Farview
Well-known member
Yup that's it. Here is the interview. Metallica - Classic Albums: The Black Album (2001) Bonus Feature: "The Mix, the Masters..." - YouTube
On the usefulness of ADAT in today's recording environment
- Thread starter elbandito
- Start date
- Status
cusebassman
Freakin' sweet
Thanks for the link - for all the making-of footage I've seen on this record, I've never seen this. Usually the classic albums DVDs don't include any extra footage, and they never play extra content on TV. The Tom Petty - Damn the Torpedos classic albums DVD has a lot of great extras, as an aside.
It's funny to think how much stock I put in the concept that these albums were seemingly done in analog all the way from the sound hitting the mics to the presses stamping the vinyl, only to find out that many were mixed down to DAT or some other digital stereo mechanism, and then mastered and pressed.
Tim Gillett
Banned
Yup. All along we thought we were hearing the warmth and naturalness of all-analog when we were really hearing "the harshness of digital". Makes you feel like you've been tricked doesnt it. I hate that...
Last edited:
Well I'm sure you will agree that it sounds less harsh (warmer) than if it were tracked to DAT. See Metallica's last few releases (Lulu, Death Magnet, St Anger) for extreme digital harshness. Although IMO the sound quality in those cases is not what makes those albums unlistenable.
Farview
Well-known member
The harshness of those albums is the mix and mastering, not the medium.
Tim Gillett
Banned
That's a different issue. The question was, " Did the addition of the digital stage (in this case DAT) make the sound harsh?" The answer is "no".
Did the digital stage make the sound warmer? No
Did the digital stage make the sound cooler? No
Did the digital stage change the sound in any significant way? No
And that's the whole trouble with digital audio recording. It doesnt make the sound warmer, cooler, harsher, or less harsh. It just records it.
So lacking in character, creativity, charisma, commitment, partisanship, leadership.
So damned neutral. I want an audio recorder which adds heart, soul, depth, warmth ... ........ to my squeaky voice.
TASCAM MAN
New member
B
Beck
Guest
Man , you THINK like me !!!
You can make and understand logical argumentation.
On the digital side of the equation it’s not reasonable to conclude both that digital has always been neutral and that converters have improved to make it more neutral. That’s a dichotomy only the gullible, unguarded mind can sustain. We need more like you who can reason.
So anyway, I worked with the original 1992 ADAT, which was the worst of them. They made some design improvements over the first few years, but didn’t start recording to 20-bit until 1998. By today’s standards the converters were pretty bad. Converters improved a lot more in the first ten years after the ADAT was launched than they have in the last ten years. I still recommend a DAW interface made in 1999-2000 by Echo Audio over newer and more expensive models by other companies. In many ways things have just gotten worse… even worse than I predicted.
It's all a play on words really isn't it?
OK if I make it clearer then.... surely you agree a DAT recording is harsher sounding than recording on 2" tape. Analog tape sounds warmer to me than listening to the actual pre-recorded signal in the control room so I'd say that analog tape makes the sound warmer than the actual live sound. Now, the digital recording is harsher than the tape recording but does recording to a digital medium impose a certain harshness that isn't there in the pre-recorded signal?
Regarding your other comments, do you think they were going for a 'neutral' sound when they recorded the Black Album? (the sound of each of them recording there instruments in a room) or do you think there desired sound was something more? maybe warmer? maybe punchier? maybe harsher?
Did the guitarists want to record their guitars through a neutral amp where what goes in is what comes out or did they use big mean ugly valve amps and all the harmonic distortion that comes with it? did they use these valve amps to get their desired punchy, warm sound by 'controlling' the amp?
The digital clipping is the big issue and there isn't much of that anywhere until you start converting your signals to digital...
I'm not saying that digital clipping is inherent in the digital recording medium but if they used all analog gear it would have sounded much better IMO.
Farview
Well-known member
But its hard to put something out on cd without digitized it. clearly the act of digitizing a signal doesn't clip it to death (the back album isn't clipped), so it's obviously not the medium that's to blame. Its the people engineering the happy sounding o es that are too blame.
Again, using the black album as an example, if it were tracked digitally, but engineered the same, it shouldn't be clipped to death like the newer albums.
TASCAM MAN
New member
Yep they(DA88,38 and 78s) sure looked promising specially appealing was the smaller tape format(HI8) so I had a decision to make.....upgrading from my 38 1/2" machine to 24 Tks I wanted badly.About the same time Tascam came out in competition with the Alesis ADAT came out there DA88 and about the same time came out there 1' 24TK MSR24S that was a toss over for me.....so my decision was a good one,I figured that 24 TKS on one tape would be much more organized than 3 DA88s synced up and having to always keep up with 3 tapes for every 24 TK recording!! I still have my MSR24S and still want to set it up again as soon as I get the room for it along with my 135 pounder M-3500 !! Oh yeah and I bought 2 DA38s
on e-bay with fery few hrs. on them later and worked good and sounded good and then went thru a divorce and they sat in storage for a few yrs. and I set em up a few months back and first thing (even after a good cleaning) ate one of my important works of music......LOST!!! So ....the minature VHS transports was not a good idea cause there was no way (that I know of) to fix a tape after it gets ate and besides that the worry of it happening again..........my 2 cents
Tim Gillett
Banned
It's all a play on words really isn't it?
OK if I make it clearer then.... surely you agree a DAT recording is harsher sounding than recording on 2" tape. Analog tape sounds warmer to me than listening to the actual pre-recorded signal in the control room so I'd say that analog tape makes the sound warmer than the actual live sound. Now, the digital recording is harsher than the tape recording but does recording to a digital medium impose a certain harshness that isn't there in the pre-recorded signal?
Regarding your other comments, do you think they were going for a 'neutral' sound when they recorded the Black Album? (the sound of each of them recording there instruments in a room) or do you think there desired sound was something more? maybe warmer? maybe punchier? maybe harsher?
Did the guitarists want to record their guitars through a neutral amp where what goes in is what comes out or did they use big mean ugly valve amps and all the harmonic distortion that comes with it? did they use these valve amps to get their desired punchy, warm sound by 'controlling' the amp?
No it's not a play on words. Do you even know what a "play on words" is? Describe it to me and show the readers the play on words in my post.
Cusebassman was discussing the difference if any of the addition of a digital stage. Immediately under his post I picked up on that exact same idea. That was the topic raised. If you cant even recognize the topic we were discussing , what is the point of discussing with you? Stick to the topic being discussed or you rule yourself out of being taken seriously before you start.
Is a DAT harsher sounding than a 2" analog tape? If you put it like that, everything is "harsher" than an analog tape. Not only microphones, preamps, amps, mixers, but the human voice, musical instruments, in fact every every sound in nature is "harsher" (your judgement) than analog tape. It becomes a ridiculous statement.
Perhaps you think every sound we hear on the face of the earth would be better recorded through an analog tape machine and then we hear it. Well you're free to think that. I'm just glad that 99.99999999% of people , including myself, dont share that bizarre view.
For example, analog tape adds extra harmonics. Some sounds in nature are already very heavily laden with harmonics and overtones. Others have very few harmonics. Do all those different sounds ALL need to have more harmonics added to them regardless of the harmonics they already have or dont have? It's these differences in harmonics and their character which distinguish certains sounds from each other. Do you want to blur them into sounding more like each other rather than preserving their individual timbre and voice?
But that doesnt change the fact that effects always have had a place in audio recording and always will. But usually it's to make sounds and voices complement each other, not sound the same as each other.
What I've described here are just principles of sound and music. They have nothing really to do with analog tape or digital as such.
"does recording to a digital medium impose a certain harshness that isn't there in the pre-recorded signal?"
Again, no.
As to the rest of your questions, I'm not familiar with the album in question and I dont need to. I dont know exactly what sound they were aiming for, but no matter what it was, the addition of a digital stage wouldnt have changed that sound. If they had gone for a very different sound, it wouldnt have changed that sound either. It would have preserved it. That's all you need to know. That's all you need to understand.
It's not complicated. Digital recording (even a good home setup these days) doesnt audibly change the sound. Get over it. Move on.
Tape is too expensive these days to be doing that!
Cheers to that!
TASCAM MAN
New member
Yep they(DA88,38 and 78s) sure looked promising specially appealing was the smaller tape format(HI8) so I had a decision to make.....upgrading from my 38 1/2" machine to 24 Tks I wanted badly.About the same time Tascam came out in competition with the Alesis ADAT came out there DA88 and about the same time came out there 1' 24TK MSR24S that was a toss over for me.....so my decision was a good one,I figured that 24 TKS on one tape would be much more organized than 3 DA88s synced up and having to always keep up with 3 tapes for every 24 TK recording!! I still have my MSR24S and still want to set it up again as soon as I get the room for it along with my 135 pounder M-3500 !! Oh yeah and I bought 2 DA38sYep they(DA88,38 and 78s) sure looked promising specially appealing was the smaller tape format(HI8) so I had a decision to make.....upgrading from my 38 1/2" machine to 24 Tks I wanted badly.About the same time Tascam came out in competition with the Alesis ADAT came out there DA88 and about the same time came out there 1' 24TK MSR24S that was a toss over for me.....so my decision was a good one,I figured that 24 TKS on one tape would be much more organized than 3 DA88s synced up and having to always keep up with 3 tapes for every 24 TK recording!! I still have my MSR24S and still want to set it up again as soon as I get the room for it along with my 135 pounder M-3500 !! Oh yeah and I bought 2 DA38s
on e-bay with fery few hrs. on them later and worked good and sounded good and then went thru a divorce and they sat in storage for a few yrs. and I set em up a few months back and first thing (even after a good cleaning) ate one of my important works of music......LOST!!! So ....the minature VHS transports was not a good idea cause there was no way (that I know of) to fix a tape after it gets ate and besides that the worry of it happening again..........my 2 cents
on e-bay with fery few hrs. on them later and worked good and sounded good and then went thru a divorce and they sat in storage for a few yrs. and I set em up a few months back and first thing (even after a good cleaning) ate one of my important works of music......LOST!!! So ....the minature VHS transports was not a good idea cause there was no way (that I know of) to fix a tape after it gets ate and besides that the worry of it happening again..........my 2 cents
B
Beck
Guest
Sounds familiar.
Tape eating was the final straw for ADAT and DAT of all kinds for many people. The only format I've ever permanently lost something important was on ADAT. There's nothing worse than that crinkly tape sound and transport slowdown. Still a thing of nightmares.
The MSR-24 with last a lifetime with proper care. The Tascam TSR/MSR is my favorite era of reel-to-reel. It's the era analog peaked with new and very real improvements. It was a good way to leave it rather than try to outsource junk to follow it.
B
Beck
Guest
The question is a good one and the answer is, yes absolutely it does. That's really half the equation of the digital/analog question. Some people get it half right… that analog can make natural sounds more palatable to the ear, but they don’t grasp the other half… that digital can render natural sound more harshly than it exists in the live setting as heard directly by an audience.
We can compare different formats for a relative perception of warmth or harshness to each other, but also how each impacts the original source without comparing them to each other. It’s easy to reveal the other half of the debate by removing analog from the discussion and listening to the debates raging over specific converter comparisons and general comparisons like bit depth and sampling rate. Next time someone declares that digital is a perfect refection of the original source, ask him which digital. That is, what product exactly. All of them? If so he is saying there are no valid reasons to compare different products based on sound quality. Ehem…
We have no recording medium that does not impact the original sound. The first step is knowing the real pros and cons of a medium, so it may be used to greatest advantage. Denial is not the attitude of a competent engineer (or technician)
The myth of digital transparency is a religious belief… a statement of faith. As I’ve mention previously, the ideal transparent digital system only exists in theory. The reality is that everyone debates about the performance of individual digital devices and interfaces, including the quality of the converters to render sound more “accurately” than another does. And then you have other real life issues like digital master clocks that change the character of a converter from that of the internal clock. Reading anything of any depth about how converters work will quickly dispatch the notion of digital transparency. It doesn’t matter what. The following examines master clocks…
Does Your Studio Need A Digital Master Clock?
These are the real world issues of experienced recording engineers. When all someone can do is throw around theory and myth it’s a big read blinking sigh hanging around his neck, which says, He’s a pretender. He hasn’t been there. He’s fudging at the “Recording for Dummies.” Level.
Steenamaroo's Avatar
Steenamaroo
Steenamaroo is online now Honorary Old Fart.
Send a message via Skype™ to Steenamaroo
Join Date
Aug 2005
Location
U.K.
Age
27
Posts
5,719
Rep Power
18896271
Hey, do any of you chaps know of any good forums where I might find some tascam/adat heads?
I've two da88s that I can't shift, but I'm sure someone out there would get good use of them.
You might like to have a look at the the following forum --- UK Vintage Radio Discussion Forums --- There are some interesting sub-groups and many of them are very knowledgable and many are collectors.
David
Steenamaroo
Steenamaroo is online now Honorary Old Fart.
Send a message via Skype™ to Steenamaroo
Join Date
Aug 2005
Location
U.K.
Age
27
Posts
5,719
Rep Power
18896271
Hey, do any of you chaps know of any good forums where I might find some tascam/adat heads?
I've two da88s that I can't shift, but I'm sure someone out there would get good use of them.
You might like to have a look at the the following forum --- UK Vintage Radio Discussion Forums --- There are some interesting sub-groups and many of them are very knowledgable and many are collectors.
David
Tim Gillett
Banned
The question is a good one and the answer is, yes absolutely it does. That's really half the equation of the digital/analog question. Some people get it half right… that analog can make natural sounds more palatable to the ear, but they don’t grasp the other half… that digital can render natural sound more harshly than it exists in the live setting as heard directly by an audience.
We can compare different formats for a relative perception of warmth or harshness to each other, but also how each impacts the original source without comparing them to each other. It’s easy to reveal the other half of the debate by removing analog from the discussion and listening to the debates raging over specific converter comparisons and general comparisons like bit depth and sampling rate. Next time someone declares that digital is a perfect refection of the original source, ask him which digital. That is, what product exactly. All of them? If so he is saying there are no valid reasons to compare different products based on sound quality. Ehem…
We have no recording medium that does not impact the original sound. The first step is knowing the real pros and cons of a medium, so it may be used to greatest advantage. Denial is not the attitude of a competent engineer (or technician)
The myth of digital transparency is a religious belief… a statement of faith. As I’ve mention previously, the ideal transparent digital system only exists in theory. The reality is that everyone debates about the performance of individual digital devices and interfaces, including the quality of the converters to render sound more “accurately” than another does. And then you have other real life issues like digital master clocks that change the character of a converter from that of the internal clock. Reading anything of any depth about how converters work will quickly dispatch the notion of digital transparency. It doesn’t matter what. The following examines master clocks…
Does Your Studio Need A Digital Master Clock?
These are the real world issues of experienced recording engineers. When all someone can do is throw around theory and myth it’s a big read blinking sigh hanging around his neck, which says, He’s a pretender. He hasn’t been there. He’s fudging at the “Recording for Dummies.” Level.
OK Beck. Let's grant that in theory, digital audio recording is perfect, but in practice it isnt.
Since the theoretical models only exist in our minds, for a practical real world recorder, what should be its specs? Frequency response, signal to noise ratio, distortions, wow and flutter, and any other criterion you like to mention. The same criterion used for decades to rate analog amplifiers and audio components in general.
Over to you.
TASCAM MAN
New member
- Status