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
2" Tape is dead long live Pro Tools!!! Dynamics Processors (HW)
Old 13th October 2002
  #31
One with big hooves
 
Jay Kahrs's Avatar
Quote:
Originally posted by 2" Tape sucks!
The ISA 430 is great on bass and Electric & Distorted guitars, so Ido not know if i should keep this piece or not. My summit MPC-100A feels like everithing put through it gets soft and muddy, but the compressor is extremely fast for being a hybrid with tubes. So maybee this piece of gear will be sold to. Daking on the other hand is extremely good sounding on Vocals and Aucoustic guitars, but sounds like crap on electric & distorted guitars?!?
I don't think the Dakings sound good as mic pres on vocals most of the time. Sometimes it's the rigt sound but the other 97% of the time I don't think they sound right. Most of the time I use them on electric guitar they sound pretty good, other choices are Telefunken, Neve or OSA mic pres. Different tastes I guess. I'm also not a fan of the C12VR. That mic should sound amazing for what it costs but it doesn't IMHO. It does look good, but so does the green & gold MXL V67 which is about $150.

Also, 2" tape isn't dead. I just finished cutting basics with a band a few hours ago and we went through two reels of GP9 at 15ips, +9 over 185 on an MCI JH-24. Sounds great. They cut their last project at my place going direct to a rented PT system and prefer the sound of tape.

Isn't it funny how almost everyone wants the sound of tape and real gear rather then plug-in emulations but no one wants to use the real deal?
Old 13th October 2002
  #32
Super Moderator
 
Remoteness's Avatar
Just keep telling everyone 2' sucks, so I can buy two or four Studer A827's for $1000.00 buck a piece!

Do a mass email and stuff.

Old 13th October 2002
  #33
Gear Head
 

I think 2" Tape sound is the best, that is why I am trying get that with modern editing capabillites. Many of todays multi platinum artists can not even sing or perform, thats why we need the editing thing.

So the conclusion is I love the 2" sound but hate the format.

Quote:
Originally posted by Jay Kahrs


I don't think the Dakings sound good as mic pres on vocals most of the time. Sometimes it's the rigt sound but the other 97% of the time I don't think they sound right. Most of the time I use them on electric guitar they sound pretty good, other choices are Telefunken, Neve or OSA mic pres. Different tastes I guess.
I have a pair of the Daking Micpre/EQ and a pair of Daking Compressor/Limiter, these sounds just amazing on drums, just amazing. But I am looking for that incredible vocal chain.

I have a Manley Ref-C >>> Micpre (Flamingo+ibis or Element 78Micpre/EQ) >>> Compressor (Trakker or STC-8) >>> A/D Hedd 192 >>> PT HD >>> D/A Hedd 192.

I am asking for help to determine wich one to choose between Falmingo+ibis or Element78Micpre/EQ and Trakker or STC-8.

I have no possibility to A/B check these piceses of gear, so if any body has A/B them please give me your opinion.

Thanx everybody, this forum is freaking great.
Old 13th October 2002
  #34
Quote:
Originally posted by 2" Tape sucks!
I think 2" Tape sound is the best, that is why I am trying get that with modern editing capabillites. Many of todays multi platinum artists can not even sing or perform, thats why we need the editing thing.
Why not use both?

Most artists we work with track to 2" and transfer to PT for editing - all the gain of analog tape compression with the editing abilties of PT...
Old 13th October 2002
  #35
Lives for gear
 
drundall's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Brad Blackwood


Why not use both?

Most artists we work with track to 2" and transfer to PT for editing - all the gain of analog tape compression with the editing abilties of PT...
Word. It's what a lot of people are doing, at least 'round these parts...
Old 14th October 2002
  #36
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Brad Blackwood


Why not use both?

Most artists we work with track to 2" and transfer to PT for editing - all the gain of analog tape compression with the editing abilties of PT...
Exactly.

Nearly every real project I've seen this year used both 2" and PT.

Except the project I'm producing currently, which is an album exclusively to 2" with no editing. It takes more time to get performances that don't need to be edited, but it's way more real and interesting.
Old 14th October 2002
  #37
FX smörgåsbord user
 
Charles Dye's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon
...every real project...
real?
Old 14th October 2002
  #38
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Yes, Charles, real as in those that have the means, i.e. the engineer, the performers and the budget, to choose to work with 2".

Those that don't, obviously won't.
Old 14th October 2002
  #39
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

The second use in my post of the word 'real' pertained to performances based on artistic talent and the magic of the moment.

Those are the kind of performances I'm interested in preparing and capturing well and not editing ad nauseum afterwards.

Real artists, real performances, and sufficient budget to afford certain choices.

Charles, you are a public, MOA-esteemed member of the Alsihad army who converts more recruits every day into drinking the kool-aid. That's cool. Let's just say that I have good ears and monitors and won't agree with you, though my life would certainly be easier if I did. End of topic as far as I'm concerned.
Old 14th October 2002
  #40
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

real opposed to fake?

so now jon is saying if its not done on 2" with an engineer AND a producer AND a budget... its somehow not "real"

i dont think the world jon lives in is real.
Old 14th October 2002
  #41
Gear Head
 
kushan_ku's Avatar
 

SSSHHH!!!

My clients might find out all the work I did for them was fake!!

hehehe

Old 14th October 2002
  #42
Lives for gear
 
drundall's Avatar
 

Been doing lots of fake work lately, the suck thing is they pay me in fake money.
Old 14th October 2002
  #43
Gear Addict
 

I was wondering how long it would take this thread to go into full Jihad.

Release the Monkeys of War!
dfegad dfegad dfegad dfegad

Bear
Old 14th October 2002
  #44
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
real opposed to fake?

so now jon is saying if its not done on 2" with an engineer AND a producer AND a budget... its somehow not "real"

i dont think the world jon lives in is real.
No, you didn't read my post. I explained what I meant, and it's not what you seem to understand.
Old 14th October 2002
  #45
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon


No, you didn't read my post. I explained what I meant, and it's not what you seem to understand.
Jon, no need to get all worked up. It's just time to realize that things are evolving for each second that passes by. Would you rather have a Mercedes from the 1950:s or a brand new Mercedes SLR Vision? It is just a matter of taste, and if you like playing around with old tape that's totally ok the clowns will not eat you when you are sleeping.

I think Mr. Charles Dye is a really nice PT guy that I totally respect for his talent.
Can you imagine how hard it is to get Digital to sound Analogue, that most mean that we that are working with PT must be incredibly good engineers.

I have found out that the sound I strived to get 10 years ago is not the one I am looking for today. What I mean is you should never relax and play it safe in this business because you will be left braging about old productions and not getting any new productions. My conclusion is not to be afraid of new technology, instead you should embrace it because the old technology is not going anywhere, you can always fall back on your well tried out setups.
Old 14th October 2002
  #46
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon
The second use in my post of the word 'real' pertained to performances based on artistic talent and the magic of the moment.

Those are the kind of performances I'm interested in preparing and capturing well and not editing ad nauseum afterwards.

Real artists, real performances, and sufficient budget to afford certain choices.
Old 14th October 2002
  #47
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon
Yes, Charles, real as in those that have the means, i.e. the engineer, the performers and the budget, to choose to work with 2".
and what am i not getting here? oh yeah, that you are full of yourself.
Old 14th October 2002
  #48
Super Moderator
 
Remoteness's Avatar
2" or no 2", it really comes down to one thing at the end...

It's about the Ear and not the Gear!

There's nothing wrong with also being Earslutz.
Old 14th October 2002
  #49
Lives for gear
 
Knox's Avatar
 

This whole thread was one that I was staying out of because it was just mean't to get things stirred up . . . . just like the 'Neve Sucks' post. I mean what is the point? Don't be an asshole . . . . Neve doesn't suck and 2" tape isn't dead.

I will say that almost everything I do here is 2". . . . and the session yeterday proved for the millionth time why.

We were tracking on 2" (my preference by far) . . . . then we went to digital for editing (only because the client wanted to, AGAIN, not my preference as I would make someone play it over) . . . . . after the material was transfered I was a/b ing them . . . . . WHAT A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!!

The digital had NO front to back depth . . . most of the punch and the nice low end was gone and the left to right spread seemed lacking . . . . and that was on the first listen AND it was a transfer of something originally recorded on 2 "!.

Again . . . I would love to hear someone make a rock record . . . say Van Halen's first record for example, on Digital Performer or Pro Tools and get it to sound anything close. THAT is why I stay with 2". Doesn't mean that a record can't be made on a computer . . . . as it obviously can. I have to enjoy what I am doing and recording . . . . and for me, to stare at a computer all day to have it sound less then I am seeking is not what I am looking to do. Doesn't mean a relevant record can't be made on a computer though.
Old 14th October 2002
  #50
Ted
Gear Maniac
 

The one thing about Jon is he has, and has had, all the formats being discussed. He went from 2", to all PT, and then back to hybrid all in his own studio. He's an authority on this subject. He's not saying you can't get a good sound/marketable product out of all digital. You can. He's saying he likes the musicality of going to 2" better and he sincerely wishes he didn't. I respect the fact he tried as hard as he could(spent lots of time/monies) to like going all PT. For the stuff he's doing most of the time it doesn't work out. I'm with him. I can't make it work out either even with the 192s.

For the way music is being produced today all PT is probably just fine. Music is changing. I'm a classic rock kind of guy. I like that 2"/mixing to tape kind of sound. I'm having a very difficult time getting those kind of sounds in and out of PT. Like Brad said if tape is dead why do we all want/have tape emulators? It's not just the tape sounds I'm missing though....

In the midst of all digital recording has come edit mania. I can't stand this. I watched the PT 6.0 demo at AES and was disgusted. It's no longer a tool, it is the music! We don't need no stinkin drummer or a vocalist that can sing in tune anymore. We'll just fix it in the mix literally! What you end up with is perfect music. It sounds good but does not move you. Well music is not perfect and the humans that are listening aren't and will never be either. Is this all PTs problem? No it is a great tool but it's being abused. I look at it like this. We need gene cloning to eliminate diseases not to create a blond haired, blue eyed, daughter.

There absolutely are things you can do in digital you can't do in 2" but beyond a certain point is this a good thing or a bad thing?My point is, some of us like 2" not just for the tape sound but also for the "raw" factor. It makes the musicians/engineer work harder. I like that. It took Nancy Wilson 7 hours to sing "These Dreams". Near the end she was calling Ron Nevison everything in the book. Of course he was provoking her intentionally. In the end she nailed it in spite of him which is exactly why it sounds so good/full of life. Would it have sounded that way being Autotuned? The last Aerosmith album sounded so thin. It was tracked in PT and mixed to SSL. Rumor has it that won't happen again... Something happens when you know you've got to get it in this take. I fear the elimination of this type of "real" thinking as stated in Jon's post above.

I respect Jon. I respect you guys as I know Jon does too. He loves this stuff. I didn't want this to turn into the old debate but I did want to get this off my chest. A lot of it is not whether digital sounds better it's what Franken Editing is doing to the music. As AJ says "It's all about the song" and he's right. ProTools nor 2" will never replace this. On the other hand you can record a great song on about anything and get great results.

Just my 2 cents. Flame away!

Thanks,
Ted.
Old 14th October 2002
  #51
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Knox

We were tracking on 2" (my preference by far) . . . . then we went to digital for editing (only because the client wanted to, AGAIN, not my preference as I would make someone play it over) . . . . . after the material was transfered I was a/b ing them . . . . . WHAT A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!!
Peace brother, I am not an asshole I am a pretty enlighted person. I told you once but since you not have been reading I will tell it to you once more. So read carefully. I love the 2" Tape sound...... rollz but I am not as blessed as you are, the artists I work with do not go by names such as Michael & Janet Jackson, Madonna, Celine Dion, Bruce Dickinson, James Brown, Milli &Vanilli, Jenny Jones, Montel, Ricki Lake, Toni Braxton, Mariah Carey and Whitney Houston. If any of these singers comes in to my studio I would make a No. 1 hit song in 2 hours with an old 2 track cassette desk! But right now I am working with medium rare artists, and Record companys that want more than 1 album a year, we have to produce 1 song every week not 1 song every month MR.

If I were to use 2" my face would look like this
Old 14th October 2002
  #52
FX smörgåsbord user
 
Charles Dye's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by vudoo
Charles,

What's your typical chain for drums during tracking AND mix down ??? Do you still rely on ouboard during mixing or only during tracking ??
I do a fair amount of drums for record label and movie score. I'm still trying to find the ultimate set up that i can be satisfied with for the majority of the sessions.
I just bought a few Daking and they are absolutely superb for drums...the EQ's are also GREAT. I'm still checking out different compressors, i already have a couple distressors and a Joe Meek SC2. What do you all think ?? Suggestions ?? Thanks
When I'm fortunate enough to record drums @ The Hit Factory in Miami this is the set-up I often use:

Mics

Kick (Inside): MD 421
Kick (1.5 to 2 feet out): U-47 FET
Snare: SM-57
HH: AKG 451
Toms: MD 421's
OH's: AKG 451's
Rooms: U-87's

Console

Neve 8078

Outboard Compressors + EQ

Kick (both mics bussed together): dbx 160 --> Pultec EQP-1A
Snare: dbx 160 --> Pultec EQP-1A + Pultec MEQ-5
Rooms: Pair of 1176's


But no matter where I record drums I'm always looking to get a bit of crunch out of the pre's and EQ's, and a nice punchie sound from the compressors. The gear you mentioned sounds like it would definitely do a great job. The Distressors would be excellent for kick, snare + room.

Regarding mixing drums. I'm an all-in-the-box PT mixer kinda guy, and my basic chain with drums is: DaD Valve or AnalogChannel AC1 --> RenEQ --> RenComp --> DaDTape or AnalogChannel AC2. My use of saturation plugs (DUY + McDSP) always depends on how warm the tracks are to start with, and not every track needs it.

In the September Hard Disk Life column in DIGIZINE (an educational e-zine on the Digi website) I talked about my usual mixing set-up for dums in detail. If you'd like you can read it here: Hard Disk Life - September

I hope you find this helpful.

Charles
Old 14th October 2002
  #53
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by 2" Tape sucks!
I think Mr. Charles Dye is a really nice PT guy that I totally respect for his talent.

Can you imagine how hard it is to get Digital to sound Analogue, that most mean that we that are working with PT must be incredibly good engineers.
I really agree with your first sentence.

About trying to get digital to sound like analog...why not just track to analog then xfer it to PT, if that is the sound you're after? Use the strengths of both formats, when needed. A reel of 2" isn't that expensive...you could track 3 songs, dump to PT, then use the tape to track 3 more...and do the whole album with a reel or two. I've seen major label projects do just that, a whole album using 2-4 reels.
Old 14th October 2002
  #54
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Ted,

Thanks from the bottom of my heart for your post. You expressed what I feel better than I ever could.

Jon
Old 14th October 2002
  #55
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Charles Dye


Kick (Inside): MD 421
Kick (1.5 to 2 feet out): U-47 FET
Snare: SM-57
HH: AKG 451
Toms: MD 421's
OH's: AKG 451's
Rooms: U-87's
Add an ATM25 inside the kick in addition to the 421, and some more room mics, and that is exactly my go-to setup as well.

For more information, see the "Rock drum tracking session - Day 1" thread from about a month ago on the High End forum.
Old 14th October 2002
  #56
"why not just track to analog then xfer it to PT?"

- Drum punch ins & especially outs are a royal PITA on tape IMHO

That's one advantage with a DAW.
Old 14th October 2002
  #57
Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
Drum punch ins & especially outs are a royal PITA on tape IMHO

That's one advantage with a DAW.
Is that a format issue or a crappy drummer issue?

Hehe... all in fun...
Old 14th October 2002
  #58
Gear Maniac
 
Neve Sucks!'s Avatar
 

If you can´t get your Protools recordings to sound like an analog recorder (with or without a Neve desk) you should quit engineering! fuuck

The problem is not me. It´s the record companys that keeping sending me ****ty artists.......(and a do like the amounts on my invoices) grggt
Old 14th October 2002
  #59
Moderator emeritus
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
real opposed to fake?

so now jon is saying if its not done on 2" with an engineer AND a producer AND a budget... its somehow not "real"

i dont think the world jon lives in is real.
Well, jon's definition of 'real' apparently means that someone is paying for it, as opposed to doing demo or spec deals for friends. And I can even see that most 2" projects would be 'real' by that standard, since tape costs are so high (compared to the costs of hard disk recording or even DTRS machines).

But there are some 'real' projects, in the sense that great music is being made by great musicians, done to every conceivable recording medium.

I'd be happy to live in a world where the studio is booked full time at the book rate, and they were willing to pay for two inch tape. And that may be real to some folks. Not me, but I'm also happy to be bashing away at my usual dreck (I suspect that most of us spend most of our recording hours working on music that it's our personal favorite thing to listen to).

Since it looked to me like jon took a wholly unwarranted swipe at Charles, I'm simply going to assume that he's simply having a bad day.

That reminds me, Charles - we chatted for a bit at AES, either in New York or LA afew years ago - are things still going good for you?
Old 14th October 2002
  #60
Moderator emeritus
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
"why not just track to analog then xfer it to PT?"

- Drum punch ins & especially outs are a royal PITA on tape IMHO

That's one advantage with a DAW.
Nonsense! (I figure as long as everyone else is being loud on this thread, I can too...)

I've been punching drums when needed on TASCAM DTRS machines for 10 years. No problem. I've been on dozens, if not hundreds of sessions where it was done on 2". No problem (as long as the drummer is capable of it, and you know how to work with the machine in question). Sure, if you're using an early MCI, before the quick punch option, punchouts were problematic, but I was recording to a Studer A800 Mk4 last week, and we didn't have any problem with punches. And while I'm thinking about it, I was punching drums on a Radar on the project I started before AES. No problem there, either. And it's really not a DAW...
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
kilon / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
2
kieran kelly / Music Computers
4
bcgood / Music Computers
15

Forum Jump
Forum Jump