Analog Tape Processing

[xpulsar]

I just mixed a project that I recorded completely digitally into Radar. I was curious to what effect Analog tape would have on the sounds of things on a per track basis. So I did a little experiment and ran tracks that I felt needed some love. Not to my surprise,everything that I ran to tape sounded so much more complete. I had to use a lot less EQ and Compression when mixing. I experimented quite a bit with how hard I hit tape on different instruments to get the desired sound. Now I just have to save my money and get a 2" 16 track.

-Collin

[Dakota]

I've been leaning on that more and more lately, with great results. Oddly, even though it takes a seemingly slow real time transfer to print a track out to tape and back (using the repro head to catch back in one go), it usually ends up taking less time than dialing in 3 or 4 plugs on the track to do some of what tape would have done - and not even as well.

Dialing in different saturation amounts and tape speed choices is also great for flattering each track. I usually also do hardware EQ and compression as needed for each thing in the same pass, and take advantage of how different those behave pre or post tape. Commit, and the mix comes together much quicker.

A little tape hiss is great. Too much is not. To keep it under control and reduce time doing boring mute edits later, I've been putting a plug-in gate on an aux bringing the tape signal back in, setting for look-ahead with a fast but not clicky attack, and a pretty slow hold and release, threshold set only slightly above the tape hiss when there is no signal. Really speeds things up to not to have to do those edits later. I also do that with hardware effects prints, print them back already cleaned up. Longer hold and release for reverbs and delays, just like you'd think.

[xpulsar]

Yes the time it takes to run it out then back in off of the repro head is much less time than trying to get things to sound good with Plug-ins. Tape seems to be the best De-essr that I have come across. I have mostly been running things at 30ips to keep tape hiss down. I do like How 15 ips sounds on vocals and bright guitar sounds.

I am about to pick up 1" 8 track Studer A80 this is really going be sweet!

-Collin

[Dakota]

Woo Studer! Congrats.

Agreed, natural tape de-ess is one of the biggies. Esses in the digital domain are like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. I may be oversensitive to them, but they hurt so much less when passed through tape.

I sometimes like slower speeds to deliberately smooth out overly bright highs or high transients, and slow speeds for bass and other low-end emphasized tracks. High speeds for clarity and subtlety. Really slow speeds for ambient and mysterious textures.

[mertmo]

Hey guys. Probably a stupid question here, but: When using this technique, am I
assuming correctly that you would have to process literally every track to ensure
that they are all lined up again? ...At least in the Radar scenario... ?

It's the only thing that makes sense to me, given that the repro head would be
delayed, right?

[Dakota]

Hey guys. Probably a stupid question here, but: When using this technique, am I
assuming correctly that you would have to process literally every track to ensure
that they are all lined up again? ...At least in the Radar scenario... ?

It's the only thing that makes sense to me, given that the repro head would be
delayed, right?

Not a stupid question, mertmo. It does make keeping time alignment together a little more work. Mix and match, some tape some not works just fine. Slip the taped track back in time to line up with the original, mute the original. I sometimes put a low pitched square wave bleep or single sample click before the start of the file to have something really tangible to use for the line-up.

If all the tracks go through tape at the same speed settings (and the machine is very speed stable), yes, it all ends up aligned with itself. But then it's off of the original grid, if one is using grid for that song. Or if different tape speeds get used, the offset will will be different per, and need lining up anyway.

One gets used to doing this as reflex pretty fast. One *very tape* thing I do often is print tracks through a tube echoplex, wet only and no repeats, and gently move the tape with my fingernail so the pitch bends up and down in an organic way, then line that back close to the original track. Gets an old-school beatles ADT kind of sound. Those tracks always need lined back with the original by hand, as they are quite variably delayed in time.

[mertmo]

Thanks Dakota, all that makes total sense. I've used some of those same techniques
before for various other reasons, but never for re-printing to tape, etc.

Thanks again!

[drumsound]

Try to track to tape and then transfer. Also consider mixing digital tracks to 2-track analog.

[xpulsar]

Try to track to tape and then transfer. Also consider mixing digital tracks to 2-track analog.

Yes, I am aware of these benefits. But in lots of cases people don't have the time or the money to track to tape,or I am moving around to different locations for overdubs.That's why I chose the RADAR for my main recorder it is really fast to work on,and a laptop with the Metric Halo for portable recording.
Doing this tape process really helps out tracks that need it. I will probably try and get a 2" 16 track in the near future for tracking Directly to. In the mean time this is a easy way of getting things to sound good that have been recorded digitally.

[@?,*???&?]

I am about to pick up 1" 8 track Studer A80 this is really going be sweet!

Hmmm, the A-80 24-track is clear, but with 100 Hz calibrated to '0', 50 Hz is typically down two db. Aligning 50 Hz to '0' brings 100 Hz up two db and makes 50 Hz flat. Where do you want your bump?

I wonder if this will be sussed with the 8-track headstack?

Will you be getting the sync cards with it? Also, what MK series is this machine?

Those remotes are scarey.

We used to use an A-80 24-track strictly as a slave machine synced to an A-827. The A-80 was a pain in the ass in many ways, except during playback. Studer definitely got all the ergonomic stuff sorted on the A-827.

[Country Rebel]

I bought an older TDM protools rig before I moved to Nashville about a year ago. I love the editing and how small it easy and very easy to learn and use. I have not been very happy with the mixes I get. I have been paying for someone else to mix for me as I dont have the money to buy all the newer plugins and bells and whistles and such. I just got and otari 5050 2 track 1/4 machine. I am now mixing to tape and it sounds so GREAT. I also started do some re-amp with some tracks that seem "weak" and are jammed up with eq's and comps. That has worked wonders. I appreciate all you posted about running tracks to tape. I was under the impression that the tracks would not line up due to the speed of the machine "varying" It seems that you dont seem to have a problem with that ?? Suggestions?? Have you tried sending tracks to a cassette 4 track to do the same thing for economical reasons ?? I have been thinking of trying that seeing as cassette tapes are so cheap. I am very excited about using this hybrid analog/digital format. I feel comfortable that my mixing can go straight to mastering and I dont have to pay for someone else to mix.
I am in love with my otari !!

[@?,*???&?]

Monitor off the repro head while you record and route that signal back into your Pro Tools rig. There will only be one shift you'll have to do of the audio track. Speed of the machine won't matter as it will be a real time transfer. If you were to record in one pass and then play it back in to Pro Tools with a second pass, you'd have a drift issue.

[Country Rebel]

So its record to tape and play back into protools all in ONE pass. Have you ever sent groups into the tape this way?? I would love to hear about other ways you use this process. I have been doing some re-amp and this seems like another way to do that.
Brilliant, i love it
thanks

[xpulsar]

I am about to pick up 1" 8 track Studer A80 this is really going be sweet!

Hmmm, the A-80 24-track is clear, but with 100 Hz calibrated to '0', 50 Hz is typically down two db. Aligning 50 Hz to '0' brings 100 Hz up two db and makes 50 Hz flat. Where do you want your bump?

I wonder if this will be sussed with the 8-track headstack?

Will you be getting the sync cards with it? Also, what MK series is this machine?

Those remotes are scarey.

We used to use an A-80 24-track strictly as a slave machine synced to an A-827. The A-80 was a pain in the ass in many ways, except during playback. Studer definitely got all the ergonomic stuff sorted on the A-827.

It is a MK 4 machine. I just tested it out and it is pretty flat at 50hz and 100hz running it at 15ips. Jeff, you get head bump around +1.5-2db at 50hz and down 2 db at 100-150hz at 30ips. At 15ips the low frequency response is more flat , but of course you should know this,Right? Also you are trying to make it seem more complex than it is. I am simply saying that lately I have been running things out to tape and then back in off the repro-head in real time then nudging them back in time. Works really well!

Besides what does your comment have to do with this concept of processing certain sounds with tape and using a tape machine as signal processing device? It seems to me that you are just trying to shoot down and idea or start a pointless argument just to make yourself either seem smart, or just to raise your self-esteem? Which is a waste of time, if you have a good idea to interject then do so,but if you have come just to boot your ego on a forum then don't comment.

-Collin

[@?,*???&?]

Is yours one of those narrow deck units with 16 cards on top and 8 on the bottom?

Also, do you have a remote and full sync electronics for yours?

We had one of these machines up in Lake Tahoe as a 2nd slave deck for the 72-track Whitesnake stuff...fully, a 21 second lock for three machines. Master was a Studer A-827 and the two slaves were A-80s.

Are you running timecode with yours for locking to Pro Tools or doing 'real time' transfers?