I've heard that some are now recording digitally, mixing it down to tape, and then importing it back to the hard drive to get "real" analog warmth in their recordings...
Did I hear right?
Printable View
I've heard that some are now recording digitally, mixing it down to tape, and then importing it back to the hard drive to get "real" analog warmth in their recordings...
Did I hear right?
You did indeed.
It's a joke really. If you've got the capability to record things onto tape, why not put it there in the first place? Then, if required, you can digitise it to mix it.
You can buy hardware now that 'replicates' the sound of analouge tape (ie. it cuts the highs a bit and introduces a bit of hiss, basically) that costs thousands more than a well looked-after Studer machine.
It's all a lie. I think it was Wilco who made an album that sounded really 'analouge' and 'authentic' and everyone love the sound. They recorded it digitally and used the 'TrueTape' emulation in Cubase.
This is about marketing. If 'that' 'analogue' sound is what you want, buy a tape machine.
I know that wasn't the most balanced of posts but hey, that's my take on it!
Yep, and it can give digital tracks the warmth and compression that comes with good old saturated analog tape. It's especially good for drum tracks. There's much more to bouncing to tape than getting your tracks to hiss.:heeQuote:
Originally Posted by photoweborama
Fezz is correct, of course. Analog "warmth" is not a combination of high-end loss and tape hiss. What people are going for with this technique is a combination of even-numbered harmonic distortion and a specific kind of compression that occurs when analog tape is saturated. I get an effect very similar to this on synth drums by running them through my POD Pro on the "Tube Pre-Amp" setting, adding a bit of compression in the 02/R, delaying the return tracks by a millisecond or so and blending the POD output with the original tracks. Insta-fat, much more convincing drum sound. If I add a plate reverb to just the POD return and leave the original signal clean, I get a nice clean attack and a cool 'verb.
There are some digital plug-ins that sort of replicate this effect, but they don't really sound like tape (as if "tape" had a definable sound... to be more realistic, a specific tape recorder has a definable sound, but "tape" doesn't).
I can't speak for fezz but I think he would agree: a good recording consists of a good arrangement, well played and well recorded. Even now in this digital environment, what you play and how you play it is 1,000 times more important to how your record sounds than what you recorded it with.
Exactly.:yayQuote:
Originally Posted by Gravity Jim
Analog?
http://www.victor-victrola.com/LOGO.jpg
Woof!
:yay
Now that's tone!:hee
So it really works best on just some tracks, not a fianl mix?
Some guys like to take their final mixes to 1/2" analog tape, then send it off for mastering. We did a Dave Grusin score and he insisted on doing it that way. But it's really becoming the exception rather than the norm.
Oh Jim, I got to talk with Wes Dooley this week. Great guy, and loves talking about microphones. Think I'm going to get an AEA R84 from him at cost. It's a ribbon world!:hee
Arrrrrgh. You dirty rat...... I would love one of them there mics. I'm spending my whole budget this quarter on drywall and carpet! Next quarter I'm looking at mics and a hihg-end pre. It might be time for a ribbon.
I met Wes at NAMM a couple years back, and he would seem to be da man. He offered to send me one of his mics to audition, but I told him I knew I wasn't able to buy it and didn't think I could stand sending it back!
In the next booth NHT was showing off a surround rig by playing the 5.1 remix of "Toy Matinee.." holy shit! Best surround remix HANDS DOWN. Breathtaking.
He knows that, that's why he gives 'em to you.:heeQuote:
Originally Posted by Gravity Jim
I'd love a 44, but can't justify spending that type of bread on a mic, but the 84 at cost is hard to refuse.