Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Total Members Voted: 0

[Jason Phair]

Hey, there's nothing wrong with Marillion!

[electrical]

Eric Vincent wrote on Wed, 05 January 2005 03:00

Why put the delivery medium before the music?

I'm not. I just have no interest in either doing a less-than-optimal job or dealing with a computer for 14 hours a day. That's why I don't work in an office.

Quote:

Mixerman and Fletcher are getting along just fine with Radar. Have you ruled that out too?

Until there is a storage format I can trust as well as analog tape, then I have no reason to look for anything else. I haven't ruled anything out, I just don't think digital systems are suitable for making records, and I wouldn't be seving my clients to pretend they were.

At any rate, I don't believe it will come to this.

Quote:

I'm not trying to bust your balls, bro. I'm just trying to understand this.

Why start now?

[electrical]

J.J. wrote on Wed, 05 January 2005 03:37

How about this: Steve, since you said you were envious that I got to record Johnny Cash, what if I told you it was in a situation where I had no choice but to use the Cash cabin black face ADATs?

As a one-off under special circumstances, I would have no problem temporarily recording something digitally and then making the work tapes from the digital files. It's a pain in the ass, but fine for a one-off. Not for a day-in, day-out job.

Many things may happen in the future we haven't seen yet, but one thing for shit-sure is not going to happen: I am not going to spend my time recording music on a computer.

[Curve Dominant]

Quote:

posted by electrical: Quote: Quote: I'm not trying to bust your balls, bro. I'm just trying to understand this. Why start now?

Morbid curiousity?

[RMoore]

FWIW - It seems RADAR is closest to the 'analog' way of working with the tape deck style transport, metering etc..no fiddley menus, crashes,  learning curve or core audio burps..

If it comes to the point of tape extinction, one could always track in RADAR & bounce over to your analog mix 24 trk reels, that you recycle come mixing time..

With your pace of & style of working  I couldn't imagine a DAW-Komputer fitting in there seeing as the time waste & frustration factor is too huge..When I was forced into DAW-land not too long ago, I noticed everything suddenly taking about 5 x more time to complete...

Not to mention what computers do to the brain - supposedly kid's brainwaves just flatline when on a computer or TV...I would imagine its the same for the average AE - assuming there are brainwaves to begin with.

Some things I personally do like with DAW action though, like the increased editing possibilities (within reason.. ) and level automation.

If anyone's ever seen that ridiculous Michael Douglas film Falling Down where he snaps & goes on a killing spree through LA:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106856/
Lets just say that DAWs can do that to you just as well as any good LA traffic jam.. Or at least so it seemed to me..

I hope ATR or someone else will surprise us all..

[xonlocust]

i use tape, but i'm pretty small time compared to most people here - the rate at which i go through it is pretty slow. for my stuff it depends on the project, but 90% is (has been) tape. i own a 1" and 1/4" machine - had been planning on getting a 2" shortly.

compasspnt made an interesting point about mixing to tape. the last thing i did was supposed to be mixed to atr but the machine was on the fritz. instead we mixed to masterlink. that really bummed me out to hear the difference btw the 2mix and the sound off the masterlink.  that said - would you guys see benefit to printing the masterlink mixes i have now back to 1/4"?

sorry to sidetrack - ignore if it's not appropriate here... i usually lurk not post.

[ted nightshade]

xonlocust wrote on Wed, 05 January 2005 11:53

i use tape, but i'm pretty small time compared to most people here - the rate at which i go through it is pretty slow. for my stuff it depends on the project, but 90% is (has been) tape. i own a 1" and 1/4" machine - had been planning on getting a 2" shortly. compasspnt made an interesting point about mixing to tape. the last thing i did was supposed to be mixed to atr but the machine was on the fritz. instead we mixed to masterlink. that really bummed me out to hear the difference btw the 2mix and the sound off the masterlink.  that said - would you guys see benefit to printing the masterlink mixes i have now back to 1/4"? sorry to sidetrack - ignore if it's not appropriate here... i usually lurk not post.

This is because the masterlink converters suck. They can be OK if clocked to something way better, but not still not very good.

I tracked some live to 2 track stuff simultaneously through the SLAM! converters to a masterlink and to an ATR 1" 2 track and you'd have to pick the winner on the basis of what that song needed. Many times the SLAM! worked better for the material we were using.

I am very pleased with tracking to analog and mixing down to great digital. I have not been as pleased with tracking to digital and mixing down to analog, but I haven't pursued it very far. If there are any kind of digital artifacts, they grow harmonics when they hit tape and that is not such a nice thing. So I have real doubts about transfering anything from the masterlink to the 1/4" tape.

When digital sucks, it's because the converters suck or some processing sucked. It can really rival tape unless you are attached to the artifacts of tape. The best of both worlds really can be the best of both worlds.

[RMoore]

< instead we mixed to masterlink.>

I use a Cranesong HEDD before the Masterlink - that sure sounds better than the stock link converters.

FWIW - anytime I tried copying final mixes from DAT or Mlink  to 1/4 inch 2 track on my Studer 810 it sounded tres sucky, too much loss, too nasty..I once had to do that with a whole 'experimental horn' album I did (copy from DAT & M link to 1/4 inch) before my DAW era though - editing on the 1/4 inch..that sure took a lot of work..glad I did it that way though..but never again ..

<would you guys see benefit to printing the masterlink mixes i have now back to 1/4"?>

Try it and see if it works for you!

[compasspnt]

I tried this Radar thing on two albums (someone else's idea, not mine), having heard that it was so close to analogue tape, and was such a familiar environment in which to work with for those "analoguists..."

...but I have to say that to me it was a toy.  Just a silly imitation of working in a tape-like domain, made for those engineers who weren't able to mentally grasp the intricacies of a real computer.  It wasn't bad sounding, but it certainly wasn't close to good analogue tape.  And it wasn't even close to Protools using a good converter.  Plus as mentioned before, as one of four mix options, that is, mixing through the desk back into two tracks of the Radar, it sounded terrible.




Steve, when you retire because there's no more tape, then you can get that office job at last...

[zetterstroem]

tape rules!!!

unless i have customers that won't pay shit i put every track to 2" 16-trk before i mix!!

use it less for mastering... not all things benefit from it....

"Not nearly as upset about the idea of Quantegy going out as I was about the demise of Emtec. I want my 900!"

Not nearly as upset about the idea of Emtec going out as I was about the demise of Quantegy. I want my GP9!  

[jfrigo]

I love tape and use it. I like digital too and use it. I don't think we've seen the last of tape, but if we ever do, I'll still make music.

I understand the part about not wanting to stare into a computer screen all day, though I certainly have done my share of it. No fun, but a necessary evil sometimes... like right now...

[ted nightshade]

This ATR tape machine seemed to have some kind of computer in it. It wasn't part of the audio chain, I don't think.

[Leo]

compasspnt wrote on Thu, 06 January 2005 00:12

I tried this Radar thing on two albums (someone else's idea, not mine), having heard that it was so close to analogue tape, and was such a familiar environment in which to work with for those "analoguists..." ...but I have to say that to me it was a toy.  Just a silly imitation of working in a tape-like domain, made for those engineers who weren't able to mentally grasp the intricacies of a real computer.  It wasn't bad sounding, but it certainly wasn't close to good analogue tape.  And it wasn't even close to Protools using a good converter.  Plus as mentioned before, as one of four mix options, that is, mixing through the desk back into two tracks of the Radar, it sounded terrible.

It seemed to do something to the output signal, bump up the low end. Used it on one album. The client brought it in. I agree, It wasn't that great sounding comparatively to tape or PT. But we printed to 1/2' and Masterlink, not back into the box.

[compasspnt]

Right Leo.

But perhaps I should have mentioned (again) that this "back into Radar" mix was only a test option...we also  mixed to 1/2", 2/96 split, and dat.  Of course, 1/2" beat everything by a mile.

[ted nightshade]

I'm glad to see someone really like GP9! I just bought forty-six 2500 foot "pancakes" of it. All they had left in 1/4" at tapeonline.

The RADAR converters (S-Nyquist) aren't as good as a great tape machine, as far as I can tell. The SLAM! converters are just as good.