i/o as master code generator, and the analog machine locked and resolved via Lynx or similar is the way to go.

While I won't argue whether or not it's the best way to sync, the clock in the rosendahl, Steinberg Time lock or Aardvaark Times sync II [They are all the same box just oem'ed by rosendahl] were superior to the clock in the digi hardware when these boxes were designed. These boxes will reliably let you use the 2" as the master. They work VERY well and don't really monkey with the audio, at least that's been my experience. There are commercial records that have been done using this method, most recently "Groove With Me" by Paula Atherton, the entire album was done that way. There is a song on Paula's new cd [Enjoy The Ride] called "I Can't Get You Out Of My Mind" which was also done this way. Listen for yourself.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Musiclab

While I won't argue whether or not it's the best way to sync, the clock in the rosendahl, Steinberg Time lock or Aardvaark Times sync II [They are all the same box just oem'ed by rosendahl] were superior to the clock in the digi hardware when these boxes were designed. These boxes will reliably let you use the 2" as the master. They work VERY well and don't really monkey with the audio, at least that's been my experience. There are commercial records that have been done using this method, most recently "Groove With Me" by Paula Atherton, the entire album was done that way. There is a song on Paula's new cd [Enjoy The Ride] called "I Can't Get You Out Of My Mind" which was also done this way. Listen for yourself.

I won't argue clock stability or what records have used this method. Only that if you choose this method, instead of using an external or internal digital clock, you are now choosing to use the capstan of the multitrack as your clock 'crystal". I think there's certainly anecdotal evidence that shows that some people actually LIKE clock jitter, but generally, it's not something most of us attain to...

[Steffmo]

Hey, this is the "if it works its good" industry. I spent years with first a Akai DR16 and then a Tascam Mx2424 locked to my 2" with an Opcode Studio 64 XTC resolving the clock. It worked, we made some very good records that way.

But once I tried the other way, the common sense and simpliclty won the day. Yes the other way works. And if you need to sync and have the facility to do it that way....I'll never say don't do it.

But if you think about if for a minute or two there is only one correct way.

[Musiclab]

Originally Posted by drBill

I won't argue clock stability or what records have used this method. Only that if you choose this method, instead of using an external or internal digital clock, you are now choosing to use the capstan of the multitrack as your clock 'crystal". I think there's certainly anecdotal evidence that shows that some people actually LIKE clock jitter, but generally, it's not something most of us attain to...

listen to those songs and tell me about all the jitter you hear, I dare ya. These clocks are NOT the digi clocks, I've always heard horror stories about digi sync.

[fnninns]

Witha proper syncronizer like a Lynx or MicroLynx the tape deck's PLL system will lock to an external sync source like the DAW clock much more happily than the DAW will lock to the tape.
Actually, most all multi-track machines have the ability to follow an external sync source, but the Lynx or MicroLynx systems handle the STOP, START, PLAY, RECORD, FF and REW commands.
They also provide a very accurate SEARCH and SEARCH TO CUE system.

Here is why having the ATR follow the DAW's as a sync source is a good idea:

A DC servo capstan's PLL (phase lock loop) is looking for a sync source which is usually a 9600 hz signal generated by a quartz crystal oscillator.
This 9600 hz from the oscillator is divided in half for each lower speed.
VSO or varispeed is created by varying the signal with a varying frequency oscilator instyead of the chrystal oscillator.
Thes two oscillators are part of the tape machine's system.
The DC servo motor derives it's speed reference from either the quartz crystal oscillator or the variable oscillator, but most all professional decks also have an input for an external sync reference.
Since the clock of the DAW is very stable it can easily provide a reference for the DC servo motor's PLL system.

On the otherhand, a recorded sync source (SMPTE or what ever) is going to be subject to speed changes inherent to analog tape.
Even the very best ATR transports have speed fluctuations from tape slippage and some types of transports that are not constant tension designs have speed differences at the beginning and end of a reel.
So, only a few ATR designs have all that stable of absolute tape speed.
Otari MTR90IIs and IIIs, most JH-114 based transports (JH-110s and JH-24s) most Studers, Ampex MM-1200s with the Constrant Tension Upgrade and ATR-24s have a very stable speed WITH GOOD TAPE STOCK.
SONY APR series are very stable, too.
Still, all of these decks have a degree of speed change.

On the other hand, the DC Servo Capstan Motor PLL system on ALL of these decks will happily follow an external sync source.
The sync source from a DAW will be much more stable than a sync source pre-recorded on tape feeding the DAW's clock.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Musiclab

listen to those songs and tell me about all the jitter you hear, I dare ya. These clocks are NOT the digi clocks, I've always heard horror stories about digi sync.

Hey Lou, it's not about Digi clocks vs. rosendahl clocks - it's about using a tape machine with it's inherent wow and flutter as your clock. fnninns gave a wonderful and detailed explanation, much better than I could.

Even when I had my JH24 locked and resolved to video black via Lynx synchronizers (which is about as stable as you can get an analog machine), it was still sonically preferable to run the DAW as the master and tape as slave.

[ecolleno]

I suppose it will be a very good idea to use a Daw as master. But in my case I haven´t had problems in the sound using Logic as slave. Probably,it is because my synch is high end and it is a very well done gear.

I want do the same in Pro Tools but I don´t know how to set this Daw to get it.