Hybrid Setup - 44.1, 48, or 96 from tape?

[fstrat76]

I know some of you have a hybrid setup also.

I have a Tascam 38, Tascam M2600, Tascam FW1884, Logic Pro, synced with JL Cooper PPS-1, Tascam 42. I mostly track to tape. When I am done tracking, I bring the tracks as 24bit into the DAW for any processing and automation mixing. (Yes, I could mix directly from tape since its synced, but there are some things I like in the DAW like automation). During mix, I send out to the analog mixer to to 2-track tape.

Anyway, that's the workflow.

My question is: Is it worth bringing the tracks from the Tascam 38 ton the DAW at 96k sample rate?


Thanks.

 

[jpmorris]

Is there a compelling reason not to use 96k? The more information the better, I'd say.

 

[miroslav]

(Yes, I could mix directly from tape since its synced, but there are some things I like in the DAW like automation).

It's OK....you don't have to apologize/explain just 'cuz it's the Analog forum.
I very occasionally do the mix right off my 24-track deck these days...but it requires a lot more disciple and perfection during tracking to do that. If I was recording bands with lots of tracks going down at once....it would be different...but as a solo musician, and having to some days slog through tracking sessions when I'm doing many, many parts....I just don't need to spend more time worrying about every, little note, click, string squeal....so dumping to DAW, I can just run with it and then edit out the little quirks with ease....otherwise, it would take a lot of mixing automation to mute those things out when going off the tape.

Anyway...
I do the same hybrid thing....track to tape, dump to DAW for edits/comps, and while I don't mix in the DAW, I do mix out from the DAW through a console...so it's all good.

I use to go at 88.2 into the DAW for the track dump, but for a few reasons, I switched to 48...mainly to do with my sync setup, because I now use the DAW as Master, where before I use to use the tape deck as Master.....and in my current configuration, with a Timeline MicroLynx as my central sync box...the 48kHz rate was the "most compatible" way to go.
While I could easily enough use a different approach, and still transfer at 88.2 or 96 or whatever, I prefer using the MicroLynx and my current sync configuration with DAW as Master, because it's the most accurate and most solid....of which the details of why that is the best way to sync, I don't wish to get into now (it's been discussed in depth here already).

So to get back to "should you" go with 96...?
If it pleases you and you really can hear the difference...and your DAW has the HD space and can work smoothly with files at that higher sampling rate....sure, go for it.
That said...in the past year or so since I switched from 88.2 to 48....I can't say that I've ever lost any sleep over it, and I do get the benefit of much more HD space and throughput.....so I'm OK with it.
Before making the switch....I did some objective comparisons of files at 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96....and in their "raw" transfered state....yes, there was ever so slightly an improvement between the 48 and 88.2/96 rates...and a bit more noticeable when comparing to the 44.1......but it was very, very minor. Sorta like a giving your sunglasses a quick wipe just to remove that very light haze. It wasn't earth-shattering or something that you really noticed.....and for me, taking into account some of the other configuration points I mentioned, and also having to do with things like sample libraries that are all at 48....it just didn't warrant all the back-n-forth I would be doing if I was going to keep using the 88.2 or 96.

Now....if you run tons of pugs (which I generally don't)....there may be, for certain types of plugs like reverbs (I use outboard hardware through my console when I mix) that could(?) benefit from the higher rates both singularly and when stacked, plug after plug.

I would suggest you try it both ways and come to your own conclusion if the higher rates are really adding a lot of bang-for-buck to your mixes and your process. The types of music you do may also be key.....like if it was classical or jazz or very ambient stuff...mmmmm, you might want that little bit of extra higher sampling "dust" sprinkled on your mixes.....but I wouldn't sweat it for Rock/Pop and more robust styles and mixes....48 works well enough, and has more dynamic range and greater frequency response than the tape you're transfering from...so it's going capture everthing for you.

 

[ric3xrt]

since a lot of my work ends up on CD, I use 44.1 FWIW

 

[fstrat76]

Good stuff. Thanks.

I also go out of the DAW and mostly send into separate channels on the analog mixer, then onto 2 track tape for the final mix (but not the "mastered" version since I do that separately).


My main concern is the summing in the DAW for the mix. I know the bit depth (I use 24) has a lot to do with summing, and I've seen countless threads about summing.

Knowing that I will lose some flavor by introducing the ADA to begin with, I want to lose as little as possible of that flavor upon mix. If DR at 48k is already above tape coming in per tape track, that's great, but summing all those tracks was/is a concern.

I'll have to try to setup two different projects to run some compares at 48 and 96.

 

[miroslav]

Mmmmm....I don't know how much just the summing quality of the DAW is going to be affected by the initial sampling rate choice....but I don't generally sum in the DAW, so I've never looked at that closely or done any measurments/comparisons.

That miught be a good general question in the Mixing forum and Digital forum.

 

[Beck]

It’s going to depend on the converters, so its hard for us to say definitively which word-length and resolution is best across the board. Best thing to do is make comparisons within the unit your using and /or ask others that have the same device you have what are the pros and cons of different resolutions.

That being said, I normally use 24/48 and even 20/48 on one of my older boxes that I just can’t part with because it was made so well and sounds so good.

I’m partial to the Echo Audio Layla 24/96 boxes. They’re getting on in years, but my observation is that audio interfaces have been getting much worse, not better. I’ve watched standards getting lower when it comes to what manufacturers offer us and what most people are willing to settle for.

But anyway, speaking for the Echo Layla, which you will have to pry from my cold dead hands to get it from me, 24/48 sounds great and I don’t see enough of an advantage to bump that up to 88 or 96 at this time.

I also do very little ITB and each track from the Layla goes through an analog mixer to half-track open reel mixdown deck.

I still highly recommend the original Layla20 and the Layla24 over most of what I’m seeing out there now. So YMMV with what you’re using as for bit-depth and sampling rate.

I also use the JL Cooper PPS-1, PPS-2, and PPS-100 depending on what I’m working with. I still often run an outboard sequencer on an Ensoniq ESQ-1 via MIDI, which requires Smart FSK into MIDI Clock with Song Position Pointer., so I’ll use the PPS-1 for that. Other times I’ve got MTC/SMPTE syncing up the DAW and the analog multitrack as well, so there’s a whole lotta syncing going on.

Some DAW interfaces and software are better at managing all of this than others, so each situation calls for different approaches with a view to success.