Feb 13, 2006 05:29 pm hmmmm i bet everyone here records digital...
i sure as heck can't help ya much.
ya might wanna try the guys at www.gearslutz.com
i'm sure there's a buncha tape heads out there.
analog recording advice
Posted on Feb 13, 2006 05:24 pm
jh5dl
Member Since: Feb 13, 2006
Hi, I'm seeking some some advice. ..
looking into getting hold of an analog 8 or 16 track recorder. Preferably 1" 8 track . . . or 2" 16"
budget aprox £300-800
would be great to have any thoughts/guidance Otari, Studer, MCI, Revox, Scully, Ampex, Tascam?? ...
+ IS there anygood source of info to educate myself about allignment /parts/service /calibration etc.
thanks
[ Back to Top ]
Feb 13, 2006 05:29 pm hmmmm i bet everyone here records digital...
i sure as heck can't help ya much.
ya might wanna try the guys at www.gearslutz.com
i'm sure there's a buncha tape heads out there.
Feb 13, 2006 06:52 pm please dont double post. thanks.
Feb 13, 2006 08:05 pm Otari, Studer are nice machines for sure. Can be a bit pricey though. I've never used some you've listed so I couldn't say. I'm from America so I'm not sure what your price range is. The Tascam MS-16 is a nice machine that you can pick up pretty cheap but that's 1" tape. The manual should have the calabration instruction included. Manuals are still avalibe and so are calibration tapes. I got mine from:"Maganetic Reference Laboratory". www.flash.net/~mrltapes/
There site has a lot of helpful info on it that will answer a lot of your questions. A lot of studios still use Analog. Some of the bigger indie studios have techs on hand that can service them or lead you in the right dirrection. And they LOVE to talk about analog recording. You could ask a studio if you could be present when they do a head alignment. Even if you had to pay for a half hour of studio time it would be worth it for the experience.
Most here record in digital, but there are a few of us throwbacks still left here.
Feb 14, 2006 04:55 pm Not with a good engineer. Almost anyone can make a digital recording sound good. You have to have REAL skills to get a good analog recording.
Feb 14, 2006 05:13 pm "poopy"
should that be filtered? :-D
Feb 14, 2006 06:16 pm Real skills = Mad amounts of cash and time, and lots of dexterity to not cut yourself with razor blades while editing. hehe
I don't know, I saw that feller post "poopy" and I was like "That is offensive... maybe I should remove it, being the awesome mod that I am" but then i figured I'd just give him a warning.
Loki- this is your first warning!
Feb 14, 2006 09:08 pm jh5dl, in going the analog route I would honestly recomend you do a very large bit of research before even thinking of going that direction.
That said, I cut my teeth on analog tape machines and large format desks. If this is something you are just getting into I suggest paying a few visits round to some studio's that maintain large analog tape machines. Inquire about the cost of upkeep mostly as well as everyday maintainance. It is not for the week of heart or the thin of wallet to be vey honest.
And indeed, the editing is not for the faint hearted either.
I guess I would ask you your main objective to wanting just such a machine? And as stated above, even the older used ones are not cheap by any stratch of the imagination.
Feb 15, 2006 05:26 am thanks for the advice all. . .
Well my 'main objective' is to get a bit of tape compression into the recording process.
I've recorded to digital in studios & home, & I've also recorded 2 four track tape in rehearsals/home and - there's something about the sound of tape I prefer - even when it's v low fi. I prefer the warmth and qualities of a lot of old school records too etc.
Basically my plan was to record my band live going through some kind of analog eight track into a Yamaha O1X desk & trying to get a bit of the best of both worlds. . .
Feb 15, 2006 08:59 pm There are many pluggins out there now that will emulate that very well for you. I use the PSP Vintage Warmer with great result adding tape type warmth. Also there is Steinbergs Magneto pluggin which is very simple and does excellant tape saturation as well.
The Vintage Warmer is capable of getting much deeper into the control side though, but does do an excellant job of saturation.
As well there are hardware units out there fo both Tube and solid state that will do the tape saturation thing for you without having to spend a ton of money just for the effect of the tape pre's.
Feb 15, 2006 10:49 pm The filter that dB is looking for is called a ppy filter... It filters out the letters p & y, leaving the observer with "oo" (pronounced "oo"). Almost an exclamation of glee, but more of amazement.
As for the analog recording, it doesn't really take any more "skill" than digital. I think it really takes less. I don't have to worry about "overs" or the computer farting at the most inopportune time, etc. After recording to analog tape, a transfer to the computer can be performed to alleviate editing woes, giving one the best of both worlds. The main problem with analog, besides the initial cost of the deck and the additional cost in time & money of maintenance, is the fact that it is getting rather difficult to find tape, a most necessary ingredient...
btw - tic on the "perfesser" stuff
Feb 16, 2006 02:39 pm loki, u basically said anolog sucks... i record digital too but anolog takes way more skill and it sounds WAY smoother then digital. especially clipping on anolog "smears" the sound rather then making popping and clicking noises. its actually really cool. (i know i couldnt find a spot on tape and manually cut it out and stuff... its too much required skill for me though)
Feb 16, 2006 02:40 pm it's not more skill, it's different skill...
Feb 17, 2006 02:45 pm well i guess but since i can see the waves on my computer and i cant on a tape... to me it seems like it'd be more skill
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.