Are you an analogue purist?
- Thread starter cjacek
- Start date
Instroverb
New member
That was my first response. And I have found some places that do 500 7" discs for under a thousand. But if you want just one and you're happy with your cassette mix it might be the way to go. I think they do party's and vanity stuff. They are not a major presser.
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
...
I'm not an analog purist, per se, but my purism is about capturing an authentic sound. Not fancy or contrived, flashy or "commercial", (heaven forbid). Some of my stuff is downright lame, but it's authentic and inspired.
I voted "in between".
I'm not an analog purist, per se, but my purism is about capturing an authentic sound. Not fancy or contrived, flashy or "commercial", (heaven forbid). Some of my stuff is downright lame, but it's authentic and inspired.
I voted "in between".
Last edited:
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
Quite honestly, THAT is what I had intended the poll to be about, at least for the most part. It's about the output being as close as possible to the input, meaning that in addition to using an all analogue setup (for tracking), what ends up on tape is, in essence, the pure instruments by themselves, unobstructed by any processing whatsoever and, in that respect, Dave, you're a purist.
Ever wanted to hear music breathe? You should listen to A Reel Person's tracks.
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
For that, may I suggest The Device:It's about the output being as close as possible to the input, ...
Attachments
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
p.s.
The above is and ISN'T a joke.
To me the goal is to make a recording that sounds great , when you play that recording back, that is. How it is actually done from technical point is important, and last time I've checked, when it comes to the way the best musical records ever (from my subjectve point of judgement, that is, OF COURSE!) were made - that proces of making those great records had nothing to do with INPUT=OUTPUT.
And from my personal perspective, if it was all about INPUT=OUTPUT, then I would never ever get into recording, period.
But since it's NOT so, then I'm in
The above is and ISN'T a joke.
To me the goal is to make a recording that sounds great , when you play that recording back, that is. How it is actually done from technical point is important, and last time I've checked, when it comes to the way the best musical records ever (from my subjectve point of judgement, that is, OF COURSE!) were made - that proces of making those great records had nothing to do with INPUT=OUTPUT.
And from my personal perspective, if it was all about INPUT=OUTPUT, then I would never ever get into recording, period.
But since it's NOT so, then I'm in
trancedental
New member
I would define myself as in-between with a slight, maybe more bias towards the old way of doing things, I know that some commercial artists are recorded digital & mixed / tracked through expensive old school mixers & have heard great recordings made this way.
However the finance options for doing this for the home / project recordist are limited, particularly when working in an all digital set-up (AKA mix in the box) which is when the limitations of prosumer digital become apparent, limitations which analog tape masked somewhat at the time. It’s not really surprising that since the digital era started that more attention has been paid to outboard pre amps, EQ & compressors, because with digital there is no forgiveness, & even expensive plug ins will struggle to change this in most cases after tracking.
In the ’80’s to ‘90’s many people worked with a multitrack tape machine synced up with a MIDI sequencer, running keyboards, samplers, drum machines, FX’s ect, all running through an analog mixer. I’ve come to a conclusion that the best option for me is an updated version of the above running with a DAW which is just a updated sequencer in effect with added audio recording. Just use the DAW facilities for extra audio tracks & even transfer tracks over when you run of track space on the multitrack.
In this way for me personally the tape machine is still the most important link in the recording chain, I even turn off the DAW whilst tracking because it is a distraction most of the time unless mixing.
One related thing I would mention is that good sounding outboard gear is important, even a couple of channels worth will do the job on the most important instruments. This is something you have to pay for apart from a few exceptions, most of the prosumer stuff will not match up to the sounds you hear on classic recordings.
However, for the cost of prosumer microphone preamps, equalizers, & especially compressors, you can make your own DIY versions, many of which are of classic designs which you will pay thousands for. I’ve just finished a Stereo Neve Mic Pre clone, Stereo SSL Mixbus compressor, & am working on a 1176 compressor & Stereo Tube Opto Compressor similar to a LA2-A.
I’ve come to the conclusion that everyone needs at least some outboard gear with audio transformers on board for that larger than life sound & a tube guitar amplifier of course. You can also get away with cheaper mics with better outboard, I’ve really been surprised with dynamic mics used with the Neve Mic pre clone I built, even a T-Bone Ribbon cheapo priced at £50 sounds great, I never even liked a Audio Technica SM58 type mic I’ve had for 20 years until it went through this pre.
However the finance options for doing this for the home / project recordist are limited, particularly when working in an all digital set-up (AKA mix in the box) which is when the limitations of prosumer digital become apparent, limitations which analog tape masked somewhat at the time. It’s not really surprising that since the digital era started that more attention has been paid to outboard pre amps, EQ & compressors, because with digital there is no forgiveness, & even expensive plug ins will struggle to change this in most cases after tracking.
In the ’80’s to ‘90’s many people worked with a multitrack tape machine synced up with a MIDI sequencer, running keyboards, samplers, drum machines, FX’s ect, all running through an analog mixer. I’ve come to a conclusion that the best option for me is an updated version of the above running with a DAW which is just a updated sequencer in effect with added audio recording. Just use the DAW facilities for extra audio tracks & even transfer tracks over when you run of track space on the multitrack.
In this way for me personally the tape machine is still the most important link in the recording chain, I even turn off the DAW whilst tracking because it is a distraction most of the time unless mixing.
One related thing I would mention is that good sounding outboard gear is important, even a couple of channels worth will do the job on the most important instruments. This is something you have to pay for apart from a few exceptions, most of the prosumer stuff will not match up to the sounds you hear on classic recordings.
However, for the cost of prosumer microphone preamps, equalizers, & especially compressors, you can make your own DIY versions, many of which are of classic designs which you will pay thousands for. I’ve just finished a Stereo Neve Mic Pre clone, Stereo SSL Mixbus compressor, & am working on a 1176 compressor & Stereo Tube Opto Compressor similar to a LA2-A.
I’ve come to the conclusion that everyone needs at least some outboard gear with audio transformers on board for that larger than life sound & a tube guitar amplifier of course. You can also get away with cheaper mics with better outboard, I’ve really been surprised with dynamic mics used with the Neve Mic pre clone I built, even a T-Bone Ribbon cheapo priced at £50 sounds great, I never even liked a Audio Technica SM58 type mic I’ve had for 20 years until it went through this pre.
SteveM
New member
You need to put some pics up of the stuff you've made.
The shure 58 mic is a great mic even on recording. Your everyday mics can go a long way with the right equipment.
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
That's Only if you choose to do so.
Things which those "classic designs" legends devices were/are made of end up in the trash on the daily base.
Why do I get that itchy-crispy feeling deep under my diaphragm when I see words such as: "cheap", "consumer", "prosumer", "hi end", "low end", "fully pro", "top of the line", "bottom line" in a "technical" discussion about music recording/production? , yeah, that Itchy-Chippy'-Crispy One ...
**************
Yeah, Mr. trancedental, post some pics of your things, that would be cool
gerard
Member
I voted for # 3. I like to keep things simple but don't mind stacking and bouncing tracks 30/40 times (kidding) if the song calls for it. I see my home project studio as a extention of music expression, another tool or a bunch of tools to make the song in head sound like I vision it, but my music taste's vary from simple acoustic to multi track songs. Guess I'm not sure what I am
trancedental
New member
OK As requested
SSL 4000 Mix bus Compressor Clone with added Super Sidechain Board c/w API Thrust Filter (Don't know what that does exactly but sounds great) & various high pass settings. Great on the main outputs of your mixer & drum buss. Needs one more control knob for the set so I've used another type for now!
I'm actually going to make another different (Turbo) version of one of these with my own case! Was a fiddly build especially as it's my first, had to redo a main PCB board along the way being a newbie! Case was built by Perusha on the Prodigy DIY Forum.
Neve 1290 Stereo Mic Pre, build in progress working & almost finished. Have just tested my first channel with excellent results, waiting for a couple more transformers & parts for Channel 2 . I'm just adding a DI / Phase / Pad interface board now. Just got to drill the front panel & print out transfers for the settings & writting for the controls.
I'll post more when I'm finished
SSL 4000 Mix bus Compressor Clone with added Super Sidechain Board c/w API Thrust Filter (Don't know what that does exactly but sounds great) & various high pass settings. Great on the main outputs of your mixer & drum buss. Needs one more control knob for the set so I've used another type for now!
I'm actually going to make another different (Turbo) version of one of these with my own case! Was a fiddly build especially as it's my first, had to redo a main PCB board along the way being a newbie! Case was built by Perusha on the Prodigy DIY Forum.
Neve 1290 Stereo Mic Pre, build in progress working & almost finished. Have just tested my first channel with excellent results, waiting for a couple more transformers & parts for Channel 2 . I'm just adding a DI / Phase / Pad interface board now. Just got to drill the front panel & print out transfers for the settings & writting for the controls.
I'll post more when I'm finished
Attachments
Last edited:
SteveM
New member
Nice! Where are you getting the parts and schematics?
trancedental
New member
Various projects over on http://www.prodigy-pro.com/diy/index.php?board=2.0
All project & details on the META thread above, PCB's available http://www.prodigy-pro.com/diy/index.php?board=3.0
Advice , troubleshooting & how to build links are all on Prodigy DIY forum
I wonder why this post from 3-26-09 showed up as from one day ago (in the thread list, that is)?
Cheers,
Otto
Last edited:
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
because somebody must've voted...
Of course. Should have thought of that.
Well, it's a thread I missed out on. I would have to say that I am no purist.
One thing I like about tape is that it usually manages to let you know if you suck or not. DAWs have so many tools that let you hide from the fact that you suck. I'd prefer to get better as a composer and musician, rather than rely on a crutch.
As far as purity, I tend to be a minimalist (partly due to laziness and lack of gear and partly because it's easier to get a focused sound with fewer parts) but I try stuff out and listen and keep going till I like the sound. Kind of like Einstein's view on explanations of nature, I make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.
Cheers,
Otto
Blue Jinn
Rider of the ARPocalypse
Well, my *first* synth was a Crumar DS-2 which had *digital controlled oscillators* as opposed to voltage controlled.... I have plenty of digital gear, most of the keys I had went bad and went away (I regret that now considering what I paid for a broken ARP Odyssey in 1989 and what the same broken ARP Odyssey would go for today...now to be replaced with digital modules (or FM like the TX802) ) and my recent project was mixed from 8 track to DAT, then pulled straight from DAT with DAT2WAV and mastered on a PC.
But I also have an analog sampler (AKA the Mellotron M400S....) Does that make me choice C or D???
Otherwise, I have a few "digital delay" lines, but no other digital effects per se, the rest are analog.
And I confess, I'm also a gear slut....
But I also have an analog sampler (AKA the Mellotron M400S....) Does that make me choice C or D???
Otherwise, I have a few "digital delay" lines, but no other digital effects per se, the rest are analog.
And I confess, I'm also a gear slut....
hungovermorning
Dr. Caveman.
I'd like to think I'm as analogue nerdy as feasible.
The recording process is track to tape > mix to tape > master and press vinyl.
The processing I do is in mixdown, passive EQs, a tube reverb, and a couple old goofy comps and limiters (CBS, Urei, Altec). I used to really not like the people who would protool and manipulate music, but as I've gotten older you realize there's a place for them too, it's just definitely not in the mid 60s garage rock/early rock n roll aesthetic I'm looking for.
The recording process is track to tape > mix to tape > master and press vinyl.
The processing I do is in mixdown, passive EQs, a tube reverb, and a couple old goofy comps and limiters (CBS, Urei, Altec). I used to really not like the people who would protool and manipulate music, but as I've gotten older you realize there's a place for them too, it's just definitely not in the mid 60s garage rock/early rock n roll aesthetic I'm looking for.
nate_dennis
Well-known member
Unfortunately I don't have the energy to read all of these posts . . . but here's my take.
I use what I have and what I can get my hands on. I haven't had much chance to record lately, but the last thing I did, I used my church building when no one was there and I was recording to cassette. I don't think I'm going to add much (if any) artificial reverb because I was getting some really nice room sounds. I'm not opposed to digital effects if they serve the song. When I get ready to record my (programmed) drums I will run them through my KRK's and mic the speakers in order to try to make them sound as realistic as possible. I'm about to to start work on a DIY spring reverb and will hopefully use that instead of a digital.
So no, I'm not a purist, but I can't afford to be. But I don't use computers and I hate autotune . . . .so maybe i'm in between the top two options.
-Nate
I use what I have and what I can get my hands on. I haven't had much chance to record lately, but the last thing I did, I used my church building when no one was there and I was recording to cassette. I don't think I'm going to add much (if any) artificial reverb because I was getting some really nice room sounds. I'm not opposed to digital effects if they serve the song. When I get ready to record my (programmed) drums I will run them through my KRK's and mic the speakers in order to try to make them sound as realistic as possible. I'm about to to start work on a DIY spring reverb and will hopefully use that instead of a digital.
So no, I'm not a purist, but I can't afford to be. But I don't use computers and I hate autotune . . . .so maybe i'm in between the top two options.
-Nate
I'm really caught between 2 worlds. I love the options I have with Cubase, and the ability for an insane amount of tracks, effects, etc. But at the same time, I really like the limitations of working with my Tascam 414 4-tracker, and after listening to a few demos I made both digitally and with cassette tape, I've found I really like the compression I get from tape. And so I guess if I like the analog sound better, that's what I'll continue to record on most of the time. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm abandoning digital completely...