Being for the Benifit of Mr. Tape

[rene-lemieux]

Everyone in this section is clearly an advocate for the use of analog mediums for sound recording, but I want you all to compile a list of every little thing that is an advantage of "Tape".

I mean, there's the things laymen throw in like "Warmth" and "Saturation" and "Compression" and the like, and though true, none of those words are very telling or descriptive. Plus there's more than those I just listed, of course, like tapes natural function as a DeEsser (a trait that I could always hear, but never put my finger on until just the other day). I just want to know every other benefit of the medium, paired with a little more explanation than I've been given in the past. I'm not a hugely technical guy, but I wouldn't mind to know the numbers, as well as how tape executes the functions that it does.

I am a believer in analog, although I've never done any serious (pro) tape sessions, I've fiddled with it at home for a few years now, and I can believe my ears. I basically want to further convince myself of analog, so that maybe I'll have the guts in the future to invest in a good pro tape console.

To further this discussion, say you recorded a signal to a digital DAW using good converters. Now, how many "Plugs" would you need to toss onto the audio track so that you would be experiencing the same benefits as a tape would be doing for your audio naturally... It's kind of the same question as the first one, but in different clothing.

 

[miroslav]

It's just retro-cool using a tape deck than any DAW for tracking.

Watching the reels go 'round-n-'round is mesmerizing.

There this whole touchy-feely vibe you get working with a physical medium VS files.

You get 30 seconds or so during RW and FF actions to take a sip of coffee or a puff or whatever.

There's no computer fan/HD noise to deal with during tracking.

Oh...and it just sounds better for tracking and tape adds a cohesiveness to a stereo mix.

 

[rene-lemieux]

It's just retro-cool using a tape deck than any DAW for tracking.

Watching the reels go 'round-n-'round is mesmerizing.

There this whole touchy-feely vibe you get working with a physical medium VS files.

You get 30 seconds or so during RW and FF actions to take a sip of coffee or a puff or whatever.

There's no computer fan/HD noise to deal with during tracking.

I couldn't agree more with the intimacy of analog, it's all so much more REEL (pun intended)

But gimme some audio specifics, I want to make a list. A lot of it I already know, of course, this thread is more for interest/ discussion sake anyhow

 

[miroslav]

But see, that's my point...the answer is NOT in the specs.

If you just compared specs...most DAWs would win out...dynamics, frequency response, S/N...etc.
So...there's more to it than specs.
Tape has that intangible, indescribable "magic". You either like it or not, and the only way to decide that...is to use it.

 

[rene-lemieux]

But see, that's my point...the answer is NOT in the specs.

If you just compared specs...most DAWs would win out...dynamics, frequency response, S/N...etc.
So...there's more to it than specs.
Tape has that intangible, indescribable "magic". You either like it or not, and the only way to decide that...is to use it.

This is now the God VS Logic Debate, you being the believer, and infatuated with the magic, but me on the other hand wanting the logic and explanation behind it all. Neither side is wrong, but I can't believe you when you say tape statistics cannot be "understood". They CAN!

GIMMIE GIMMIE... please

Trailing on what you said about DAWs being statistically superior, that may be true in our day and age, but what I'm asking for here is the total amount of "degradation" that audio experiences in the tape world that gives it it's appeal. Hence one of my initial questions, how many plugs would you need on a pure digital audio recording to bring it to such a state.

 

[miroslav]

but I can't believe you when you say tape statistics cannot be "understood". They CAN!

I never said that.

I said that if it's specs that you want as some "proof" of tape's value, then it's a waste of time looking at them since DAW specs are most always going to look better.

AFA tape degradation as an "effect"...well, each tape deck and tape formulation has it's own sonic signature, so it's not that straightforward to reduce it down to a bunch of numbers that you can use in a string of plug-ins to get the same effect.

With tape, there is some added noise, there is some HF loss, there can be some mild wow/flutter..then depending on the deck and tape formulation, how hard you drive them will also give different flavors per deck/tape combination.
Mind you...quality tape saturation/compression is not really achievable with dinky, small format decks. Don't waste your time with a porta-studio cassette deck or some consumer-grade deck trying for tape compression. You'll just end up getting preamp distortion at best....which may sound pleasing to you or not....but you'll rarely get nice tape compression.
You need a decent deck that can be pushed hard without its electronics crapping out on you long before the tape gets saturated.

 

[westgate]

no real advantages that i can see/hear. i just like it better!

 

[rene-lemieux]

I never said that.

I said that if it's specs that you want as some "proof" of tape's value, then it's a waste of time looking at them since DAW specs are most always going to look better.

AFA tape degradation as an "effect"...well, each tape deck and tape formulation has it's own sonic signature, so it's not that straightforward to reduce it down to a bunch of numbers that you can use in a string of plug-ins to get the same effect.

With tape, there is some added noise, there is some HF loss, there can be some mild wow/flutter..then depending on the deck and tape formulation, how hard you drive them will also give different flavors per deck/tape combination.
Mind you...quality tape saturation/compression is not really achievable with dinky, small format decks. Don't waste your time with a porta-studio cassette deck or some consumer-grade deck trying for tape compression. You'll just end up getting preamp distortion at best....which may sound pleasing to you or not....but you'll rarely get nice tape compression.
You need a decent deck that can be pushed hard without its electronics crapping out on you long before the tape gets saturated.

Fair enough, I'm curious actually, how many dB of headroom is existent on tape decks before saturation? Must be pretty high, considdering the cheap pres on the consumer decks can't reach the levels.

New question: If you give a line level amp/converter (excuse me if this does not make sense, I don't know if I'm using the proper terms) on a deck a very high dB signal, will it help you succeed in achieving saturation? I'm just guessing, but would it fill up the headroom, or just distort? The nature of amps running into amps running into amps bewilders me still, let me know, pro...

 

[lo.fi.love]

I personally have a hard time understanding something that I cannot physically manipulate with my hands. As concepts, I understand analog equipment and magnetic tape (and linear editing) far better than doing something "in the box" as with digital recording.

Maybe it's similar, but I can't write on the computer. To really organize my thoughts, I need to write with pen and paper.

Maybe I'm a "tactile" learner, and I process things mentally by manipulating tangible items.

 

[M1Fanatic]

I've never had to re-boot my tape machine, nor has it ever crashed on me.

I've also never accidentally deleted an entire spool of tape.

 

[lonewhitefly]

analog is real and digital is pretend

 

[Lance Lawson]

analog is real and digital is pretend

This statements pretty much says what tape/analog is all about.

Virtually all modern pop digital recordings sound grainy and loaded with unpleasant harsh distortions. Nothing sounds like its one piece. Its a sonic mosaic instead of a sonic wave. Digital is to insects as analog is to mammals if that makes any sense.

 

[sweetbeats]

There's no computer fan/HD noise to deal with during tracking.

Right, but the fan on my MM-1000 sounds like a welder and the capstan assembly like a truck idling...

Listen, here's one of the biggest factors for me...digital peaks at 0dBfs...that's it. Analog can be pushed much further than that and when analog peaks it is an analog distortion that can be controlled; harnessed. I'm a drummer and having a recording medium that can take a hit and come back wanting more is just addicting after using digital.

Digital gives back more or less what is put into it (I realize this is an arguable point...it depends on many factors)...that's been a selling point for digital. Analog tape is another member of the band, or at least a special ops engineer in the studio. If you know your deck it can be such a fabulous tool...think of the tape selection and setup of the electronics like a voice algorithm on a cartridge or something...the original plugin (I'm not advocating that you just use a tape machine as a "plugin", but you are missing one of the best benefits of tape if you haven't treated yourself to delving into it).

Both analog and digital recording mediums are facsimiles okay? In digital the audio stream is being converted into complex "words" of 1's and 0's...LOTS of them. In analog the audio is being converted into magnetic flux effecting a complex array of magnetic particles. Which facsimile do you want?

I know that my MM-1000 makes me sound good, and its simple. I'm not as good as it makes me sound. All I have to do is hit record.

I know with my BR-20T in back-to-back realtime A/B testing (i.e. subjectively comparing playback of digital program material straight off the D/A converter into the monitors and then through the tape machine, recording and monitoring off the repro head in realtime as its recording) the audio coming off of tape sounded more natural, dynamic, musical, and the soundstage was easily an order or two in magnitude wider and deeper than the straight digital reproduction.

I know when I experienced the above as well as my recent experience testing the MM-1000 I'm literally baffled as to why everybody that cares about anything in creating, capturing and reproducing music isn't running ojt and getting a good tape machine.

 

[M1Fanatic]

A few other thoughts...

Never had to upgrade the software or buy new a new OS for my tape machine.

Never ran out of available physical or virtual memory on my tape machine.

Always have enough inputs and outputs.

Latency? On a tape machine?

The tape machine never hangs up because it's recording too many tracks at once.

 

[miroslav]

Right, but the fan on my MM-1000 sounds like a welder and the capstan assembly like a truck idling...

Yeah....those Ampex machines can be loud.

Listen, here's one of the biggest factors for me...digital peaks at 0dBfs...that's it. Analog can be pushed much further than that and when analog peaks it is an analog distortion that can be controlled; harnessed.

I get where you are coming from...but that's really an apples-n-oranges thing.
It's not like digital has this headroom “limit” while analog was designed to just push through and beyond without any issues.
Analog can distort too, and not always in a pleasant way.
You can't really compare 0dBFS to an analog VU's 0dB point. Analog 0dBu on a VU meter is more like -18dBFS digital. If you tried to hit as high a level with a tape deck as equal to 0dBFS...chances are you would find the exact same ugly distortion. That's like hitting +18dBu on your decks!

SO...the reality is that digital has WAY more headroom than analog before ugly distortion, you just don't have the "gray area" where analog starts to distort but can still sound good....which is really a personal choice.
Originally...tape recordists avoided even the smallest amounts of distortion...because it was deemed "bad quality" audio.
The whole tape saturation/compression thing became a common practice later on along with distorted guitars, etc. and that’s when tape was really being used as an "effect", but that was never the design intention…and likewise digital clipping was never meant to be acceptable, but more and more people DO push their audio into digital clipping because they LIKE the "effect".

It’s more about personal recording practices rather than equipment limitations….IMO.

Don't get me wrong...I'm not trying to put down analog tape...I use it all the time.

 

[RRuskin]

Analog is neither better nor worse than digital. It's more a question of comfort and/or expertise in the chosen medium.

 

[grimtraveller]

Analog is neither better nor worse than digital. It's more a question of comfort and/or expertise in the chosen medium.

Having been a

waste your time with a porta-studio cassette deck

cat for nearly 20 years and really having delved incresingly deeply with digital over the last couple of years, all I can say is that I like both. I love the debates about why one is better than the other because I tend to think that booty is in the eye of the bee holder. I have a friend who would almost fight if you disagreed that chicken cooked in a hole in the ground oven was better than when cooked in anything else. Sometimes, personal preference is precisely that. It's not a universal standard.
But the things that make people love tape are real as are the things that make people love dij.

 

[miroslav]

The point about porta-studio cassette decks was no to waste time trying to achieve tape saturation/compression...'cuz you probably would overdrive their front-end electronics first and not get much "good" tape saturation.

Otherwise...porta-studios are good for easy multitrack recording and can sound decent when used under the right circumstances.

 

[cjacek]

I liken the analogue experience (both in use and final result) to an artist painting a picture, the traditional way, vs someone who uses software.

 

[grimtraveller]

The point about porta-studio cassette decks was no to waste time trying to achieve tape saturation/compression...'cuz you probably would overdrive their front-end electronics first and not get much "good" tape saturation.

Otherwise...porta-studios are good for easy multitrack recording and can sound decent when used under the right circumstances.

I know, I was joshing ! On bandwidth alone, much as the cassette portastudio has been my great friend that I will never disown, even I know it's rather the poor relation !