how to get a warm, analog sound from a digital recorder?
- Thread starter ceegee
- Start date
+1 on this.
Farview
Well-known member
In your case, I really don't think it is an analog vs. digital thing. That entire recorder costs about 1/3 as much as a decent, warm sounding mic preamp should. But it has two preamps, a bunch of knobs and a recorder too. I think you are being let down by the overall cheapness of the piece more than you are the fact that is digital.
If you could bypass the preamps (which is probably not possible, because of the way they tend to design things like this), you could then use some nice preamp and it would probably sound great. (assuming that the converters, output stage, etc... didn't compromise the quality)
Even though your cassette recorder suffered from the same problems, the tape has a tendency to dull out the tone of what is being recorded. This counteracts the thin sounding electronics feeding it and makes it more pleasing sounding.
If you could bypass the preamps (which is probably not possible, because of the way they tend to design things like this), you could then use some nice preamp and it would probably sound great. (assuming that the converters, output stage, etc... didn't compromise the quality)
Even though your cassette recorder suffered from the same problems, the tape has a tendency to dull out the tone of what is being recorded. This counteracts the thin sounding electronics feeding it and makes it more pleasing sounding.
grimtraveller
If only for a moment.....
Firstly, the OP, by asking how to get a warm analog sound from a digital recorder, has already opened that door because implicit in the question is the assumption/assertion that there is a difference between analog and digital. Otherwise the question makes no sense. The OP also implies that analog is better because they are seeking to change one medium into another, hardly something you'd do if you thought analog was worse.
That's precisely what I was doing by suggesting the OP change the way they listen. It wasn't a flippant remark.
I remember when I switched from an analog 8 track portastudio to a standalone DAW. I was expecting this brittle, pristine, clean, sterile sort of sound and I received quite a surprize when I discovered that my recordings were just as thick and soupy on the Akai as they were on the Tascam 8 track. I honestly couldn't tell the difference. The only time I could was when one of my drummer friends pounded the drums into submission and I had the levels too high and the drums constantly clipped and the resulting CCCCRRRRR sound was so awful, I never went there again.
Perhaps instead of constantly focusing on "I hate this, this is digital", by changing the way one listens, the focus can shift to "how can I make this sound how I want it to".
I've heard digitally recorded stuff that sounds 'warm' or 'pleasingly dull'. I've heard analog recorded stuff that sounds 'clean', 'spiky' and 'harsh'.
Many of us that listen to CDs and MP3s when our ears were tape and vinyl schooled all those years have possibly had to change the way we listen. In fact, by simply recording music, when you listen for pleasure you find that somewhere along the line you've changed the way you listen.
cusebassman
Freakin' sweet
Others have hinted at bits and pieces of what seems to be the problem:
Another question is, what is your outboard equipment before hitting the recorder (i.e. mics, preamps, etc)? This may also have a lot to do with it - if you are using mics which are very harsh by hyping the high-end, recording to cassette may have been masking that harshness. If they aren't harsh-sounding, perhaps the digital recording is just giving you a cleaner picture of what those mics "sound" like.
- Going from recording in analog on cassette tapes to recording on a digital recording device, you are likely hearing a more accurate version of what is being sent into the device.
- The preamps on the new Tascam unit are cheap, and as such, are likely pretty low-fi by comparison to "good" preamps - they may be making mic input sound more "harsh" than it would through better pre's
Another question is, what is your outboard equipment before hitting the recorder (i.e. mics, preamps, etc)? This may also have a lot to do with it - if you are using mics which are very harsh by hyping the high-end, recording to cassette may have been masking that harshness. If they aren't harsh-sounding, perhaps the digital recording is just giving you a cleaner picture of what those mics "sound" like.
B
Beck
Guest
You cannot. Analog plugs are gimmicks and real analog is not lo-fi, so lowering your bit depth and sampling rate will only make things sound more early digital like it did when this whole digital revolution idiocy started and set our ears on edge. And the characteristics of analog are more than frequency response and in fact analog frequency response reaches far higher than digital, though it is of course not flat, but neither are your ears. At best you can try tube pres or get an analog half-track mastering deck as the last stage before final product.
Looking back at recording history over about the last 20+ years you’ll see that the digital revolution was solely responsible for the tube revival. You can still warm things up that way to some degree. One thing you cannot do is fix digital with digital. The idea that you can has proven very lucrative for manufactures, but amounts to a wild goose chase to the user. You can get good results with the most humble Tascam or Fostex half-track reel-to-reel like the Tascam 22-2, 32, Fostex Model 20, E-2, or an Otari MX5050, MX50, MX55. Mixing down to analog can have a huge positive impact on your sound. Perhaps the best investment you can make short of tracking with analog in the first place. Good luck!
mshilarious
Banned
Tubes came back because '80s guitar tones sounded like ass, mostly because of pedal abuse. In the flight away from feature-creep on solid state amps, people forgot that transistor amps can actually sound good in a good circuit. Strangely most of the preferred studio microphone amplifiers are transistor amps . . . and tubes are perfectly capable of very clean output as well, but they are often deployed in a manner to purposely distort, especially in low-end faddish tube mic amps.
Low-end tape recorders aren't hi-fi at all; their distortions are easily documented and mostly undesireable. High-end tape recorders are probably much better . . . but again, I'll say it: transformers for no-maintenance "warmth".
Low-end tape recorders aren't hi-fi at all; their distortions are easily documented and mostly undesireable. High-end tape recorders are probably much better . . . but again, I'll say it: transformers for no-maintenance "warmth".
Cool. I did missread you then. My bad. I was sort of taking it from yours and Gecko's together.
The thread has actually turned out to be quite balanced with some good perspective.
aaronmcoleman
The truth is out there!
Just curious, what makes you scared of the long term reliability of the GAP? I'm a very amateur preamp builder, and just want to know what you see in it.
I agree 100% with slamming transformers to get some of that "analog" sound.
Farview
Well-known member
Unfortunately, since he is using a $250 studio in a box, I doubt he will pop for a reel to reel anytime soon. Especially since a reel of tape will cost almost as much as the entire recording setup he is using now.
mshilarious
Banned
If you recall back to the days of the group buy preamp, that was essentially a very similar unit to the GAP, except GAP was clever enough to make (at least) two changes: they moved the PSU to external to greatly reduce induced noise, and they eliminated a gain position on the switch which caused a nasty pop on the group buy version.
That nasty pop wasn't just nasty-sounding, it also apparently caused an overpower condition on a resistor in series with the output transistor . . . which in more than one case caused said resistor to go up in smoke.
I hadn't expected the same behavior in the GAP because the elimination of the offending gain position, but then I saw somewhere (probably GS) one report of a failed resistor in the output section. Clearly the problem is not of the same magnitude as the group buy pre, otherwise by this point you'd see dozens of failed GAP resistors. But it still worries me because it suggests the factory has not fully sorted out the issue.
Generally when you are designing a preamp you want to be very careful to make sure components never fail destructively. Always calculate maximum possible power dissipation in each part under "normal" fault conditions (that is, not somebody poking around an open chassis, but shorts of all external pins to ground, all control positions, etc.) and if the part is underrated, then you have to increase the part rating or find a way to limit current through that part. There are many possible current limiting schemes that could be deployed to fix any such problems.
Resistors generally don't fail quickly; they take maybe a second to heat up to the point they completely fail, and that is usually well above their rating. For example, a 1/4W resistor probably won't die until it gets to 1W, and if that 1W is very transient the resistor might be totally fine. Still, a designer should never depend on that. That does suggest that the power dissipation in these resistors (which are 2W I think, long time ago) is >>2W. That's quite a lot of heat.
I am of the opinion that analog worked fine for The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Boston, etc. for years before digital came along. But digital gives you a lot of options for an affordable cost never before seen until now. I have a 70s model Teac R2R for initial recording, and a Tascam Neo for mastering. In the end it's like Joe Perry's solo album's title, "Let the Music Do the Talking." Technology doesn't equal talent.
AxelLecter
New member
Possible solution
I have a neo mixer, did some salvage on some very old analog tapes, and when I burned a cd, the samples came out thin and tinny. I paid $500. to have it "
Professionally mastered", still sounded thin and tinny. I bought Ozone 4 and CD Architect, still sounded thin and tinny.
My solution to fix this, was to play the CD in my stereo, adjust the bass way up, the treble way down, and rerecord this new out put. I took the signal out of the headphones jack, pluged it into my mixer mic input, r4ecorded the new bassier sound, and sent samples of that out. Friends then reported it sounded normal, like a commercial CD. Not sure if this would help in your porblem, but its good info, for what its worth.
K
I have a neo mixer, did some salvage on some very old analog tapes, and when I burned a cd, the samples came out thin and tinny. I paid $500. to have it "
Professionally mastered", still sounded thin and tinny. I bought Ozone 4 and CD Architect, still sounded thin and tinny.
My solution to fix this, was to play the CD in my stereo, adjust the bass way up, the treble way down, and rerecord this new out put. I took the signal out of the headphones jack, pluged it into my mixer mic input, r4ecorded the new bassier sound, and sent samples of that out. Friends then reported it sounded normal, like a commercial CD. Not sure if this would help in your porblem, but its good info, for what its worth.
K
Nymphadora
New member
I use the "record on tape and send out to digital method", and for me, this works pretty well. Since the modern media we use ends up finalized in a digital format there really isn't much choice. Even an entire analogue studio will end up digital. But everyone is correct about warm analogue sound being subjective. I'm glad to see some major artists are going back to vinyl...there is still hope for the audio world. Hugs.....
Nymphadora
New member
YES!! Finally, someone gets it!! Thank you, Estaban! Hugs....
Nickelthrower
New member
This gentleman is correct. Digital is great for editing but if you want to capture the analog world then you must use an analog device such as a pre with a tube. I pretty much try to avoid solid state as much as possible because, after all, even the ever popular TL071 CP opamp is nothing more than an 8 bit semiconductor. Again, I try to avoid semiconductors until I get to my converters and then I try to use the best converters I can get my hands on.
It simply can't be done with plugins.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
While I am all for tube gear and have my share of it...there are solid state devices (pres/comps/EQs) that can sound warmer than some tube devices. I have a tube pre that sounds more like what you would expect from a SS pre...very Hi-Fi, even when you slam it...so one can't make generalizations that only analog tube gear does the trick.
Take some of the great analog consoles for instance, where there are NO tubes, yet those consoles are what adds the "warm, analog mojo" to the sound.