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
Tape is back! :-) Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 16th August 2008
  #121
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
I can't imagine how a reel of tape could last an entire project!!! You'd be loosing HF after only a few passes. .
Not in my experience with slap echo!
Old 17th August 2008
  #122
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Lynn, hey, thanks for the english lesson....
Sorry. Didn't mean to offend.

I have lots of international posters at my forum and I try not to take it for granted that all of them are native English speakers, which many are not. If I use a word that might be out of the vernacular*, I try to define it (or offer a link to a definition) in order to make my meaning clear. I try to do the same with cultural references that might be, understandably, foreign.

When people start posting in foreign languages, which has happened a few times at my forum, then I understand, somewhat, how non-native English speakers might feel.

*vernacular - plain, everyday, ordinary language.
Old 17th August 2008
  #123
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
vernacular*
Quote:
*vernacular - plain, everyday, ordinary language.

l.o.l.

(I had no clue)

As far as this tape thing,

I find it disappointing that we do everything we can to get that great old analog tape sound while trying to mantain the ability to edit music to death.

I would rather just use a standard 16 or 24 track tape deck, work on a few overdubs and punch ins/outs, and call it a day. Let the musicians actually learn to play the song as a song. It worked for decades. Worked quite well, actually.
Old 17th August 2008
  #124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
I would rather just use a standard 16 or 24 track tape deck, work on a few overdubs and punch ins/outs, and call it a day. Let the musicians actually learn to play the song as a song. It worked for decades. Worked quite well, actually.
Let me know how that works out for you.

Or, in the immortal words of Sponge Bob when Plankton tells him he is going to take over the world,

"Good luck with that."

*********************

I think your plan is sound and will work when you perfect your time machine and you can go back to the 60s. But as long as you're stuck with the rest of us in the 21st century, I wouldn't hold my breath.
Old 17th August 2008
  #125
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
Let me know how that works out for you.

Or, in the immortal words of Sponge Bob when Plankton tells him he is going to take over the world,

"Good luck with that."

*********************

I think your plan is sound and will work when you perfect your time machine and you can go back to the 60s. But as long as you're stuck with the rest of us in the 21st century, I wouldn't hold my breath.
Yes, I know. One can dream.
Old 17th August 2008
  #126
Gear Addict
 

straight tape

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
l.o.l.

(I had no clue)

As far as this tape thing,

I find it disappointing that we do everything we can to get that great old analog tape sound while trying to mantain the ability to edit music to death.

I would rather just use a standard 16 or 24 track tape deck, work on a few overdubs and punch ins/outs, and call it a day. Let the musicians actually learn to play the song as a song. It worked for decades. Worked quite well, actually.

hello,

word. i do not think it will be quite like mixing from tape.

however, i do remember one engineer who had a theory that the tape basics should be transferred to pro tools immediately after recrording, before any print-through, hf loss, and all that started to happen. then overdubs onto the pro tools session. his feeling was that the tape begins to turn to crap almost immediately and it was better to head it off at the pass. i guess the clasp kind of does that.

that was when pro tools sounded really terrible though. maybe he was "ahead of his time". i have some of those roughs around somewhere.

i have been into the idea of having first generation analog, and first generation digital and choosing betrween them.

not trying to cause controversy but i am not sure i want to be stuck with only analog, and digitized analog at that, although i guess pretty much everyhing ends up on cd. what we are talking about here is having a digitized tape transfer and no first generation digital or first generation analog to mix with, right?

do people feel that the sound of mixing straight off tape is different than what is being proposed?

userofgear
Old 17th August 2008
  #127
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
You're in the bay area, right? perhaps an "aha" moment during AES for the Slutz????
I am in the Bay Area. That's a great idea. I'd be more than happy to host a demo at my place if there was anyone interested. Fremont is about 45 minutes from San Francisco.

Brad
Old 17th August 2008
  #128
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
Let me know how that works out for you.

Or, in the immortal words of Sponge Bob when Plankton tells him he is going to take over the world,

"Good luck with that."

*********************

I think your plan is sound and will work when you perfect your time machine and you can go back to the 60s. But as long as you're stuck with the rest of us in the 21st century, I wouldn't hold my breath.

I don't buy that for 1 second. IME it's the engineers pushing sessions into an edit fest, not the musicians. More often than not I hear the engineer yapping away about how "It's not perfect, but I - the great one - have the tools in my arsenal to make you mere mortals sound brilliant. On your knees and worship me".

Furthermore, I find that when musicians begin nit picking things apart - it merely a symptom of something seriously wrong with the big picture. But yeah, blame the musicians...
Old 17th August 2008
  #129
Quote:
Originally Posted by kats View Post
I don't buy that for 1 second. IME it's the engineers pushing sessions into an edit fest, not the musicians. More often than not I hear the engineer yapping away about how "It's not perfect, but I - the great one - have the tools in my arsenal to make you mere mortals sound brilliant. On your knees and worship me".

Furthermore, I find that when musicians begin nit picking things apart - it merely a symptom of something seriously wrong with the big picture. But yeah, blame the musicians...
If you need proof that isn't always so, you can sit in the back of the control room with me and listen to the players say

"Can you playlist that and give me one more?"

"That take was better but can you peel it back and use the previous ending?"

"I can play that last stab again but it's probably faster for you to just nudge it."

It may be the way you describe on your sessions, but I often prefer the talent to get it right instead of me having to "make it right" in PT.
Old 17th August 2008
  #130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
Not in my experience with slap echo!
Now there's a piece of tape that should be worn out. 5-6' at most and running over the heads during the whole mix session, sometime days at a time. Only stopped at night.
Old 17th August 2008
  #131
Quote:
Originally Posted by userofgear View Post
not trying to cause controversy but i am not sure i want to be stuck with only analog, and digitized analog at that, although i guess pretty much everyhing ends up on cd. what we are talking about here is having a digitized tape transfer and no first generation digital or first generation analog to mix with, right?
Stuck? How about just picking the one that you think sounds best when you're tracking and then being "stuck" with that? No predicament there.

Don't want to be stuck with "digitized analog?" What is it you normally print to your digital recorder or DAW?

Consider this. Who's saying you can't print the "tape" version and the "direct" version simultaneously on two different tracks? Then take your pick.

If you can print a track without compression and the another track with compression (or EQ or an effect) on two tracks so you can pick later, why could you not print the "tape" version and the "direct" version?

Guys. It's not nearly as hard as some here are trying to make it.

Really.

That's why you have DAWs with 256+ tracks. So you can print 4 alternate versions of every single thing you record and keep them all until the final mix. And then decide. Decision postponement. Isn't that what modern music making is all about?
Old 17th August 2008
  #132
Gear Addict
 

different ideas

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
Stuck? How about just picking the one that you think sounds best when you're tracking and then being "stuck" with that? No predicament there. [
hello,

i am not sure what you mean by that.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
Don't want to be stuck with "digitized analog?" What is it you normally print to your digital recorder or DAW?[

i do not usually record to tape and then transfer to pro tools. i usually record to both simultaneously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
Consider this. Who's saying you can't print the "tape" version and the "direct" version simultaneously on two different tracks? Then take your pick.[
that sounds like it would work.

userofgear
Old 17th August 2008
  #133
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by kats View Post
I don't buy that for 1 second. IME it's the engineers pushing sessions into an edit fest, not the musicians. More often than not I hear the engineer yapping away about how "It's not perfect, but I - the great one - have the tools in my arsenal to make you mere mortals sound brilliant. On your knees and worship me".

Furthermore, I find that when musicians begin nit picking things apart - it merely a symptom of something seriously wrong with the big picture. But yeah, blame the musicians...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
If you need proof that isn't always so, you can sit in the back of the control room with me and listen to the players say

"Can you playlist that and give me one more?"

"That take was better but can you peel it back and use the previous ending?"

"I can play that last stab again but it's probably faster for you to just nudge it."

It may be the way you describe on your sessions, but I often prefer the talent to get it right instead of me having to "make it right" in PT.
have to agree with both of you. i've been asked if i couldn't just 'protool' it later as though DAWs had some magic power, and i've also been guilty of saying 'we can fix that, let's move on', when the talent is a lttle lacking.

whether one likes DAWs or not, blaming musicians or the tools used now for some perceived ill i think is kind of a waste of time. Sounds Great said that musicians getting it right in the first place seems to have worked fine for decades. obviously true, but i don't think more convenience or faster tools necessarily make for bad musicianship. you could make the same argument for or against multitrack recording and second takes. if we're going to blame DAWs, we may as well blame Les Paul for starting the whole thing.
Old 17th August 2008
  #134
Lives for gear
I just record two tracks into the DAW, one from the Repro head (muted in the DAW), and monitor the other track. Once the tracking is done, I just nudge the "tape" tracks back to the value I've already determined, and move the "straight to DAW" tracks to a different playlist as a safety. Works everytime.
At 15ips, I can do overdubs for a half hour or so before I even need to stop the deck.

Sometimes I even run out of PT back to the tape machine as an effect; same procedure, different nudge value. It's really not that difficult, or time consuming. Certainly not enough to warrant this gizmo that will inevitably need a second mortgage to cover.

What's the big deal?? I assumed everyone was doing this kind of thing.....?

I use the same tape all the time. No problem. Not when you're re-recording over the tape every time.
I worked at a studio with "aging" JH24s, and we rolled over "used" tapes all the time. Again, no problem.

Last edited by soundrick; 17th August 2008 at 07:11 AM.. Reason: spelling
Old 17th August 2008
  #135
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
If you need proof that isn't always so, you can sit in the back of the control room with me and listen to the players say

"Can you playlist that and give me one more?"

"That take was better but can you peel it back and use the previous ending?"

"I can play that last stab again but it's probably faster for you to just nudge it."

It may be the way you describe on your sessions, but I often prefer the talent to get it right instead of me having to "make it right" in PT.
For me it is less common. But what I have learned from GS more than anything else is that this business is still very much regional dependent. Markets vary from each other quite a bit according to what I read here - so I'll just chalk it up to that.
Old 17th August 2008
  #136
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
I created a video explaining my system

Okay folks,

Here's two videos that my buddy and I created yesterday explaining how I integrate analog tape with my DAW:

YouTube - redwagonstudio's Channel

You can also access the videos from my Myspace site or from the link in my signature. I hope this clarifies and enlightens some people. I'd love to see more people dust off their tape decks.

By the way...can someone PM me how to embed YouTube videos in posts. I'm having trouble.

Brad
Old 17th August 2008
  #137
Lives for gear
 
illacov's Avatar
 

Thanks BRAD!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad McGowan View Post
Okay folks,

Here's two videos that my buddy and I created yesterday explaining how I integrate analog tape with my DAW:

YouTube - redwagonstudio's Channel

You can also access the videos from my Myspace site or from the link in my signature. I hope this clarifies and enlightens some people. I'd love to see more people dust off their tape decks.

Brad
BTW..I had a question that others might ask anyways. On decks that run at 15 or 30 ips would a user of the CLASP or the redwagon system notice the "tape" sound when they track with tape versus somebody who tracks on consumer decks running at the 3xx or 7xx ips? I've read from some people that the higher ips will give you more of a hifi sound so if you're going for the darker tape sound you need to run at a slower ips setting.

I know you mentioned before that an Otari deck like the 5050 deck would be better but what about those Akai and Tascam decks? While they are nothing near pro, might they provide a more immediate result/difference for someone seeking the tape sound/grit/mojo? Our AD/DA converters are already trying to give us same in same out, so if we were to consider tape nowadays we would definately want something immediate.

Just curious. I only asked this because others are already discounting using tape with a CLASP system or your system because of the issues/troubles with tape machines. So I was wondering if you had any first hand experience with tracking on the low end machines or using one for your integrated setup.

Peace
Illumination
Old 17th August 2008
  #138
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
A low end machine is going to sound low end, dude. It's really hard to say until you try whatever you have your hands on. Sometimes you find something that's a real gem but cost you $5 at a yard sale. Use your ears--you'll know if it's crappy.

Brad
Old 17th August 2008
  #139
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
Video #1

Old 17th August 2008
  #140
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
Video #2



Sorry for the crappy camera work and the poor sound quality in spots. This is my first attempt at trying to make a video. I'm hoping to redo these once I get some feedback and a chance to re-organize the material.

Brad
Old 17th August 2008
  #141
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Fuston View Post
Disclaimer: I saw the demo and will answer according to my understanding of the facts of the system after seeing it.

1) It doesn't clock the PT system.

2) It works with many different systems other than PT. They were demoing it using Nuendo.

3) The system has a setup mode used to synchronize the system before you start. When it performs that test, it checks the latency (head spacing, tape speed, etc.) so that the analog recording is laid back into the session sample accurately.

4) There is no clock in the CLASP system. You use the clock (either internal or external) that you typically use with your DAW.
I didn't see the demo but I just want to add that anolog doesn't have to clock cause there's no sample rate, it's analog.
It can be syncronized but not clocked.
Just want to avoid any confusion.
Old 17th August 2008
  #142
Lives for gear
 
lozion's Avatar
 

Mcgowan for president!
Old 17th August 2008
  #143
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
Politics are not in my blood, unfortunately. But tape is! heh

Brad
Old 17th August 2008
  #144
Gear Addict
 

clocks

Quote:
Originally Posted by matskull View Post
I didn't see the demo but I just want to add that anolog doesn't have to clock cause there's no sample rate, it's analog.
It can be syncronized but not clocked.
Just want to avoid any confusion.

hello,

when you sync pro tools to a tape machine, you clock the lynx that drives the tape machine . the lynx has to be referenced to the same clock as the pro tools rig. [actually synchronous blackburst]. you want to use a nanosyncs or something that will generate synchronous word clock and blackburst. word clock to the pro tools rig, blackburst to the lynx.


userofgear
Old 17th August 2008
  #145
Lives for gear
 
illacov's Avatar
 

Hey Brad!

Just set up a deal for next saturday to get my hands on a 3 head machine that records at 15 ips for a nice price. I'll keep the name to myself.

I did have a question or two regarding the latency and for that matter your method.

A) I see that you do the whole send a transient out and then measure the return delay in the daw manually. I suppose there is some trial and error to this correct?
There's no automatic way to do this?? At least calculating the latency thru a loopback?

B and most importantly.

What would the difference be with recording directly to tape and recording the repro head's output versus recording directly to the DAW and then using the tape machine as a hardware insert on a track with automatic latency compensation like in Cubase4??

SO basically the same thing but using recorded audio from the DAW into the tape machine back into the DAW on a track by track basis??(little more flexible, more idiot proof??) IE Guitar Channel 1 (Hardware insert RtR) Render with FX. You should get the same or similar results. Even if its a 2% difference in sound quality I think it might be worth it for the convenience.

DO you think that this would "sound" different? If you have accurate D/A would that be a major factor? Yes it would be two trips in theory from A/D to D/A back to A/D again, but it would make things pretty flexible and little less complicated I'm assuming??

I know in Reaper versus Cubase, you can put your hardware inserts on any track and then render the effected audio. Which in turn frees up your insert to be routed to any other track in Reaper.

SO on in theory could print all of their tracks to tape and back into the daw after they recorded everything they need to.

I'm not knocking your method just simply saying that this makes it even more flexible because you don't have to calculate the latency by hand or with a plugin because the DAW would do it for you. I know that in Cubase it usually locks the hardware insert once you freeze it (at least in SX3) but if Cubase 4 got rid of this problem then you're in the money.

Care to provide some insight from your perspective??
Thanks for the videos! I loved em! Don't change a thing!
Peace
Illumination
Old 18th August 2008
  #146
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by userofgear View Post
hello,

when you sync pro tools to a tape machine, you clock the lynx that drives the tape machine . the lynx has to be referenced to the same clock as the pro tools rig. [actually synchronous blackburst]. you want to use a nanosyncs or something that will generate synchronous word clock and blackburst. word clock to the pro tools rig, blackburst to the lynx.


userofgear
Of course, I was just saying that analog doesn't have to be clocked cause clocks are for digital gear.
Of course if you got digital gear integrated with your tape machine you'd need to clock them but it doesn't have anything to do with the tape machine itself.
Like you said you'd then need a syncroniser.
Old 18th August 2008
  #147
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by illacov View Post
Just set up a deal for next saturday to get my hands on a 3 head machine that records at 15 ips for a nice price. I'll keep the name to myself.

I did have a question or two regarding the latency and for that matter your method.

A) I see that you do the whole send a transient out and then measure the return delay in the daw manually. I suppose there is some trial and error to this correct?
There's no automatic way to do this?? At least calculating the latency thru a loopback?

B and most importantly.

What would the difference be with recording directly to tape and recording the repro head's output versus recording directly to the DAW and then using the tape machine as a hardware insert on a track with automatic latency compensation like in Cubase4??

SO basically the same thing but using recorded audio from the DAW into the tape machine back into the DAW on a track by track basis??(little more flexible, more idiot proof??) IE Guitar Channel 1 (Hardware insert RtR) Render with FX. You should get the same or similar results. Even if its a 2% difference in sound quality I think it might be worth it for the convenience.

DO you think that this would "sound" different? If you have accurate D/A would that be a major factor? Yes it would be two trips in theory from A/D to D/A back to A/D again, but it would make things pretty flexible and little less complicated I'm assuming??

I know in Reaper versus Cubase, you can put your hardware inserts on any track and then render the effected audio. Which in turn frees up your insert to be routed to any other track in Reaper.

SO on in theory could print all of their tracks to tape and back into the daw after they recorded everything they need to.

I'm not knocking your method just simply saying that this makes it even more flexible because you don't have to calculate the latency by hand or with a plugin because the DAW would do it for you. I know that in Cubase it usually locks the hardware insert once you freeze it (at least in SX3) but if Cubase 4 got rid of this problem then you're in the money.

Care to provide some insight from your perspective??
Thanks for the videos! I loved em! Don't change a thing!
Peace
Illumination
If you really want to have the benifit of tape, it'd be better to drive it directly with a nice pre, make those red light flash a little bit , now you got tape compression.
if you use the tape in cubase as an insert, you're signal would be converted two times before it gets to tape, you'd also need to find a way to get your signal hot enough to saturate the tape properly, I ppersonally think recording directly to tape would be much better.
Old 18th August 2008
  #148
Lives for gear
 
duvalle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by matskull View Post
if you use the tape in cubase as an insert, you're signal would be converted two times before it gets to tape, you'd also need to find a way to get your signal hot enough to saturate the tape properly, I ppersonally think recording directly to tape would be much better.
may i disagree ... ?
heh

i now have a tape deck inserted as an external efx into cubase 4.
i go: DA -> PreAmp -> Dominator/Limiter -> TAPE -> Vitalizer -> AD.
it works just as easy as inserting any other outboard.

i can get the tape as hot as i want and and i can hear my adjustments in real time!
so it's great to have that for i.e. electronic music ...

of course when recording real live stuff, it would be better to go directly to tape ...


cheers!
Old 18th August 2008
  #149
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad McGowan View Post
Okay folks,

Here's two videos that my buddy and I created yesterday explaining how I integrate analog tape with my DAW:

YouTube - redwagonstudio's Channel

You can also access the videos from my Myspace site or from the link in my signature. I hope this clarifies and enlightens some people. I'd love to see more people dust off their tape decks.

By the way...can someone PM me how to embed YouTube videos in posts. I'm having trouble.

Brad

Really enjoyed the Vids

For the life on me I cannot find a ma vst plug in that can report latency like
the Voxengo on.
Old 18th August 2008
  #150
Lives for gear
 
illacov's Avatar
 

Point taken...

Quote:
Originally Posted by matskull View Post
If you really want to have the benifit of tape, it'd be better to drive it directly with a nice pre, make those red light flash a little bit , now you got tape compression.
if you use the tape in cubase as an insert, you're signal would be converted two times before it gets to tape, you'd also need to find a way to get your signal hot enough to saturate the tape properly, I ppersonally think recording directly to tape would be much better.
So what about using a pre before the tape deck on a hardware insert so you can drive it??

I have access to 2 PM1000s, 2 PM700s (soon anyway!) and an MPA Gold with Mullards, I'm beyond certain one of these units would do the job.

Probably the cleanest unit I have would do the job so I don't introduce any more noise than necessary.

I can't wait to try my new RTR on drums! Should be insane!
BTW I'm glad that what I suggested is easy to implement. I love Brad's concept but as I mentioned in another thread, I don't want to deal with retracking too much stuff if all we have to do is "reamp" it with a Reel to Reel from the DAW.

Peace
Illumination.
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
midy / High end
11
Plush / So much gear, so little time
1
echorec / High end
11
BlackSoultan / Rap + Hip Hop engineering and production
8
gevermil / So much gear, so little time
0

Forum Jump
Forum Jump