Because tape sounds a lot better than wax cylinders.
Who still uses a 1" 8 track or 2" 16/24 track?
- Thread starter mixmkr 2023
- Start date
try
Reel to Reel Tape
Splicit Reel Audio Products sells a wide variety of premium analog audio reel to reel recording tape. Brands we offer: RTM SM900, SM911, SM468, LPR35, CAPTURE 914, CAPTURE 930, in 7" reel, 10.5" NAB metal reel or tape pancake on hub formats
www.splicit.com
Reel to Reel Warehouse
The Ultimate Resource for the Reel to Reel Enthusiast…
if you have never used tape I can see your perspective , however there is a certain skill set that knowing how to use tape makes using digial more understanding , view it as learning to do long hand math to using a calculator , any body can push a button but do you really know the pocess and operation ?
its the same with tape ,using it as another step in the recording and signal processing chain .
Skully
Doctor of Teleocity
Or you could go straight to digital -- which isn't hard to get started with -- and just learn that. You don't need to know how to groom a horse if the vehicle is powered by an engine.
I can't imagine anyone in the film sound community ever suggesting someone use mag tape, even 15 years ago.
It's reminds me of taking care of a sick person for a long time, then they die, and you realize that all those things you used to worry about, you don't have to worry about anymore.
There are musical artists who still use it today. Some insist on it.
Like going SS amp or tube, it's the small stuff that makes some difference.
Personally I think Digi is fine for recording. But still wont use a SS amp.
There was an 8-track AG-440 for sale in Facebook Marketplace here a year or two ago, with a three-figure price tag. I wanted it, until I noticed "not working" in the fine print.
Skully
Doctor of Teleocity
Yes. My perspective is that it is an indulgence; a fetish. In the film world, nobody's got the time to humor that.
Listen... One's art can benefit from limitations. But I don't think choosing to work in handcuffs -- expensive ones, at that -- is a good idea.
And the idea that it might be a good investment is just wacky. With the possible exception of microphones, very few things related to studio recording, including and perhaps especially the studios themselves, are a good investment.
When on the rare occasion, and getting rarer and rarer, I do a session where they're going to tape (even if it's just for 'basics', or just drums) - I love it! You know why? ... Because stuff always goes wrong: biasing, track not working, head alignment, tape speed issue, etc. I'm usually there for double the time and double the money.
So yeah, tape ... awesome!
So yeah, tape ... awesome!
Last edited:
no right or wrong answers here only perspective,
we see things much differently , when we are able to record at 196 Khz and compress it down to 44.1 KHZ for broad cast, internet , CD etc or you use tape and transfer to digital really whats the difference? except personal prefference or to perform tape tricks that you can not do in digital , both realms have their Pluses and minuses
and as I said earlier , "just another tool in the box" thats it.
I have a monster digital set up with 5 towers for recording and mastering 2 full towers for libraries 3 complete sytems , and I still have room for tape and I use it , not all the time , but its there. so I understand your point of view , I choose to work with one foot in both worlds on a higher level no wrong answers here.
this is my digital guitar rig I have every emulation of Guitar amps and or processors installed , but I still use my My 11 guitar amps and studio rig all tools in the box , again no wrong answers here , just alot less limitations to the process when I need it
loudboy
Tele-Afflicted
From about 2000 - 2008, I worked in a busy mid-level studio. We had an MCI 2" 24-track machine, and also 24 inputs of digital.
I used the 2" machine on 2 projects out of hundreds, both of which were transferred to digital as soon as tracking finished.
It had a very distinct sound, but the costs of tape and the decrease in such things as track limit, editing ability and mix recall made most of our clients prefer to use digital.
I had about 35,000.00 of synths in my studio on the coast , 2 of the biggest fully polyphonic analog units available Korg PS3200
60 note polyphany with a custom 1024 note polyphonic digital sequencer , Korg 2 X MS 10s, 2X MS 20's,2X SQ 10 sequencers , several roland jupiters, Junos , mini moog model D, Ensonic mirage digital sampler. etc
My client came in and wanted the sound of a 40.00 Bontempi Organ , I fell down laughing , I got what he wanted and it worked for him , but what a waste LOL
this was the 3200's I had. rare as hens teeth now but big
Last edited:
Skully
Doctor of Teleocity
Ironically, I'm totally onboard with the artist wanting the Bontempi organ. He knew exactly what he wanted from an instrument with sonic and physical limitations that would likely also affect the way he played. That's a much better than searching for a sound on $35K worth of keyboards.
Personal preference I get, but in 2023, what tape 'tricks' can you not do in the digital realm?
I'm genuinely curious.
chulaivet1966
Friend of Leo's
Yep.
I had (2) 1/4" R/Rs....a Teac A3440S (4 trk) & a Fostex Model 80 (8 trk).
I got the Teac first in January '79.
I got the Fostex in '88 or so.
Love them and both served me quite well.
Sold them both in the early 90's.
I had about 23-24 R/R tapes with original material and spent a month of Sundays getting them all transferred into the digital domain....I employed some tequila to keep me motivated with the daunting task ahead of me.
But, personally....I would never go back per your comment, the real estate they take up and editing limitations.
Then there's the tape cost & availability issue.
Thorough maintenance is required after each days sessions.
Demagnetizing heads, cleaning heads and the pinch roller.
Me too....I loved all that cool gear & analog FX units we had in those days.
I will wish good hunting to all that pursue this route.
If I knew then what I know now I would have invested in Q-tips....heavily.
Back to it....
Last edited:
I had a blast doing this
it was great that i could come up with some thing thats a cross with a kazoo and an accordion filter it with a slight delay and a touch of reverb , it worked . no presets all anaog .
just as an example, at one point I took 2 revox B77's placed them 10 feet apart ran a recording from one machine to the play back of the second machine back to the first machine layering the the recorded track with the first machine and so on
( frippertronics )
Pink floyd used the same as above for the clock ringing sound effects on Time and the cash registers on Money
took apart an old key board calculator soldered the key board to 10 X 1/8th inch mini jacks , used the ensonic Mirage sampler to to sample some relly unique sounds like blowing across a pop bottle layered with the sound of a straw sqeeking through a styrofoam cup, ( very original sound samples) scaled it up 10 notes , ( but this could be any recorded sound ) I used 10 dictation cassettes with the sampled sounds ,one for each sampled sound and created a melotron effect playable from the calculator key board being plugged into the off/on switch of each machine, hit a key on the keypad and the sample plays back for that cassette
Did a recording where the snare drum was weak, I sampled the snare crack and decay off of another song and repaired the weak tracks by editing the new sound into snare track
I have a recording I have made with a broken cymbol (I got from Dave Wilson drummer for Crazy on you , Heart) 2 tape machines and a cassete recorder ( I was aiming for lofi ) and created the representative sound of the internal workings of a clock , by running some of the rings of the cymbol close mic'd to get the drone played in reverse with out using any crash sounds turned out quite effective
other than for the editing I have done using tape machines , which can be done clearly in a daw rapidly ( this is what you were implying here) there is a lot that can be done with tape that cannot be done otherwise . the major issue is most engineers think in the " clean recording to daw mind set , EQ, add digital effects & compress " that we lose the ability to be creative out side the box. and although the music today is , in most cases well recorded, well played ( or well edited ) the imagination of what can be done with a given piece of gear pushed to the limits can do is missing.
one other thing I plan to do using my Yamaha portastudio is record sound effects one on each of the four channels and fade them in live to some of my synth recordings to play live , a great use of old tech , some of these synth tracks will be used for intros to songs or ambient mood recordings , the possibilities are there .
that is why I have my feet in both realms .
Last edited:
bottlenecker
Poster Extraordinaire
Music is aesthetic. Tape is an aesthetic, so is digital. Some of the best engineers, producers, and trained ears in the business still prefer some things about tape. Some of them use it, and some don't but still miss what they liked about it.
There is still a lot of tape used professionally today. No one's going to force you to use it.
Skully
Doctor of Teleocity
A lot still use it? Who is this "lot"? Relative to what? I find that claim dubious.
I know nobody is going to force anybody to use it.
The real eyeroller here is the wax cylinder diss. How many of you have heard a wax cyldinder recording, much less made one? I thought so. It's an aesthetic, too.
I recently recorded an analog synth through a guitar amp on to my phone because I was going for a certain aesthetic, but it's not a workflow I'd recommend.
Last edited:
@24 track ...
All that is super cool and it's probably quicker out of the gate to get the lo-fi and freaky vibe/tone via tape, but you can "do" all that with software and a DAW and of course some creative thinking. But it probably would take longer and not be as fun.
An analog to that (pun intended) would be that sure, I can play 15 solos and edit the good parts together ITB, but it's just faster for me to work on playing a 'good one' and then nail it in one (or two) takes.
I get where you're coming from. You're obviously passionate about the gestalt of the whole process. I say "bravo to you sir!"
All that is super cool and it's probably quicker out of the gate to get the lo-fi and freaky vibe/tone via tape, but you can "do" all that with software and a DAW and of course some creative thinking. But it probably would take longer and not be as fun.
An analog to that (pun intended) would be that sure, I can play 15 solos and edit the good parts together ITB, but it's just faster for me to work on playing a 'good one' and then nail it in one (or two) takes.
I get where you're coming from. You're obviously passionate about the gestalt of the whole process. I say "bravo to you sir!"
bottlenecker
Poster Extraordinaire
Well, enough that maramachines.com exists, tape is being manufactured, and tape op magazine exists. Tape op isn't exclusively about analog recording, but it's one place I regularly read about people still recording on tape. I listen to at least four recording podcasts where the subject comes up regularly during interviews.
Off the top of my head, Steve Albini famously only records on tape at Electrical. Gabriel Ross records all the Daptone Records stuff on 8 track tape. Blackbird in Nashville offers multiple tape formats. Larry Crane and Johnny Sangster in the PNW still work with tape. Dan Auerbach. Jack White. Jeff Tweedy. Tiny Telephone in Oakland has a 24 track 2" Studer, which I think is what's in the Wilco Loft too.
I'm probably missing some big ones
