The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Turning the reels of time backwards
Old 25th July 2007
  #1
Gear Head
 

Turning the reels of time backwards

[hisssssssss]
As much as I love...wait... maybe that wasn't the right word. Stop tape. Can I get another take? [...] Huh? [...] Oh, okay. [roll tape]

[hisssssssss]
As much as I have committed myself whole-heartedly to the digital realm (HD|3Accel, Control|24, Apogee AD/DAs, Big Ben, CD-Rs, hard drives, LCDs, iLoks, Goldilocks, head-locks, lox and bagels, you get the point), I can't help but feel like something is missing. I know it is trite at this point to even say this, but I really do want to go back. Maybe not completely; not in that Luddite, Pennsylvania Dutch kind of way; rather in the sense that I want the option for the old-ways, while still keeping the modern ways in full effect.

I used to record onto an old Fostex B-16, and I miss it. Unless you all respond to this post with words recommending otherwise, I am going to purchase a 2" 24-track. There is a fellow near me selling a A-800 MKIII with low hours. I will be having my technician (who is an old-time electronics engineer who used to give seminars to teach technicians how to work on and repair Ampex ATRs) go look at the machine this week to find out (a) if it's worth it and (b) how much it'll cost to get it the way I want it.

I guess my reel [sic] motivation here is to find out if I am crazy. Am I... crazy? I know the price of tape from RMG is probably $300 a reel, but dammit, this is about more than tape! THIS IS ABOUT FREEDOM!! THIS IS ABOUT BEING ABLE TO WALK THE STREETS, UNPESTERED BY THE PERSECUTION OF SCUM WHO... ooh, wait, take that back again, I yelled too much... [".............more than tape! this is"] yeah, right there. right after 'tape' [......]

[hisssssssss]
This is about maintaining what is best. The name says it all: analog: that which is most analogous to reality. All the other means grant us is easy workflow. I agree, this element is essential as well, but not at the cost of the former, viz. quality. The two do not have to be mutually exclusive. And that is why I want to make the A-800 an addition to my studio. Does that make me a bad person?

Okay, to be serious, and put the insane ramblings aside: what do I really need to make this ascent back into the celestial world of tape machines? What is the best way--is there an easy way--to integrate tape (and I mean mixing tape, not just the old 1/2" stereo mixdown scenario) and analog mixer into my now-highly-attuned-to-the-DAW environment. Is there some other equipment I am overlooking (besides a quality console)? I have had clients ask me if they could bring reels to me on occasion, and I have had to turn them away. I don't want to have to do that anymore either. People like that ought to be embraced with open arms. Send me your people who listen to records and cassettes, your reel-to-reel tape owners, your people who still own 78 rpm discs, your people who haven't blown they're ear-drums out driving in a subbed-out Corolla, your pocket watch users, the fountain-pen writers, and the people who still use a straight razor! I welcome and tip my hat to all those who realize that the concept of change is independent of the concept of good/bad. I think that last sentence is really the quintessence of the analog versus digital argument.

I know that this post is filled with lots of long-winded levity and tangential points, but I really am considering the Studer purchase and any of your guidance is appreciated. Thanks!
Old 25th July 2007
  #2
Registered User
 
Rick Sutton's Avatar
 

If it's cheap and you've got the bread, go for it. But do it for yourself (and enjoy it) 'cause it can be difficult to get clients excited enough to pay the cost of tape.
I've got 2" and PT here and it's only once or twice a year that I get to use the 2".
Others will have different experiences, but that is how it shakes out here.
Old 25th July 2007
  #3
Lives for gear
 
stagefright13's Avatar
 

Don't buy it. Unless you have the funds and YOU want it! The customer base for Tape is very low. Tell someone it costs $200.00 per song then tell them the tape price!!!! Added to there bill. They will go digital almost every time. Kinda hard to make money with tape at your location. And probably most locations these day unless you get MAJOR financing for a project. And the band WANTS tape.

I think Tape is for the people who like that sound. Wich is great but expensive. And people just won't pay the extra.

Kinda weird to me that I use a hard drive to do this stuff. But I guess I will get used to it.

And having every format is great cause doing transfers to CD is good money for me but Having a tape machine is hard to justify financially. Well at least a big one. I do keep a DAT and 4 track tape deck in the corner. I made quite a bit doing transfer with the DAT.
Old 25th July 2007
  #4
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
I say go for it. I love using tape. I did some quick mixes for a guest piano player this weekend and it was so easy getting good sounds off the tape even though I only spent 15-20 a song. Plus adding a console to your studio will be a benifit for workflow and possibly make you mixes from your DAW sound better too.

There's always used tape that can be had for about $100 a reel from TapeTape. I ust most of the time. MMM...996
Old 25th July 2007
  #5
I was thinking why I didn't select tape for my studio..

Storage / finding the space for a tape library (I have 7 years of DATA DAT back ups in one desk drawer)
Finding space for a 2" tape deck
Bands with no money to spend on new reels of tape
The headache of managing 'hire reels' (if you don't come back to pay in 3 months we rub over it etc...I find that somehow.. immoral! Who wants to rub out a bands work?)
Sheer laziness - no line up, no having to get off you ass to change reels.

But the number one reason to me was always - an indie rock band having filled one reel with 2 songs having to decide if they were going to spend the extra $200+ for a 2nd reel of 2" just to get ONE MORE TAKE of a tune, or if they were going to record over the last 'pretty damn good take' they already had.. tutt I found that this dilemma would halt the session, kill the vibe and it would take the band about 45 minutes to descide between them yes or no about the extra reel purchase. By the time they made their minds up all spirit for the backing tracks might be lost and if the band DID decide to go for the extra reel, they would have a 'black cloud' that was their share of the $200 over their heads for the rest of the session.. coming from a big studio background, (3 rooms major lable sessions etc) I would be thinking COME ON GUYS! pay the damn money and lets get GOING fer kissakes! But to the bands, that extra $200 was almost always like ...

...THE END OF THE WORLD!
Old 25th July 2007
  #6
Gear Head
 

Haha, there are some great comments here. As I started reading them, though, that buzz started in the back of my head. You all know which one: the one that says, "Well, I don't care what they say, I'm still going to get it! I wanted it for a while, I saved, and that's it!"

I am realizing more and more that this is more of a purchase for myself, and not for business. I guess it's more that I see these machines as examples of great 20th century craftsmanship and engineering, and I can't just turn my back on them. As a DJ since I was 16, I am proud to say that I am still using real vinyl on all of my gigs (I also have added Serato to my arsenal, which helps much, but the wax is the max! It still comes to every one with me.). So I guess I am no stranger to anthropomorphizing obsolete equipment and media and bringing them into my family so they don't have to sit out in the cold where no one appreciates them and eat a small leftover can of beans while huddling next to each other for warmth, shivering from each gust of winter wind.

Wow... I guess I really am sick. Oh well.

As far as clients not wanting to pay for its use, etc., I have to admit that this is probably correct. It is hard enough to get them to pay for friggin studio time and the small stack of CD-Rs they wish to use. Nevertheless, as Stagefright mentioned, it is nice being able to make some money on "digitizing" old media into new -- there are definitely people out there who are willing to pay for just that. In fact, I must remember to that as a unit itself on my rate-sheet.

As far as a console, that will, unfortunately, have to be the next step (unfortunately for my pocket, i mean). Although, Drumsound, I don't quite see how this would _help_ my DAW workflow? Maybe you could clarify.

So, to weigh it in for the moment: R2R = 5% business + 95 % self-gratification. Let's see if anyone else can tip the scales!
Old 25th July 2007
  #7
Lives for gear
 
soupking's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slickmf View Post
Haha, there are some great comments here. As I started reading them, though, that buzz started in the back of my head. You all know which one: the one that says, "Well, I don't care what they say, I'm still going to get it! I wanted it for a while, I saved, and that's it!"

So, to weigh it in for the moment: R2R = 5% business + 95 % self-gratification. Let's see if anyone else can tip the scales!

I'm strictly tape right now. I have a Fostex m-80 1/4" and TASCAM 48 1/2".

I think they're great. I'm honestly more frustrated with other things than the tape sounds at this stage in my studio's development. My "studio" is primarily used for "studying" sound though. NOT making money. I'm using tape because I'm interested in the saturation in provides, or "harmonic distortion" yadda yadda. It captures nuances that I don't get in digital. Plus, I just like the process of recording to tape. It's tangible and doesn't require staring at a monitor.

I dig digital though (please no ana/digi warfare, this is not a hijack debate). I honestly think it's best to have both. Cassettes are crap though. Can't say I have much love for something that sounds worse than an mp3.

I think beyond taste, the whole nature of to tape or not to tape is really a question of time. If I were to go pro, I would buy pro tools.
Old 26th July 2007
  #8
Gear Head
 

To console or not to console? WAS: Turning the reels of time backwards

Okay, it is pretty clear what I am going to do now as far as the Studer is concerned. So, once the A-800 is firmly in place (is there any other way for a washing-machine-sized unit to be in place?) I guess the next question is: to console or not to console.

No, I don't mean, console as a verb with the implicit object of my wallet. I mean console as the noun, referring the the grandiose thing that will complement the other grandiose thing I am about the buy in both size, age, and function.

I have a half-decent Tascam 16-channel mixboard from the past that I was pretty much ready to sell, and I might as well since I need at least a 24-channels for my iminent purpose. So... do I wait, save up, and get a _really_good_console_, and if so, which ones are recommended? Please don't say SSL 9000 or something similar to further send me to the poor-house and my wife into another man's arms.

Or should I just stick with standard mid-range desktop mixers such as the Mackie Onyx and Souncraft? Hehe, as before, I am afraid that I am going to defy all logic and wind up doing the least sensible thing, no matter what is said. This is almost like the repeated line from The Matrix trilogy, wherein I have already made the choice; it is now up to me to understand it. All suggestions are welcome and appreciated!
Old 26th July 2007
  #9
Gear Addict
 
hle144's Avatar
 

Make sure its a Studer A800 mk III as you said or a 827,820, or A80.

Other than those, its not worth the added attention.
Old 26th July 2007
  #10
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by slickmf View Post
As far as a console, that will, unfortunately, have to be the next step (unfortunately for my pocket, i mean). Although, Drumsound, I don't quite see how this would _help_ my DAW workflow? Maybe you could clarify.

Consoles are really convenient and fast. You've got the bussing buttons, so when it's time to track another guitar solo, while keeping the last you just change from buss 18 to buss 19. If you want to hear what pouring on a ****-ton of low end into the BD you just grab the low EQ knob on the BD channel. The monitor mix just needs the vocal up a tiny bit, bump the fader. I fine the one know one function of a console very convenient. I don't want to open a window and find the right plug in and try to get the mouse to do what I can easily do tactile in 3 seconds.

How far away from buying a console are you and what price range are you looking. I love my Neotek Elan II and you can find those used in the 32 channel (usually in a 40 channel frame so you can expand) for around 10K. It's in in-line desk so at mix you've got 64 inputs. The EQ and mic pres sound great, as does the mix buss. There are other options on the use market as well. Tridents, DDA, Soundcraft etc can be found for various pries. On a smaller budget I'd look at a Soundcraft Ghost. You should be able to find one for 3K ish.
Old 26th July 2007
  #11
Gear Head
 

I see what you are saying. Yes, I agree, and I think this is one of the biggest short-comings of the DAW in its present incarnation. Even though my Control|24 works great with Pro Tools HD and makes life much easier than it would otherwise be, I inevitably must sit myself more in a position in front of my keyboard and mouse than in front of the control surface, making the surface a mere secondary to the computer interface. The end-user's difference in experience from analog to digital ought to be seemless, and--as of now--it is not. Oh well, let us not get into this debate.

I just hope that I can come up with a clever way to integrate the two concepts into the same studio simultaneously without much of, "Hold on, I have to setup for digital now. It'll be another twenty minutes while I rewire everything."

The Soundcraft Ghost looks like it will fit my budget for the time being and offers the most quality for the price. Once I level off from current necessity purchases (which will probably extend into early 2008), I will be more in a position to think about a high-end console. After all, not all of my purchases can be in vain: only some.
Old 26th July 2007
  #12
Lives for gear
 
themaidsroom's Avatar
 

buy the a800
don't think twice
if you have a client
with taste and talent, they will
choose tape, almost every time
it sounds really good, better than that other
format - if you use ears, that tends to
be the result

i am right now making a great sounding record
on 499 from 1995 - beautiful sound - $80 a reel from
california - one needs ten days of planning to get it
to nyc......

tape, well designed track sheets , pencils, erasers and real talent can
make amazing records (with depth and warmth , no awkward congregation
around a video monitor as if people were editing a film, maybe no computer at all)

one can hear the difference in 2" 8 track, 2" 16 track, 2" 24 track
in the consumer format of mp3 - i would never endorse this format, but
the 2" 8 track mp3 sounds much better than the 2" 24 track mp3 - in my opinion -
the mp3 that comes from a digital source is the most sonically unpleasant.

i am for aaa - 12 minute sides of 45 r.p.m. 100% analog vinyl - people who really
sing and play live in front of microphones.
i encourage all of the artists i work with to make their music for this audience
first. all others will benefit from this approach.


i love the idea that there will be tape only
studios later in this decade - i think there
will be
kids,
people in their early twenties love tape
love vinyl, immediately hear the difference, ask why
pro tools doesn't sound good ?
why doesn't it sound as good as their father's
records from the 50's and 60's ??





the a800 is better made than any digital hardware. it will outperform things
that are not yet built !!



be really well
buy the tape recorder

- jack
Old 26th July 2007
  #13
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soupking View Post
Plus, I just like the process of recording to tape. It's tangible and doesn't require staring at a monitor.
Funny you say that. The other day I was mixing and I turned the monitor off and worked with the control surface. It was pretty nice. There's something about looking at a monitor that does not let me focus on the audio completely. (Maybe I'm just weird)
Old 26th July 2007
  #14
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by elpezpr View Post
Funny you say that. The other day I was mixing and I turned the monitor off and worked with the control surface. It was pretty nice. There's something about looking at a monitor that does not let me focus on the audio completely. (Maybe I'm just weird)
Hmm... I like this idea. When you think about it, there is very little reason (depending on which surface you have, I suppose) that this is not possible. The DAW provides us with so much info that we are dependent on seeing it to function. This will be hard to explain to clients who want to see pretty blue and red waveforms, though.
Old 26th July 2007
  #15
Gear Guru
 
u b k's Avatar
 

you don't have to sell your clients on tape; tape will sell itself.

don't even ask or make an issue of it. when you go to track drums and bass, mult the signal to tape and to the daw. invite the band in to listen to the takes.

press play on the digital, let their ears acclimate. stop. switch to tape, press play. tell them that sound costs an extra $250 for the reel. you can dump the tracks into the daw and use the same reel for every song. hell, you can use the same reel for every band for the next 10 years and that tape will still sound amazing.

show me a drummer who doesn't prefer the sound of his drums pounding into 456 at 15ips and i'll show you a muso that needs to be smacked upside the head.

oh, and get the console too. sit at a control surface, turn off the monitor, and try adjusting the hi-mid eq on the snare while easing off on the drum sub's compressor makeup, then pan the acoustic a little further to the left while lifting the hi shelf on the voice and hey, maybe you want to dig in on the bass comp too and narrow that 100hz notch a little more. console: 10 seconds to do everything and zero energy from thought to manifestation. control surface: lots and lots of thought energy devoted exclusively to function switching and knob assignments IF you can actually do it without the monitor. i want to think of something and do it, not think of something then think of how to do it and then do it.

life is too long to spend it fµcking around.


gregoire
del
ubk
.
Old 26th July 2007
  #16
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post
oh, and get the console too. sit at a control surface, turn off the monitor, and try adjusting the hi-mid eq on the snare while easing off on the drum sub's compressor makeup, then pan the acoustic a little further to the left while lifting the hi shelf on the voice and hey, maybe you want to dig in on the bass comp too and narrow that 100hz notch a little more. console: 10 seconds to do everything and zero energy from thought to manifestation. control surface: lots and lots of thought energy devoted exclusively to function switching and knob assignments IF you can actually do it without the monitor. i want to think of something and do it, not think of something then think of how to do it and then do it.

life is too long to spend it fµcking around.
.
Very well put. I think this is part of what I am intimating when I say in the first post, "As much as I have committed myself whole-heartedly to the digital realm[...], I can't help but feel like something is missing." As much time as the DAW seems to save (and, to be fair, it does its fair share, especially in the editing arena), I wind up wasting that time I just saved on things such as what you describe above -- a very complex and time-consuming mix. As an aside, and I think this too has been said in the past, I believe that we force ourselves to edit with much more precision than would normally be expected simply because we have the DAW there to make it all possible.

Now, on to a few more questions: heretofore, I have accumated much out-board rack gear that has become indispensible when dealing with getting the right tracking and mixing in Pro Tools (e.g., my LA-2As, Avalon 2055, DBX 165, Eventide H3000, etc., etc.), not to mention the many quality pre-amps I have used such as my Vintech 473, for example. In moving to the console scenario, it almost seems implicit that much of this gear is put aside in order to use the console's own EQ, FX, etc. How much of this is true? Similarly, how much of this is true on a more budget-type console like the Soundcraft Ghost? Are there any better consoles that you recommend for my temporarily tight budget? How about once I am back on my feet? I can't help but to end this post by thanking everyone so far; this thread has been very helpful to me.
Old 26th July 2007
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Berolzheimer's Avatar
 

If your only analog tape experience was with the fostex, beware, a 2" machine is a differnt beast altogether. For one thing, they require regular maintenance. and DAILY alignment. or more. If you're serious you'll realign every time you put up a new reel of tape. If you don't know how to do this, learn it, & learn it thouroghly, it will have a huge effect on the sound of your recordings. You need to learn about bias, over bias, bias traps, azimuth, wrap, & a bunch more.
I bring this up because I've gotten a number of records to mix that were recorded on 2" by folks who obviously didn't know how to align their machines and I'm sorry, analog recording isn't better unless it's done really well. Bad analog sounds terrible.
Old 26th July 2007
  #18
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
You'll still be able to use you outboard with a console. The stuff you listed was around before DAW only studios. Real consoles don't have effects. They have pres, EQ and on more expensive ones dynamics.
Old 26th July 2007
  #19
Gear Head
 

Thanks for the heads-up. I was aware of some of these issues, but definitely not the fact that they required daily attention. I will have my tech review some of these issues with me, but do you know of a good source of information? Any books? Certain equipment?

I apologize, but over my somewhat lengthy (obviously not long enough, compared to you all especially ) career, I perceived early that, as Mark Twain warned, I was not to let school interfere with my education. Whatever I have gleaned in our field has been from doing; hence, this practice left a small gap in this area, I suppose. Any resources you present I will gladly digest so I can catch back up.
Old 26th July 2007
  #20
Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post
show me a drummer who doesn't prefer the sound of his drums pounding into 456 at 15ips and i'll show you a muso that needs to be smacked upside the head.
So are you saying use the older tape formulas rather than the newer ones?
Old 26th July 2007
  #21
Lives for gear
 
themaidsroom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berolzheimer View Post
If your only analog tape experience was with the fostex, beware, a 2" machine is a differnt beast altogether. For one thing, they require regular maintenance. and DAILY alignment. or more. If you're serious you'll realign every time you put up a new reel of tape. If you don't know how to do this, learn it, & learn it thouroghly, it will have a huge effect on the sound of your recordings. You need to learn about bias, over bias, bias traps, azimuth, wrap, & a bunch more.
I bring this up because I've gotten a number of records to mix that were recorded on 2" by folks who obviously didn't know how to align their machines and I'm sorry, analog recording isn't better unless it's done really well. Bad analog sounds terrible.
if it's a studer that's in good shape 99% of the time this will involve a three minute
daily ritual to throw up an mrl and ascertain that all 24 meters are spot on. this is
an apocryphal irony of 21st century analog where, most of the time, a studio does
not handle different tape types, speeds and calibrations with each session......
it is such a strange time when a truly professional machine is so affordable......

i believe this man above, if you read between the lines, is agreeing with the idea
that analog recording is the way to go.......



be really well
buy a800
when the atr tape hits, it will be one
of the four four things still made in the usa
that are truly top of the heap - in a well designed
green facility purpose built for 21st century longevity
make your mp3's shine......
steer clear of taiwanese plastic
it leaks into the music


- jack
Old 26th July 2007
  #22
Lives for gear
 
deuc647's Avatar
 

I say if u have good mic pres, get a toft ATB, i hear the EQ is great but the mic pres are ok. seems like a better option than the ghost.
Once i get my protools rig where i want it, i think ill start lookin for a console and 2 inch also,
Old 26th July 2007
  #23
I track to tape for 98% of my tracking sessions. In my expereince tracking to tape is far cheaper than tracking to digital as an project tracked to tape will be completed faster than to digital. The set up time is faster, you don't have the same issues with digital overs and the mixing always happens far faster.

I have yet to seen an extra expense from tape. I haven't needed to purchase a reel in 5-6 years.

The idea of a "for hire reel" that gets "rubbed over" 3 months laters is kind of funny to me. Try 3 minutes later.


As soon as you stop think of tape as a recording format and think of it as a signal processor and a recording process the value of tracking to tape becomes clear.
Old 26th July 2007
  #24
Gear Head
 

Hmmm.... Interesting posts. I really didn't expect to get this much of a response in support of tape. So you track everything to tape, and then what? Just mixdown to DAW stereo track or ADAT? Is anyone doing all this and then mixing down to half-inch 2-track? Also, do you still charge your clients something extra for tape (other than when they actually want to buy the reels) even though it's part of how you track every session?
Old 26th July 2007
  #25
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by deuc647 View Post
I say if u have good mic pres, get a toft ATB, i hear the EQ is great but the mic pres are ok. seems like a better option than the ghost
Thanks for the advice on this one: the Toft looks like exactly what I would want. Nice appearance too. Now comes my ignorant question: if I were to, let's say, get the 32-channel board, how does this interface with 24-tracks (really, 23 anyway, right?) of the A-800 2"? Do most people in that situation link up two machines somehow, or am I just overlooking something?
Old 26th July 2007
  #26
Gear Guru
 
u b k's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slickmf View Post
if I were to, let's say, get the 32-channel board, how does this interface with 24-tracks (really, 23 anyway, right?) of the A-800 2"?

if you're mixing live off of tape, the extra channels are for fx returns, buss/parallel comps, live inputs for synths, whatever... you'll run out of inputs before you run out of uses.

what most people do nowadays, though, is dump the tracks to the daw off the repro head while recording. most daws have a recording offset you can set so that, when you hit stop, all newly recorded tracks are time-shifted to compensate for the head gap.

to do that you'll need 8 (or 16) a/d's. the upshots are that you can use the same reel over and over, you can edit in the daw, and you eliminate sync headaches. the downshot is that, unless you have 8 channels of 2192 or something equally sweet, mixing off the daw definitely involves a bit of sonic compromise. but it's still way better than if you hadn't hit tape in the first place.


gregoire
del
ubk
.
Old 26th July 2007
  #27
Lives for Jesus
 
stevep's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by slickmf View Post
Hmmm.... Interesting posts. I really didn't expect to get this much of a response in support of tape. So you track everything to tape, and then what? Just mixdown to DAW stereo track or ADAT? Is anyone doing all this and then mixing down to half-inch 2-track? Also, do you still charge your clients something extra for tape (other than when they actually want to buy the reels) even though it's part of how you track every session?
I keep the music on the tape and then mix into Ptools (or soon... ATR102)
this way it only hits the converters one time

I charge for tape rental for the length of the project and then dump all the tracks in to Ptools and to there hard drive archive
(unless the buy there own reels) i use an average of 4 reels pr project

Sometimes we track to tape then dump into ptools right away, ... But the projects that stay on tape till the mixing always sound better

as for alignment,... my 820 is super easy to align and stays put

And my Studer is synced to the Ptools rig so if i fill up the 820 i can do any additional tracks in Ptools


Old 26th July 2007
  #28
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post
what most people do nowadays, though, is dump the tracks to the daw off the repro head while recording. most daws have a recording offset you can set so that, when you hit stop, all newly recorded tracks are time-shifted to compensate for the head gap.
...mixing off the daw definitely involves a bit of sonic compromise. but it's still way better than if you hadn't hit tape in the first place.
.
Well, at least for me, mixing outside the DAW is very much of the point. I have HD|3Accel with Control|24, Apogee AD16xs, DA16x, Big Ben, the whole bit. My studio could want for little else in the digital realm (without going crazy with really, really, high-end gear that's available as far as AD/DAs out there). I'm not really looking for a way to get into the DAW, although this is nice idea for those who are. I am looking for a way _not_ to get into the DAW, espcially pre-mixdown But, as I said in my last post, I think this is really the best place to receive mixed masters for storage and distribution reasons.

As many have stated, clients do not want to pay for a reel (and therefore, I won't give them one!) -- even if it's their 2-track master. Most don't even want DAT or ADAT or DTRS. They just want a PCM WAV file they can download or receive on CD-R.
Old 26th July 2007
  #29
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevep View Post
I keep the music on the tape and then mix into Ptools (or soon... ATR102)
this way it only hits the converters one time

I charge for tape rental for the length of the project and then dump all the tracks in to Ptools and to there hard drive archive
(unless the buy there own reels) i use an average of 4 reels pr project

Sometimes we track to tape then dump into ptools right away, ... But the projects that stay on tape till the mixing always sound better

as for alignment,... my 820 is super easy to align and stays put

And my Studer is synced to the Ptools rig so if i fill up the 820 i can do any additional tracks in Ptools


Steve, congratulations on you upcoming 102 purchase. Are you getting one from Mike Spitz (ATR Services)? Very expensive, but very nice work and a great man to work with. I don't own any of his machines, but I have met him several times and toured his factory in York, PA. How are you going to give masters from your 102 to clients once you go this route? Or will you do as the above poster and have it linked to DAW?

By the way, you Studer is synced up? How is this done? SMPTE somehow, I imagine, but what is your exact way of implementing it?
Old 26th July 2007
  #30
Lives for gear
 
themaidsroom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevep View Post
... But the projects that stay on tape till the mixing always sound better

as for alignment,... my 820 is super easy to align and stays put

And my Studer is synced to the Ptools rig so if i fill up the 820 i can do any additional tracks in Ptools
same with A827
best sounds are A827- daking console - mtr-12 1/2" 2 track - no digital
i also use the synch, sometimes do basics with the 2" 8 track, overdubs through
the 8 track into 96 k pro tools and then i relock the basics from tape for mixing...
i would love another A827......
i would love to lock two machines, i would love an atr-102 1" 2 track.......staying
100% analog through to vinyl is ideal.......this is the only way to bring depth
to the serious listener, and all others benefit from this process.....


be well


- jack
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
pingu / Music Computers
14
EMPORIO / Music Computers
17
mosrite / The Moan Zone
3
Dragonfly / Music Computers
11
M2E / So Much Gear, So Little Time
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump