Enjoy and to each his/her own.

Seriously use what works for you, but don't assume that tape is anymore organic than computer based recording.

there are people who do far better work on a computer and vica versa.

Just have fun and make something great!

Steve

BOTH formats are nice. :D :D :D

Originally posted by lance thomas:
Just recently gone back to completeley using tape.....A80...440b...C37..
and I'm making music again.....

I felt the exact same way when I switched from tape to computers. :)

I agree with Mr.Devino. Use what works best for you. I do have 1 question, is the cyber thing up your alley anyway? I'm not asking this question for personal sake but to suggest to you to find someone (here @ R.O. or any other source for that matter) to help get you up to par with either PC or Mac. Then maybe you already know computers.

One thing I have noticed as an engineer and as an arranger is that I make very different outcomes and decisions when looking at a screen than I do when not looking at it. I notice also that a track sounds different to me if I turn off the computer and listen to it from CD staring at dead grey screens and then turn it back on listen to the song again with a DAW arrange page in front of me.

Now whenever I comp vocals or other critical parts I always look away from the screens as I listen to them. Try putting some great pictures or such on the wall above your workstation and gaze at it when you need to really listen to something.

Good idea Steve, I'm gonna try that!.

I like the functionality of DAW but I still prefer the sound of tape and a big analog console.

But the writing is on the wall ... DAW has lowered the bar in terms of cost to operate (maintenance) and tape based systems with large format consoles simply cannot compete with the lower overhead that computer based recording offers.

So at one point or another, everyone will have to get on the bus. It's just a question of when ... and longer one waits, the steeper the learning curve and more catching up one will have to do ...

I WANT....large unwieldy steel stands that'll hold up a tank......I WANT....a field of knobs.....I WANT....great big VU meters that I can peg-out to get that 'sound'....I WANT....that smell of fresh acetate and that factory smell of an old reel shedding all the highs onto the magnetic field.....I WANT....the sound of soffitt mounted Westlakes with a pair of Mac's or Brystons or maybe a pair of rebuilt Marantz Model Nines pumping out bass so frickin accurate you'd swear it was next to you in the room.....I WANT,,,,sound I can Taste!!!

Is it DAW or is it Studer?

I havent heard computer generated sound that does that to me yet.If I live long enough I'm sure I will.I like the DAW idea and theres a lot to be said for total recall....but,and I'm sure theres many to disagree,theres something homogenous in the computer sound.I dont know what it is but I can hear it.Maybe its the order of harmonics.....dont know////but I know what I like.

Originally posted by Steve Jones:
.....I always look away from the screens as I listen to them.....

*Absolutely bang on!*

(I would re-phrase:- I always look away from the computer screens/2" tape machine as I listen to them)

Wise words indeed. :)

"Just arrived" my arse. phuck I hate these newbie bullturd labels.

Originally posted by Davedog:
I WANT....large unwieldy steel stands that'll hold up a tank......I WANT....a field of knobs.....I WANT....great big VU meters that I can peg-out to get that 'sound'....I WANT....that smell of fresh acetate and that factory smell of an old reel shedding all the highs onto the magnetic field.....I WANT....the sound of soffitt mounted Westlakes with a pair of Mac's or Brystons or maybe a pair of rebuilt Marantz Model Nines pumping out bass so frickin accurate you'd swear it was next to you in the room.....I WANT,,,,sound I can Taste!!!

Is it DAW or is it Studer?

I havent heard computer generated sound that does that to me yet.If I live long enough I'm sure I will.I like the DAW idea and theres a lot to be said for total recall....but,and I'm sure theres many to disagree,theres something homogenous in the computer sound.I dont know what it is but I can hear it.Maybe its the order of harmonics.....dont know////but I know what I like.

I too long for some of the things I miss in Digital. Things like taking all day to line up a 24 track machine for record and playback. The excitement of accidently putting all the tracks into record EXCEPT the one you were trying to record on. The feeling of power as the tape reel came off the machine and damaged the final mix tape while rewinding at high wind speeds because the person who put it on the machine forgot to lock it down. The long days and nights checking tubes in all the equipment to see why you were getting some distortion on the vocal tracks and finding that it was the way the vocalist sounded in real life. The joy of no automation on the console and having the producer decide that he had one more change in the triangle part in all the songs and wanted them all remixed for the umteenth time and telling you that the tape was due to be mastered the next morning. The smell of a cup of coffee or soft drink that the producer had just knocked over into the guts of the console 30 seconds before the session was due to begin. The thrill of the chase as you tried to find one song that had to be remixed and finding that the assistant mixer had taken all of the cue sheets with him when he left for the day and trying to remember whether the triangle was on track 23 or 3 in the forth overdub on the 16th take of the 3 minute song and trying to remember what reel it was on. All this at 3 am in the morning after you had been up for 48 hours tracking and mixing down for the A&R person's artificial deadline.

Yes I really miss analog (I really do and yes I have a lot of analog gear including 7 reel to reel tape decks) but there is a lot I don't miss.

Have a good weekend.

For me, nothing takes the fun out of music and recording faster than a mouse. Sound quality aside, there is something spiritual about a console and the sight of those reels spinning in a dimly lit room with the glow of the lights from the VU's.

I can understand why Pro-Tools, and the like, are so appealing to budget home studios, but I'm astonished that it has become the standard for most commercial facilities! I look forward to the day that Radar crushes the miserable Digi myth, and becomes the standard for commercial facilities. I'd take the cheapest Mackie 24/32 channel board, and an Alesis HD24 over any of this computer recording software crap any day.

Fortunately, I have not ever experienced the problems Thomas speaks of. It only takes me about 30 minutes to line up a tape machine, record & playback.

I personally don't mind mixing with a mouse.. I accept that for some it sucks but it doesn't bother me in the least. I don't even feel the need for a control surface. But even in analog, I usually set up a basic "starting point" static mix and then work on individual elements one at a time, writing the moves into automation. A mouse is fine for this. I have never been an eight fingers on the faders kind of guy.

If I could get the sound of analog with the control of digital, automation, instant recall, editing power etc, I would indeed, be a happy camper. It's the sound of analog that I miss ...and the smell. I love the smell of 456 in the morning.

One client I had at my analog studio was listening to a playback. he had been working with digital DAWs for about 2 years and he commented to me, "Wow! I'm hearing things I haven't heard for a long time".

A client I have now, while listening to some DAW mixes said , "It sounds very good, but it just doesn't have that punch that records used to have." Same mics and pres for the most part .. just different recording and mixing platforms.

I think that pretty much sums it up.

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
Fortunately, I have not ever experienced the problems Thomas speaks of. It only takes me about 30 minutes to line up a tape machine, record & playback.

Wow for a 24 track recorder only 30 minutes? It takes me that long to get out the equipment and thread up the test tape.

What multitrack is that fast to set up? I am use to Ampex, MCI and Sony. On none of those could I even do a playback alignment on all 24 tracks in 30 minutes. You must be super engineer....

I am talking about a complete demag, playback alignment, bias and record alignment and final tweeks.

Thomas,
I had a MCI JH 24 ... Sony version. I usually didn't have to do the bias everytime.. maybe once a month. That's where we are differing. I meant demag and clean, record and playback alignment. I used to do it before every session.

Do you still have a MCI?

Yes!

JH-110 8 track 1 inch with a 1/2" 4 channel head stack and full remote control.

Also Ampex, Otari, and Tascam decks. Various configuations from mono to 8 track.

Analog forvever.

Tom,
I had a JH 110b 1/4" machine for two mix... I loved it at 30ips! Nothing like it. Too bad I couldn't afford the maintenance after I went private. Otherwise I would have kept the console and tape amchines and just added the DAW to the gear list.

One Question I haven't heard yet was why not use both. Print to tape, dump to Protools mix in protools then print the two track to tape, it works for me, I get he best of both worlds, tape saturation and harmonics, and the ease of digital.

Originally posted by Davedog:

I havent heard computer generated sound that does that to me yet.If I live long enough I'm sure I will.I like the DAW idea and theres a lot to be said for total recall....but,and I'm sure theres many to disagree,theres something homogenous in the computer sound.I dont know what it is but I can hear it.Maybe its the order of harmonics.....dont know////but I know what I like.

Have you ever tried the HEDD 192 with a DAW (with analog prosessing ingaged)?

Though yea, when using a DAW, I also really do miss the hands on feel of a serious analog board. Maybe someday a controll surface or digital mixer will feel right, but so far the real deal just seems way cooler imho.

Tony....I have not had an oportunity to experience the setup you're talking about.I have heard many opinions about the HEDD and it sounds like a very cool thing.
My goal in my equipment growth in the next year is to have both mediums.I love the first two or three passes from the acetate.This is tape at its purest.I can hear degredation after a few passes and the dumping to digital very soon after tracking just makes more sense to me.My ideal setup would be 2" right to HD24/Radar through converters capable of playing well @96khz or better,a great analog frontend(one of my friends is selling his Sony MPX3000...whooo),mics I can know and trust,and a room that has a sound.Right now we're buying a house so nothing is going to happen soon.In fact I'll be giving up my nice big room in favor of a smaller studio area and a very small control room.At least theres two rooms now instead of one.And owning it makes it possible to do the room the way I want it.

Yes I do agree, the combination is the best, but I would still want to track to tape.It just sounds like a record.Right out of the box.

I too love the smell of 456..

I run 2" 16 track,-1" 8 track,-1/2" 4 track,1/4" 2 track,and best of all 1/2" 2 track, all at 30ips....I get into some 996 from time to time too..
I live for the day that something sounds better than 1/2" 2 track 996 at 30ips....
I think this is the way pro recording should be done...but I am old...
It just sounds good to me...

Originally posted by Kurt Foster:
I like the functionality of DAW but I still prefer the sound of tape and a big analog console.

But the writing is on the wall ... DAW has lowered the bar in terms of cost to operate (maintenance) and tape based systems with large format consoles simply cannot compete with the lower overhead that computer based recording offers.

So at one point or another, everyone will have to get on the bus. It's just a question of when ... and longer one waits, the steeper the learning curve and more catching up one will have to do ...

Kind of like a lot of things, eh? My wife and I just bought a home built in 1909 that we're fixing up. After digging in and seeing how this thing was built, I don't think I could ever live in a modern home again. So much care went into those old houses and there is so much charm. Sure, there is a lot of maintenence too (I'm re-doing the entire main bathroom right now, right down to the floor joists) but they just don't build them like that anymore...

And if you wanted to, it would cost too much.

"What, you want REAL wood?!" :confused: The floors in our house are real, solid, 3/4 inch oak.

Try buying that nowadays.

I am thankful for computers and daws- I do love having a studio at home that sounds good, where I can lay some tracks withour worrying about the clock. I know its a two edge sword and people turn out a lotta crap in their home studios but what isn't two sided in life? You sift through the bad and take the good and run!

heck, if there werent home studios out there either daws or all in the box type of things, we probably wouldn't be having this forum today. This is a wonderful place where many talented, profesional and knowledgeable people share their knowledge of their craft... with whom? Mostly with people who are learning the craft in their home daws!

That is the nature of our race- the human that is- and one of our shining virtues- we share- the student learns and eventually becomes the teacher, the techer learns and eventually becomes the sage, always passing the knowledge along to the next group down the line-

so, if you have an analog set up you like, track away to your hearts content, may your tracks be fruitfull and multiply! And if you have a daw, track away and may your art advance!

peace :D

I personally haven't had the privelage of working in the various analog formats (well maybe some 8track stuff way back when).
I plunged head-on into the bleeding edge of the MDM revolution with the old blackface ADATS. Now I'm running DP3 on an OS9 Mac. What I've noticed from the beginning was the flatness (lack of depth, bredth, height and dimension) of digital.
I set out to change that with good microphones, preamps, compressors, and converters. The Apogee AD-16 was the best converter I was willing to invest in, and to me digital still sounded flat.
My next investment was a Crane Song HEDD192. It really does make a huge difference. The effect is subtle yet pervasive. For the most part, it adds the depth and dimension I've been looking for.
For tracking multiple sources at once, I still use the AD-16, but on overdubs I'll use the HEDD192 with the process in (even with the process bypassed the HEDD converters are better sounding than the AD-16, which I guess is to be expected). Depending on what the material needs, I may process either individual elements or even entire mixes with the HEDD192 after the fact via digital I/O.
All in all, yes- digital is a compromise; but it does bring it's own set of attractive attributes to the table.