4-tracking in MONO special trick

X

xxmangoosexx

New member
I just got my Tascam 246 Portastudio running smoothly, and it's been integrated as the main recorder at my home studio. I have a 32-channel board and a bunch of outboard pres and analog synths and drum machines. I'm working on a project in mono, where everything goes into the board, gets mixed, and then printed to tape. My plan is to record the same thing to all four tracks on the cassette. I've done some tests and it yields a far superior sound to recording to just one track at a time. I know it can't even approach the fidelity of 7.5ips 1/4 inch tape, but i discovered a trick on the 246 that really get's you close:

1) track the same source to all 4 tracks on your 246 with Dolby on

2) when mixing, turn dolby off on JUST TRACK 4 (you can do this because track 4 can be used for sync purposes on the 246 - check your model to see if it can do the same)

Now, you've got the foundation - tracks 1-3 of your mix with all the good noise killing dolby gives you, but track 4 becomes your 'excitement' track, because all the highs remain intact as you fade it in. Noise is minimized, because you are only dealing with non-Dolby on one track.

I've been really, really impressed with the sound!
 
xxmangoosexx said:
... but track 4 becomes your 'excitement' track, because all the highs remain intact as you fade it in.
Click to expand...

That's just Dolby pre-emphasis (encode) of the highs above 1kHz...basically a boost in highs (and hiss/noise) that remains there because you are not completing the process and using Dolby de-emphasis (decode) to remove it.

I would just not use Dolby at all rather than using it only for half the process...but YMMV...if you like that sound.
 
I know what the OP is saying. It will give it extra sheen in the highs and more punch. Good chance it sounds pretty good like that.
 
once again, miroslav's right on the money. give that guy a carrot.
It is just an hf boost, very easy to replicate without Dolby.
But as always.. if it sounds good to you, then do it!
 
miroslav said:
Yeah...but it's just high-end boost...you can achive it without the Dolby "trick". :D
Click to expand...

ahh.. maybe. But I've always thought the undecoded dolby had a different type of smoothness. Depends what you have for eq I guess. :D


It's actually been done many times. But I did kind of notice myself that using just eq is the same.
 
Yes it does both but it's a bit more complicated than that. I don't know about 'smoothness' but what Dolby B does (almost certainly Dolby B as it's for cassette), is to boost the high frequency content when it's coded, and then do the exact opposite it when it's decoded. This gives you a better hf signal to noise ratio. The compression is where it gets more complex, as it's not linearly compressed. It's called a bi-linear compression-expansion system, which only compresses mid-level signals i.e. during recording, loud sections are left at 0 gain and quiet sections have a fixed gain applied to them, when the signal is in between these two areas then a changing gain is applied which is inversely proportional to the level (i.e. it's compressed!). On decoding, the exact opposite expansion is applied.
Hope you're still with me? It's probably more than you need to know but it does have implications if you are going to skip the decoding phase, as you will want to set your level depending on whether or not you want to hear the compression on top of the high frequency boost.
 
cobaltaudio said:
...but it does have implications if you are going to skip the decoding phase, as you will want to set your level depending on whether or not you want to hear the compression on top of the high frequency boost.
Click to expand...


Right.

If the OP likes the effect and wants to go that unorthodox route, fine...but basically he is defeating half of the Dolby process, without consciously knowing what is happening...he's just hearing the end result.
I would rather apply any HF boost and compressing consciously and under my control rather than as some byproduct of a half-defeated Dolby process.

YMMV.... :)
 
miroslav said:
I would rather apply any HF boost and compressing consciously and under my control rather than as some byproduct of a half-defeated Dolby process.

YMMV.... :)
Click to expand...

They got them cars nowadays that'll parallel park for ya...

I'm in your camp on this, Miroslav, BUT...I used to always reproduce in my car with n/r off. I'd dub LP's to tape using my Onkyo TA-2058 deck and then play them in the car on an Alpine head unit and it just sounded better with the Dolby B off. Different scenario...though those were also the days that my graphic eq used to look like a big smile too so my ears hear things, maybe listen for things differently today. I figure it probably had more to do with some tracking discrepancy between the two tape transports more than anything so I was compensating in a way that shouldn't have been necessary.

The thing I DO like about what the OP is saying is he is mixing that encoded/non-decoded track into 1 out of 4 tracks so its blended. Up until recently I always approached dynamics processing as something to be applied to one track of one source rather than maybe splitting the track and applying compression to one and blending with the dry track or even using the compressor as a send effect on one source. It opens a creative avenue to get certain sounds as you can, for instance, squash the living daylights out of the track but blend it in incrementally with the dry track and sometimes that works really well if that's the sound you are going for...all SORTS of things you can do with that overtly compressed source when it can be blended.

And another thing...I like control, but I'm finding increased value in having stuff that just works and brings a pleasing result even if its "parking the car for me". Not in all cases, but its finding more and more room in my process...maybe because I'm not savvy enough to use the stuff that allows all the control. My CRL SEP400A dynamics processors are a good example. They are four-band dynamics processors with limiting. Very little control over threshholds, only sort of pseudo control on ratio and just four simple boost/cut knobs for the four fixed frequency centers...but I like what they do and in reading the theory of operation there's a whole mess of stuff the proprietary VCA's are doing inside that thing, but I figure I let them do their thing and it becomes a useful tool when I let it be.

The ultimate in this regard is a tape machine itself when I use it to "remaster" digitally tracked material or digital media. Hey...there's all SORTS of stuff going on when the audio goes through the amplifiers from head to tape, tape to head and back through the amplifiers and all I have control over is bias, tape selection and levels. Very simple, but it sounds awesome.

So while I agree the OP employing an unorthodox technique, I also agree with anything said above akin to "if you like it, then use it."
 
sweetbeats said:
...I used to always reproduce in my car with n/r off. I'd dub LP's to tape using my Onkyo TA-2058 deck and then play them in the car on an Alpine head unit and it just sounded better with the Dolby B off. Different scenario...
Click to expand...

Yeah...I've done that at times with prerecorded music back in my cassette days. My cassette player had 3-4 different PB options...and I would play back a tape and dial through them to find the one that worked best for a given tape regardless of how it was recorded...or what type of tape it was. :)

I just think that during tracking...the Dolby "trick" isn't really a useful "tool", and similar (probably better) results can be had doing it yourself with EQ and compression on an individual track.

But if it feels good.... ;)
 
Miroslav is right, except i'm not unaware that I'm skipping the decoding process one track - my understanding of Dolby NR is not as watertight as his, but that it is a two step process wherein the signal is manipulated and then "de-manipulated" is not beyond my realm of comprehension.

I guess i could track 1-3 w/ Dolby on, and leave it off on track 4, and see how that sounds - all I know is that after tracking one source to all 4 stretches of tape with Dolby on, and then turning it off on track 4 on playblack, and blending the signal in with tracks 1-3 - I was instantly in love with the sound - without having to do anything else, freeing up my compressors and EQ's for other uses... and that's pretty neat to me.
 
Yeah...try tracking with NR just on 3...skip it altogether on track 4.

You can then also EQ/process track 4 with some added HF and some compression...blend it back...see how it works for you.
You may find that you can do even more going that route, and have some choices in how much HF and comp you have...rather than just getting the byproduct of a Dolby process.
 
miroslav said:
I just think that during tracking...the Dolby "trick" isn't really a useful "tool", and similar (probably better) results can be had doing it yourself with EQ and compression on an individual track.
Click to expand...

Well it may not be useful to everyone... I, for example, some times can't be stuffed spending more than 10min EQ'ing and compressing a single track. This 'trick' can be done very quickly, the results can be replicated on all tracks, it sounds good to 'some' people and I don't know about you guys but I think it would be pretty hard to 'replicate' the results using EQ and compression (especially since you would need a multiband compressor) so the results would also be pretty unique sounding.

That sounds pretty useful to me..
 
The idea of a Dolby 'trick' goes back to the late 60's/early 70's, when pro studios started using Dolby A units that way (encode to tape, no decode on playback). Word is that Fifth Dimension is one such band that employed this practice. Dolby A behaves differently than B and C, and it seems to me it was the birth of the exciter. I tried this Dolby A trick before on a 3M 1/2" 4-track with acoustic guitar and it was very nice, actually. On bass instruments, not so good.
 
Chilljam said:
... I, for example, some times can't be stuffed spending more than 10min EQ'ing and compressing a single track. This 'trick' can be done very quickly, ...
Click to expand...


Yeah...10 min is a lot of time to spend on a track. ;)
What's the hurry and need to do things very quickly when mixing?

I said if it works for you, go for it...
 
I have a little stand alone DBX unit meant for home audio stuff I use to get this sound.
Just run your mic pre into the encode side and right to tape.
It's a very cool sound.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top