miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Yes, I have.
Transferring Multitrack Reels Into Computer?
- Thread starter bmg
- Start date
Yes, I have.
No need for that in my opinion. The first sentence of yours that I quoted pretty much says it all.
Stuff is good nowadays, and you can get on your computer an 'exact copy' of what's on tape. Nothing added, nothing taken away.
Edit; As usual I'm late to the party. I see now we're talking about plug ins versus hardware.
My take is use what you like. Both are good? There's something magical about being able to have multiple '1176 style' compressor plug ins available, even when a lot of home recordists couldn't even afford one......let alone justify the expense to wifey.
On the outboard gear side, it doesnt have to be expensive.
I love my ART pro vla comp.
I'm not alone either. That unit shares rack space with high end gear in quite a few studios.
Also, I still have my 2 Alesis quadreverb multi effects units. Just something I like about the sound of those things.
Last edited:
Ooo'er! I DID say "received wisdom". I know some will say the reminder that this is primarily a HOME recording forum is a cop out but even at $500 a pop that is quite a wedge to get a few basic effects?
I am not qualified to judge but it seems I am not talking complete bollocks?
I shall leave "The Pros" to it. Peace and Harmony to all.
Dave.
I am not qualified to judge but it seems I am not talking complete bollocks?
I shall leave "The Pros" to it. Peace and Harmony to all.
Dave.
keith.rogers
Well-known member
Here's a book I'm reading. Interesting, and the short first chapter has some great [mental] images of the "days of yore" when we kiddies would sit in front of the giant radio at the old relatives place (my grandparents who lived upstairs, in my case), watching that glowing green tube/dial in the center, or switching to unknown bands that had decipherable dits and dahs at blinding (?) speeds.
https://www.amazon.com/Discrete-Charm-Machine-Became-Digital/dp/0691179433/
https://www.amazon.com/Discrete-Charm-Machine-Became-Digital/dp/0691179433/
ashcat_lt
Well-known member
If you're going into it with the assumption that the plugins can't be as good as analog, then you're never going to be satisfied with the plugins. You might as well just buy the gear now. You know you want it. You won't be happy til you get it. Then you still probably won't be happy until you get that other thing. Then...
One day maybe you'll stop buying and comparing and start actually mixing, but you still won't be happy. People who listen to what you're mixing won't want to tell you that the real problem with your stuff is half assed performances of poorly conceived arrangements of uninteresting material, so they'll blow smoke up your ass and you still won't be happy, so you'll go buy something else.
If you've got that kind of time and money, then by all means go ahead. You're not hurting me much except in that you are helping to perpetuate the consumerist economy that is destroying the planet.
If you want to get things done, use the plugins and get them done.
One day maybe you'll stop buying and comparing and start actually mixing, but you still won't be happy. People who listen to what you're mixing won't want to tell you that the real problem with your stuff is half assed performances of poorly conceived arrangements of uninteresting material, so they'll blow smoke up your ass and you still won't be happy, so you'll go buy something else.
If you've got that kind of time and money, then by all means go ahead. You're not hurting me much except in that you are helping to perpetuate the consumerist economy that is destroying the planet.
If you want to get things done, use the plugins and get them done.
TalismanRich
Well-known member
This is a great project! I'm in the middle of a similar project involving video tapes and film negatives from the 30s to the early 2000s. Eventually there will be some audio tapes to work with.
I wouldn't get too worried about whether hardware addons are better than plugins. That can all be addressed later along with whether you want control surfaces or software only mixing.
The first objective is to get the tapes transferred to digital. For that, most decent interfaces with 8 line ins will work. A Tascam 16x08 or Behringer 1820, Focusrite 18i8 or 18i20 will work with USB. These interfaces are in the $300-500 range which is peanuts compared to the old days of the 3340 and 80-8. If Thunderbolt is available, that's probably a better option if the ultimate goal is to start working on a new studio in the future. Most new interfaces will have some type of DAW software included, Cubase, Presonus Studio, etc. Reaper is always available to try and works very well. For a straight transfer, you don't need a high end mixing console.
You're simply running line outs to line ins, just the same as the old days. The files should be moved over at the highest bitrate and depth you have available. 96k/24B should preserve the audio files. Once they are in digital form, you can choose what to do with them later.
Best of luck with your project.
I wouldn't get too worried about whether hardware addons are better than plugins. That can all be addressed later along with whether you want control surfaces or software only mixing.
The first objective is to get the tapes transferred to digital. For that, most decent interfaces with 8 line ins will work. A Tascam 16x08 or Behringer 1820, Focusrite 18i8 or 18i20 will work with USB. These interfaces are in the $300-500 range which is peanuts compared to the old days of the 3340 and 80-8. If Thunderbolt is available, that's probably a better option if the ultimate goal is to start working on a new studio in the future. Most new interfaces will have some type of DAW software included, Cubase, Presonus Studio, etc. Reaper is always available to try and works very well. For a straight transfer, you don't need a high end mixing console.
You're simply running line outs to line ins, just the same as the old days. The files should be moved over at the highest bitrate and depth you have available. 96k/24B should preserve the audio files. Once they are in digital form, you can choose what to do with them later.
Best of luck with your project.
There you go. :>)
Me, I'd love to have a really nice hardware rig. I have the nice preamps and a few great comps, the PCM80 and 90 (..so lonely lately they tell me
..It was the mixer situation that nailed it for me. I just couldn't see spending the bucks this late in my game to do it right, so A&H QU digi it is now.
ashcat_lt
Well-known member
Just want to mention that Reaper isn't actually free to demo forever. There is a 60 day demo period and then you really should buy it. The fact that it's not crippled in any way during the demo and in fact afterwards except for the 5 second nag screen is pretty cool, but it's not really donationware. It's only $60 and you get free upgrades for years, and those guys work hard. Do the right thing and kick them the cash.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Someone always does this here...they make a broad statement about analog hardware or high-end gear...then back-step it and put it in the context of "this is only home recording".
All I said was that your comment about how only "rare, very expensive" analog gear is able to outdo plugin counterparts...was not really true.
You wanna talk about what "expensive" means to a typical home recording person...that's a different discussion, because we have some people who balk at spending more than $200-$500 on their entire setup as "too expensive".
I'm talking about the gear....not people's individual budgets.
Chili
Site Moderator
Yup, agreed. Pay for the license. I probably should not have worded it quite like that, but it is free to use indefinitely, technically speaking. But yeah, the honor system is in place here and I truly appreciate that.
However, I tried Reaper several times and didn't really care for it. I'm not going to pony up the cash because I really won't use it. I paid to upgrade Cubase and I'll stick with that.
ashcat_lt
Well-known member
Shrug. I've hated Cubase since i first laid eyes on it not long after it was born. Especially when it was the only DAW I had available for a while. Reaper does several things that I need that other DAWs make difficult if not impossible and a lot of stuff that I'll never need but other people seem to like.
Gtoboy
Well-known member
So, i would just like to jump in and say that tho' having individual inputs on the interface for each tape track output is ideal, if the tapes are in good enough shape and with a bit of luck you can record two or four or whatever inputs you have at a time. Then just line them up with the DAW of choice. If there is too much speed variation on playback or the tapes are coming apart , well , no. And of course, this is only a doable "guerilla" method. As far as setting up 500 series modules for new recording, I would say it depends on what you plan on doing and the recording medium you plan to use. If like Miroslav you are going to tape then 500 series can be a relatively economical alternative to a large format analog console and standard size rack gear. It depends on how many inputs you will track at once though, 32 channels of digital desk inputs may not have the lovely analog color of 32 1073's but it's definitely cheaper to buy and easier to setup, plus if you want to use outboard effects when mixing ITB it usually means spending more money for less latency for the round trip in and out.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Nope...that really wasn't the perspective in question here...rather that plugins outdo all but "rare, very expensive analog" gear.
There are tons of great plugins...and I use many of them quite happily every day...but there are also situations and production goals that warrant the analog hardware.
That was great...one of the best denials I've heard in a long time. Use plugins instead, to save the planet.
I don't know about you...but I don't think most people start off with the mindset that they want to get into recording and having a studio by forever *intentionally* keeping it very low budget and trying to make-do with the most minimalist, inexpensive setup possible. Maybe there's a few that that actually do, like some experiment with uber minimalism...but I think most everyone that takes the recording/studio path, dreams (or dreamed at one time) of having a full-blown pro studio at some point...and it's only their life situations, environment and their budget that keeps them from ever getting there or that put a limit on the dreams.
So for annyone to say they deny those dreams purely out of some "I don't really need all that stuff" perspective (or to save the planet
)...is not the truth.I for one will NEVER feel guilty about buying another piece of audio/music equipment...and IMO, it is helping to save the planet, because it keeps me out of trouble.
Maybe it's hard to put into perspective for some folks, especially the younger ones, just starting out...but it you approach it with the "why bother, it's only home recording" mindset...you may be happy doing just that, but that is always going to be your limit.
Not saying that just buying more gear turns anyone into a pro...but rather that much of what we do is based on the dreams we had, and the point is to keep dreaming and having long-term goals to keep you going, otherwise it all becomes a finite point kinda quick, and you stop seeing the value in what you are doing.
There you go. :>)
Me, I'd love to have a really nice hardware rig. I have the nice preamps and a few great comps, the PCM80 and 90 (..so lonely lately they tell me
It was the mixer situation that nailed it for me. I just couldn't see spending the bucks this late in my game to do it right, so A&H QU digi it is now.
So again...my point exactly. Deep down, most people want some kind of full-blown studio.
I understand that life and budgets are a BIG driving force...and that is, what it is for each person. Like I said in my last post...talking about what "expensive" means to a typical home recording person is another discussion, and it shouldn't always be used as the "excuse" whenever someone asks about hardware and going with a more expAnsive "home" studio setup.
I can appreciate that some 18-year old kid is going to have a major budget problem...but THAT is not the reason to think that anything more than a couple of hundred bucks spent on a "home" recording setup is a waste.
My first recording rig was a 4-track and a couple of mics...and I scraped up to then add a 2-track for mixdowns, rather than using the cassette deck from my home stereo. That was a loooong time ago, and I've come a long way, but I maintained my dream to the best of my ability to build (and keep building) as pro a recording studio as I possibly could...and I've sacrificed some other aspects of a "normal" life in order to do so...but this is what I really like to do.
It's not about chasing "one more piece of gear" because I think it's going to be the magic one that makes all my mixes sound like they came out of Capitol Records or some such nonsense...it's because the recording and the studio for me has always been an evolutionary project, and will continue to be to the end...and while it may not save the planet...it will save me.
bouldersoundguy
Well-known member
If your live inputs recorded while listening to playback are aligned properly on the timeline then you can use outboard gear without latency.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Are you talking about aligning them after you've recorded them...or while recording them...?
Stopped receiving notifications to the thread and was shocked at how it has grown!
Thanks for all the ideas, I really appreciate it and will try to start this very soon.
My '500' idea is to get a good pre amp/compressor and mic for a clean front end when recording.
This is mostly acoustic music, so subtlety is of the essence (ribbon mics anyone?)
I've no experience with recording to computer, and I suppose it will grown on me when I start, but I do like to see the reels spinning as I listen.
First thing is a good set of 'phones to hear closely just what's going on with the tapes.
(I had AKG K240DF's before and am told they're not made anymore, so will have to search around for something similar.)
Thanks for all the ideas, I really appreciate it and will try to start this very soon.
My '500' idea is to get a good pre amp/compressor and mic for a clean front end when recording.
This is mostly acoustic music, so subtlety is of the essence (ribbon mics anyone?)
I've no experience with recording to computer, and I suppose it will grown on me when I start, but I do like to see the reels spinning as I listen.
First thing is a good set of 'phones to hear closely just what's going on with the tapes.
(I had AKG K240DF's before and am told they're not made anymore, so will have to search around for something similar.)
bouldersoundguy
Well-known member
They should align while recording. That would depend on the round trip latency being compensated for correctly by the software. If that's the case then there should be no latency when using outboard processing.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I'm just curious how you are setting that up....I mean...so that the software knows how long it's going to take for a recorded track to be sent out to an external FX box and then back in, in-sync with the existing tracks.
For things like external reverb and delay, latency is not such a big issue...but how long some external comp is acting on a signal, is not something your DAW software is going to know and automatically align for you.
Gtoboy
Well-known member
In Pro Tools there is a procedure for checking the round trip delay when using outboard gear when mixing and applying the delay compensation to the ITB tracks but I think BSG was talking about tracking, where obviously if you are going through outboard into interface you don't have any issues. I was thinking more along the lines of overdubbing with outboard sends at the same time- the delay compensation at that point can cause timing issues in the monitor mix. Yeah there are workarounds. OP appears to be talking about a smaller rig so no big deal. A single 500 series housing a few choice pieces for tracking and a great mic is a nice plan ,if it's done at a reasonable cost for the spender.