The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
The Genetic Code For Tape Has Been Conquered!!! (AnaMod)
Old 18th January 2007
  #31
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new View Post
Hey Lou

Change your expectations and things are much brighter.

(see... I have my shades on)

If you are expecting an "emulation" to actually sound like the unit it is emulating then you are in for a negative surprise.....

BUT

If you are expecting a unit to help you make better recordings and you evaluate each unit as you would any other unit that you expect to help you make better recordings you might be in for a positive surprise. In doing so now that each unit is judged by the same criteria (i.e. does it sound good) not by the word "emulation" (i.e. does it sound like something else) you may find a "keeper."

If you throw the name and the emulation concept out the window a whole new world of great gear can open up.

Most "emulation" devices that I have tried have fallen short of the unit they are going after but many of them have their own thing going on that is VERY useful in my arsenal.. I guess YMMV but I just hate seeing people put off by simple words like "emulation." I judge a tool by it's usefulness in my studio not by it's name.

That's why I said if it's a useful tool, then great. But this whole copy/ emulation bs is that. I have nothing against more good toys, just quit telling me the genetic code has been conquered, that this time we really got it. Howsa about it's "inspired by"
Old 18th January 2007
  #32
Lives for gear
 
RusRant's Avatar
 

It looks like when Behringer and Avalon have a baby. It looks like berhinger stuff to me, but what are looks? I wouldn't pay that for a emulator of anything. I would spend my $ on the real deal if I hadn't already moved on from analog.
Old 18th January 2007
  #33
Gear Addict
 
Wiggum, Ralph's Avatar
 

Um, when was the last time an item sold for the list price? I dont know how much cheaper it will be, but Im pretty sure it won't hold the price tag of $2995.00

I'm just waiting for some of the early comments on this unit, before I get my hopes up too high.
Old 18th January 2007
  #34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musiclab View Post
That's why I said if it's a useful tool, then great. But this whole copy/ emulation bs is that. I have nothing against more good toys, just quit telling me the genetic code has been conquered, that this time we really got it. Howsa about it's "inspired by"
That I can COMPLETELY agree with.

I think the problem is that when the designers make a piece of gear they need to sell units (obviously that is the whole goal). The only way to sell units is to market them and part of marketing is to appeal to the customers "needs" be they actual needs or inflated needs. I see "inflated needs" as "you know that people talk about X all the time and you need X to make better recordings so we are going to give you X in a pretty package with a bow on it."

All of that is marketing and you are 1000% correct, it is BS. I want good tools. Hype like "Emulation" and "conquered genetic code" goes in one ear and out the other for me. I understand the designer needs to make cash, I respect that so I let them have their words but at the end of the day if it sounds good I use it, if it doesn't I don't.

I think we are on the same page Lou! Rock on!
Old 18th January 2007
  #35
Lives for gear
 
I.R.Baboon's Avatar
My guess is it won't sound exactly like tape

but that's cool

maybe it'll have its own sound that is equally usable

maybe a new sound?
Old 18th January 2007
  #36
Gear Addict
 

Sounds like a neat idea.
Old 18th January 2007
  #37
Moderator
 
Tim Farrant's Avatar
 

Quote:
The ATS-Analog Tape Simulator is the first product that uses the AnaMod process for modeling complex analog circuitry entirely in the analog domain. Specially developed analog building blocks are 'coded' to emulate the behavior of a complex analog system.
I am intrigued by this statement and even more intrigued by how this actually works.

Does it mean - it could conceivably emulate itself???
Old 18th January 2007
  #38
Lives for gear
 
84K's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Farrant View Post
I am intrigued by this statement and even more intrigued by how this actually works.

Does it mean - it could conceivably emulate itself???
As I understand, it is an entirely new technology that can be applied to modelling compressors, eqs, mic pres, etc. to greater accuracy that ever before. I have not heard it yet, but I will definitely give it a good hard listen. I am excited based on who the designers are. I have a great deal of respect for both of them.
Old 18th January 2007
  #39
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new View Post
Most "emulation" devices that I have tried have fallen short of the unit they are going after but many of them have their own thing going on that is VERY useful in my arsenal.
I don't believe in the Magic Box products. And that's what this is. Put that money into a microphone. Better yet, get better with the mics you have.

Sucking less is a free ugprade.

JSL
Old 18th January 2007
  #40
Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
I don't believe in the Magic Box products. And that's what this is.
Is it? You have heard it then?

heh

The point is I judge gear by how it sounds not by it's name or marketing slant. Makes logical sense to me but what do I know.....

Old 18th January 2007
  #41
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new View Post
Is it? You have heard it then?

heh

The point is I judge gear by how it sounds not by it's name or marketing slant. Makes logical sense to me but what do I know.....

I take your point, but in my defense, I am not judging it by its name or marketing slant, but on what it actually purports to do. By a "Magic Box" product, I mean a product that serves no purpose other than to "magically" make your stuff sound less crappy. While I might, at a stretch, spend a couple hundred bucks on a plug-in like that, which can have dozens of instantiations, I doubt very much that I will ever think very much of spending ten times that amount on a two-channel hardware Magic Box.

The lack of a Magic Box has never been any engineer's problem, so I doubt that getting a Magic Box is likely to be anyone's best $3000 solution. But it is true, I have not heard it. If it really does turn **** to shinola, I guess I will have to buy one, so I can fire all my talented staff and replace them with talentless hacks who will work for free.

JSL
Old 19th January 2007
  #42
Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
I take your point, but in my defense, I am not judging it by its name or marketing slant, but on what it actually purports to do. By a "Magic Box" product, I mean a product that serves no purpose other than to "magically" make your stuff sound less crappy. While I might, at a stretch, spend a couple hundred bucks on a plug-in like that, which can have dozens of instantiations, I doubt very much that I will ever think very much of spending ten times that amount on a two-channel hardware Magic Box.

The lack of a Magic Box has never been any engineer's problem, so I doubt that getting a Magic Box is likely to be anyone's best $3000 solution. But it is true, I have not heard it. If it really does turn **** to shinola, I guess I will have to buy one, so I can fire all my talented staff and replace them with talentless hacks who will work for free.

JSL
Hey JSL

It's all good, we are on the same page.

Let me say this. First I never said that hardware would replace talent, talent is very important and no gear can make up for the complete lack of talent right?

That said, gear does matter. I don't care what the "in thing" is to say gear makes a difference. It is MUCH easier to use good gear to make a great finished product that it is to use bad gear.

Also one last thing. You said...

Quote:
Originally Posted by you
By a "Magic Box" product, I mean a product that serves no purpose other than to "magically" make your stuff sound less crappy.
Can't you use that very definition of just about any piece of kit we talk about here at Gearslutz? I can't describe why a 1176 sounds so good, magic to me really. In the end the goal of every unit in my rack is to make my stuff sound good.... or "less crappy" depending on what my mixes sound like...



The only difference that I personally see with this AnaMod is that it is down on my list of things I need right now. That does not make it useless it just does not reach the top of my priority list right now. If it can make my mixes better like a good 1176, "magicly" or other wise then the AnaMd would be a keeper for me... Maybe someday I will find out.

Rock on!

Old 19th January 2007
  #43
Lives for gear
 
AlexLakis's Avatar
 



The proper tools in the proper hands...

Old 19th January 2007
  #44
Lives for gear
It's missing a 4 postion switch. Studer, MCI, Otari, Tascam, so you can go for the right sound depending on the project budget. Dang, I think it does have one already. It really needs 5 postions so the last one can emulate Fostex.
Old 19th January 2007
  #45
Lives for gear
 
pigpen's Avatar
 

I wanna hear it 84...let me know when you have!
Old 19th January 2007
  #46
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new View Post
Can't you use that very definition of just about any piece of kit we talk about here at Gearslutz? I can't describe why a 1176 sounds so good, magic to me really.
I can clear this up for you. The 1176 is a limiter, and a great-sounding one.

JSL
Old 19th January 2007
  #47
Gear Addict
 
kenn.michael's Avatar
 

I heard it today. Hard to really hear it in headphones on a noisy exhibit floor.... but I liked what I heard. It's definitely better than any other 'emulator' I've heard. Had a nice vibe to it.

I'd have to hear it in my studio to really make a definite decision about it though.

I personally still like having reels turning...
Old 19th January 2007
  #48
Gear Head
 

When I flipped the tape-selector switch on the AnaMod ATS-1 between GP9 and 456, I literally had chills/goosebumps. Listening to it, I was pretty much blown away. Even at extreme settings, it sounded like tape, even to the point of getting that woolly lower-mid resonance/feedback when you pin the needle with the input at 10. And with no better way to explain it but by quoting an overused cliche about tape, at moderate settings, the effect was much like "glue."

I spent about half an hour talking to Greg and Dave about the AnaMod concept. In school, I took many courses on signals, systems, acoustics, discrete-time signal processing, etc... and one series of lectures I recall really enjoying pertained to emulating analog circuits in digital domain, digital circuits in analog domain, circuits as physical objects, and physical objects as circuits. So hearing Greg and Dave's explanations really intrigued me. I've known Dave for several years now; he's one of the smartest (and most humble) engineers I've met--even counting all the professors and fellow grad students from my years at MIT. I don't know Greg so well, but every time I've had a conversation with him, I've walked away impressed.

Over the years, I've heard a number of boxes and plug-ins that purport to "warm" up the signal much like tape does (Crane Song, McDSP, PSP, RND Portico, FATSO, etc ), but to my ears, none of these even come close to sounding as close to tape as the AnaMod (or the new Digidesign plug-in that uses the same model) does.

In my personal studio, I own five FATSOs through which I track just about everything. I don't consider the FATSO a tape emulator. Instead, I think of it as a unique dynamics processor for taking the "bite" out of digitally-recorded tracks such that songs with FATSO'ed tracks are easier to mix.

The AnaMod ATS-1, on the other hand, is what I'd call a tape emulator... with instant machine/formulation switching... and without all the alignment/cleaning/maintenance hassles.

I can't wait to hear more machine/tape emulations. For the NAMM show, Dave and Greg had 3M, Studer, GP9, and 456 settings. But new emulations (available as SIMM cards) will be available in the near future. Even EMI tape!

Last night, I had dinner with three colleagues whose opinions I value and whose body of work as engineers/producers inspires me: Larry Crane, John Baccigaluppi, and Thom Monahan. All three of them agreed with me that the ATS-1 was one of the coolest products they heard at NAMM.
Old 19th January 2007
  #49
Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
I can clear this up for you. The 1176 is a limiter, and a great-sounding one.

JSL
Obviously, but above being a comp / limiter, on a higher level it is a hardware device that makes my productions sound better if I use it correctly. Quality hardware sounds good. I don't know how to design circuits I just know when I plug in a well designed unit it puts a smile on my face.

I assume with Greg Gualtieri behind the product the design will be solid and it would put a smile on my face like any other quality design would.

I guess what get's my goat on this subject is the knee-jerk reactions that many folks here have as soon as the word "emulation" comes up before any product is even released or anyone gets a chance to really hear it (not aimed at you directly JSL ). Who knows if you used it it might put a smile on your face as well?

It's all good, different strokes.
Old 19th January 2007
  #50
Lives for gear
 
Plush's Avatar
But we already have three beautiful tape machines here.

I think I'll just use them.
Old 19th January 2007
  #51
Rep
Lives for gear
 
Rep's Avatar
Wait-a-minute
...lets not start falling all over ourselves
Just Because it is Packaged in a Cool-looking rack-mount box,
...and has big beefy knobs,
Like a Plug-In ... without "tape" involved ,
it is still only a TAPE SIMULATOR .
No matter what way you cut it
Cool or not ... Usable or not ... good effect or Not.

If it sounds pleasing to the sound you are trying to achieve use it
... but lets stop calling these Magic boxes "TAPE boxes"
when there is No tape involved .
Call it a : TAPE Deck SIMULATOR .

Hell ... Make a Better TAPE SIMULATOR of your own !
Get a real atr / studer,
and then just use it without tape for tape Head , circuitry, and Noise,
and then follow the signal up with A "gluey" compressor...
...Walla ... best sounding "Sim"

That said ... I don't fallow any of the Hype anymore,
I have totally Moved on from the tape sound and loudness wars
( barley use compression anymore) and everything Now shines .

Good recording techniques, and good converters,
make digital sound beautiful and a Joy to work with.


.
Old 19th January 2007
  #52
Lives for gear
 
robot gigante's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by zboy2854 View Post
It's called sarcasm, check into it. Or has GS become an irony-free zone?

I'm sure some people might find the box interesting for their purposes, but again, for $2995 these days you can pick up a nice 16 or 24 track analog machine and use it as a multi-channel analog processor just the same.

That we are now seeking to replicate analog tape, when for the same price you can have the real thing (and lots more channels of it), is about as ironic as it gets. Sorry if you don't find the humor in that as I do.
No kidding... how many of these boxes would you need to track drums with..?

That's assuming it does what it says it does of course; I don't like the concept or implementation of emulations much so far either.
Old 19th January 2007
  #53
Lives for gear
 
noiseflaw's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by microsoftsucks View Post
Over the years, I've heard a number of boxes and plug-ins that purport to "warm" up the signal much like tape does (Crane Song, McDSP, PSP, RND Portico, FATSO, etc ), but to my ears, none of these even come close to sounding as close to tape as the AnaMod (or the new Digidesign plug-in that uses the same model) does.
Hmm...

So to your ears Digis $400 bundle outclasses all of those expensive hardware boxes and the other software stuff and is in the same ball park as the $3000 Anamod.

I'm feeling a little dizzy - the hype is making me queesy, perhaps I should lie down when the hysteria is over.
Old 19th January 2007
  #54
Lives for gear
 
Stitch333's Avatar
 

I like tape and I like gear. I'll check it out before I cast a stone...
Old 19th January 2007
  #55
Deleted bd1be4f
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by robot gigante View Post
No kidding... how many of these boxes would you need to track drums with..?

That's assuming it does what it says it does of course; I don't like the concept or implementation of emulations much so far either.
Right, that's the thing. Even granting the assumption that this box has faithfully captured the characteristics imparted by analog tape and all things are equal, why spend $3K for only 2 channels of analog tape processing, when you can get 16 or 24 channels for the same price these days? I just don't get the economics of it, even if this box is the real deal.
Old 20th January 2007
  #56
Lives for gear
 
noiseflaw's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zboy2854 View Post
Right, that's the thing. Even granting the assumption that this box has faithfully captured the characteristics imparted by analog tape and all things are equal, why spend $3K for only 2 channels of analog tape processing, when you can get 16 or 24 channels for the same price these days? I just don't get the economics of it, even if this box is the real deal.
I guess the understanding is as as been mentioned before - that most users are just going to want to either process their 2 track mix or master to it - I dunno, but if it is really that good - it's a snip, seems like the whole audio world has, or is just about to go Tape Emu crazy. But for $3000 it had better be absolutely convincing or it wil die on it's ar*se.

We will see..............
Old 20th January 2007
  #57
Lives for gear
 
Ribbonmicguy's Avatar
I've listened to the unit yesterday!

Sounds good! Though i wish i can listen to it to non-mastered material...

It does something to the transient of the material, like tapering the edges (saturation?)

I think it doesn't look pretty, but it doesn't have to look pretty if it sounds good.

I'd buy it!
Old 20th January 2007
  #58
Lives for gear
 
John Suitcase's Avatar
 

I use the Tritone stuff, and Cubase's Magento to good effect, but in every case, you're taking a digital sound and trying to reverse-engineer an analogue sound. I think to be effective, you'd have to track through something like this, wouldn't you?

Maybe I'm wrong, but something recorded to tape, then bounced to digital sounds a bit different than something recorded directly to digital, then bounced to tape.

Agree, disagree?

I've thought about building a box that'd have nothing but Jensen 10k:10k transformers, then inserting that between my pre's and my A/D, or in an effect loop, just to hear if it imparts anything useful... Crazy talk?!
Old 20th January 2007
  #59
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by zboy2854 View Post
Right, that's the thing. Even granting the assumption that this box has faithfully captured the characteristics imparted by analog tape and all things are equal, why spend $3K for only 2 channels of analog tape processing, when you can get 16 or 24 channels for the same price these days? I just don't get the economics of it, even if this box is the real deal.
an ATR 102 or studer 820 are alot more than $3K, + tape costs and storage, + maintenance, + alignment etc. time, and don't forget the physical space they take up.

and 1 track on a 24 track machine doesn't sound even close to 1 track on a 1/2" machine.

if it's a faithful reproduction of a 1/2" 2 track machine, i'd get it in a second.
Old 20th January 2007
  #60
Lives for gear
 
kevinc's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new View Post
Hey Lou

Change your expectations and things are much brighter.

(see... I have my shades on)

If you are expecting an "emulation" to actually sound like the unit it is emulating then you are in for a negative surprise.....

BUT

If you are expecting a unit to help you make better recordings and you evaluate each unit as you would any other unit that you expect to help you make better recordings you might be in for a positive surprise. In doing so now that each unit is judged by the same criteria (i.e. does it sound good) not by the word "emulation" (i.e. does it sound like something else) you may find a "keeper."

If you throw the name and the emulation concept out the window a whole new world of great gear can open up.

Most "emulation" devices that I have tried have fallen short of the unit they are going after but many of them have their own thing going on that is VERY useful in my arsenal.. I guess YMMV but I just hate seeing people put off by simple words like "emulation." I judge a tool by it's usefulness in my studio not by it's name.



I agree totally.

Just use it as a tool to make your recordings sound better. It`s all just more or less adding desirable distortion to the signal in some way. I could see owning 1 of each of the variuous tape emulation devices and just adding a bit of this and that as you see fit.

It doesn`t sound exactly like tape but who needs it if you can just simply make things sound really big and round anyways.


Just the same I`d love to have a real high quality 4 track laying around and just track through it on the way in to the DAW. That`d be cheap and nice to use alongside some of the emualtion stuff.
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
Forum Jump
Forum Jump