how can i obtain the benifits of recording analog AND maximize my budget

jugalo180

jugalo180

www.moneyistherecipe.com
i'm going to begin recording at sheffield studio here in maryland, and i am looking for advice to achieve the benefits of analog while maximizing my budget. I took a tour of the studioSTUDIO and spoke with the engineer. i told him that i wanted to record some songs to tape and he told me that it can be very expensive. i would have to pay like $250.00 for a 13min reel 24 track 2inch tape. he also told me that recording time signatures and punching in could eat into my budget. i was thinking that i can record digital and have all of the edits done there and when everything is the way i want it i can then have it sent to tape. i figured that this could save me some cash. these are the three suggestions that he came up with below.

A. he told me that i can record in Studio B into the Yamaha DM2000 96
digital production console, protools HD2 system and he can use his
NEVE in the mixing process to get me the analog sound that i need.

B. he said that i can record through the SSL in studio A then bring it
to Studio B to have it edited in protools HD2 and use the NEVE in
the mixing process

C. or i can just record through the SSL to the Otari 2inch tape
machine, which is the most expensive route.

here are my questions

1. if all of my tracks will be created in the digital world (Reason 3)
and my vox tracked in protools HD2 would I still get that superior
analog sound if they are mixed down to tape after being tracked
in the digital realm?
2. i've read about the extra harmonics captured while recording to analog
if vox are recorded digitally and then sent to analog will those harmonics
still be introduced the same as if the vox went straight to tape?

thanks in advance
 
If you can flow without much punching, go straight to tape. If the tracks are laid out carefully, you could probably do a whole CD on one 2-inch tape.

If not, you could mix down to tape...though a 2" 24-track is not optimal for this...better to go to 1/2 inch if they got it. Also, see if they have the CraneSong Phoenix plug-in...it does a good job sounding like tape.



I used to cut rap vocals straight to 24-track back in the old days, and I would punch syllables...not many engineers (especialy these days) could do that. Come to Chicago, and I could do it for you to a 2" 16-track...
;)

Good luck.
 
mixandmaster said:
If you can flow without much punching, go straight to tape. If the tracks are laid out carefully, you could probably do a whole CD on one 2-inch tape.

If not, you could mix down to tape...though a 2" 24-track is not optimal for this...better to go to 1/2 inch if they got it. Also, see if they have the CraneSong Phoenix plug-in...it does a good job sounding like tape.



I used to cut rap vocals straight to 24-track back in the old days, and I would punch syllables...not many engineers (especialy these days) could do that. Come to Chicago, and I could do it for you to a 2" 16-track...
;)

Good luck.
Click to expand...

thanks for your reply, you have given me more information to work with.
 
There's also another way, but complicated to set up. You get all the benefits of tracking into ProTools and tape. I'll try to type up an explanation if I get a chance later.
 
In general, record through the best analog front end you can to the best medium. Then mix through the best analog hardware you can afford.

Perhaps option B is your best money saving route. Elminiating the tape from your project largely eliminates "the benefits of analog", though. The rest of the stuff is just your analog front end that you would be using anyway.

Even the digital production console is largely an analog front end for recording stage. Without having heard them or your material I'd guess that the SSL is going to give you better sound. Why not track through the Neve?

With tape, by the way the "extra" harmonics aren't captured- they are created by driving the tape hard. In theory, you can drive the tape hard with a pre-recorded digital track.

Take care,
Chris
 
Honestly, if you are having that much of a budget issue maybe you should consider digital....

Analog is good when the budgets are big, or the band can go in there and deliver without much in the way of punch ins. If you need editing you need to be on digital.

Just my opinion.
 
Chris Shaeffer said:
In general, record through the best analog front end you can to the best medium. Then mix through the best analog hardware you can afford.

Perhaps option B is your best money saving route. Elminiating the tape from your project largely eliminates "the benefits of analog", though. The rest of the stuff is just your analog front end that you would be using anyway.

Even the digital production console is largely an analog front end for recording stage. Without having heard them or your material I'd guess that the SSL is going to give you better sound. Why not track through the Neve?

With tape, by the way the "extra" harmonics aren't captured- they are created by driving the tape hard. In theory, you can drive the tape hard with a pre-recorded digital track.

Take care,
Chris
Click to expand...

tracking with the Neve may have been with the engineer was trying to tell me. the Neve was set up in studio B with the Yamaha mixer. i was getting soo much information that i may have gotten a few things mixed up a little.

cool, that answers a big question. i can track every song digital and just have everything dumped to tape and have the tape driven hard, that eliminates all of the punchins because everything would be edited prior to dumping.

THANKS
 
Cloneboy Studio said:
Honestly, if you are having that much of a budget issue maybe you should consider digital....

Analog is good when the budgets are big, or the band can go in there and deliver without much in the way of punch ins. If you need editing you need to be on digital.

Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

yeah, that makes a lot of sense. i was hoping to at least do two songs to tape just so i can see if they stood out from the digital records on the album.
from the advice i received from chris schaeffer, i could record digital like you advice and then dump to tape to get the same benefits. i figure this route would save me money because i wouldn't have to worry about the time consuming edits on tape.

THANKS
 
Last edited:
Maybe try recording digitally, mixing digitally, but running the stereo mix to tape before the mastering process? It's not quite the same as recording analog, but it's a lot cheaper and would still get some benefits of analog tape in the process.
 
ryanlikestorock said:
Maybe try recording digitally, mixing digitally, but running the stereo mix to tape before the mastering process? It's not quite the same as recording analog, but it's a lot cheaper and would still get some benefits of analog tape in the process.
Click to expand...


thanks, do you know what benefits i would get and which ones i w ouldn't get and why? it was posted earlier that running the tape hard while recording the digital medium would give me some good analog results.
 
giraffe said:
maby it's changed since i was in a studio with tape, but i think 230$ is kinda expensive.

see if you can buy the tape yourselfe and bring it into the studio.

it'id be a short album that fits on one reel of 30ips tape.

litl cheeper http://www.tapestockonline.com/reeltoreel.html

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/srs7/g=rec/search/detail/base_pid/248006/
it dosn't say what size it is, but if it 2, that's probably as good as it gets.
Click to expand...


wow, that is a much better price indeed. thanks!
 
mixandmaster said:
There's also another way, but complicated to set up. You get all the benefits of tracking into ProTools and tape. I'll try to type up an explanation if I get a chance later.
Click to expand...


i'm still interested in hearing about this
 
In 30 seconds of searching on line I found 2 inch tape under $200
http://www.datamediastore.com/datamediastore/gp997r11y.html

If you run the tape at 15 ips you can get almost 33 minutes on one reel of tape. If you are going to use tape the best time to use it is at the begining when you are recording drums and bass etc, because the tape will do a couple thing for you 1) analog tape compression which is very fast compression that grabs the transients a bit in a very smooth musical way. 2) at 15 ips you will get a slight boost in the low end which fattens up tracks nicely. Recording to PT and then dumping to tape will not work quite as well.

One great way to work is to record as much stuff as possible on the 2 inch tape and then dump it over to Pro Tools for overdubs and editing (I do this a lot). That way you will get the Euphonic benefits of tape, but the ease of editing in PT.

Also keep in mind that tape is re-usuable, so you could record drums and bass on tape (2 instruments that really benifiet from tape), dump them over to pro tools and then record bass and drums for the new songs over the old songs on the tape.

Lastly in my experience, analog mixing sounds much better than digital mixing.
 
Ronan said:
One great way to work is to record as much stuff as possible on the 2 inch tape and then dump it over to Pro Tools for overdubs and editing (I do this a lot). That way you will get the Euphonic benefits of tape, but the ease of editing in PT.
Click to expand...

Yup. That's generally the way it's done. And in terms of what you're looking for, this is easily the most logical route.
 
giraffe said:
it'id be a short album that fits on one reel of 30ips tape.
Click to expand...

Ronan said:
If you run the tape at 15 ips you can get almost 33 minutes on one reel of tape. If you are going to use tape the best time to use it is at the begining when you are recording drums and bass etc, because the tape will do a couple thing for you 1) analog tape compression which is very fast compression that grabs the transients a bit in a very smooth musical way. 2) at 15 ips you will get a slight boost in the low end which fattens up tracks nicely...
Click to expand...

For hip hop, 15 IPS is definitely the way to go (like Ronan said, huge low end). Since you get 30+ minutes per reel, and your music is coming out of Reason, you have 2 tracks of music and 9 tracks of vocals totalling 11 tracks through the tape. Then do this again for the second half of the CD, and you've got 60+ minutes of 11 tracks (staying off the edge tracks). So you CAN pretty easily do a whole hip hop CD on 1 reel, as I have done many times before.

Now, here's how to get all the benefits of tape and hard disk recording. You can do this with a 2 track machine. Maybe they can wheel one in the B room, and you can go through the Neve.

Here's some background on how a tape machine works...there are usually three heads: erase, record, and playback (repro). As the tape passes through the heads, there is a slight delay between the record and the playback head due to the physical distance between the heads. When overdubbing, the engineer will monitor ALL the tracks from the record head to keep everything "in sync". If you were to monitor off the playback head while overdubbing, all your overdubbed parts would be late when you played them back. Hopefully this makes sense. Which leads us to this technique.

The goal is to record to tape using the record head, then "recapture" it in the same pass into Pro Tools from the playback head. But first we have to compensate for the inherent delay.

Take a simple sound like a cowbell and dump it into Pro Tools. Now record your cowbell out of Pro Tools to the tape machine MONITORING off the playback head while simultaneously recording the output of the tape machine to another track in Pro Tools. Now you can determine the amount of delay between the record and playback heads. On the machine that I work on (MCI), it is roughly 86 ms.

Load your backing tracks from reason into Pro Tools (use tape if you want). Duplicate this track.

Now the tricky part:
Nudge ONE of the backing tracks back by however much your "tape delay" was. This will be your "Guide" track. Keep the other one where it is and mute it. Mult the output of your mic signal before tape. Send one to tape, the other to your headphone cue along with your "Guide" tracks. Record the output of your PLAYBACK head into Pro Tools as you record your vocals on the tape (you can always have the tape in record mode - just don't run out of tape in the middle of a take). Once your done with each pass of vocals, duplicate the track as you did with your Reason tracks. Mute the original, and nudge the "Guide" vocal track back by the "tape delay" amount. Repeat as necessary.

Now you have the "analog" sound, with all the benifits of punching/editing power of Pro Tools. Just be careful that when you go to mix, everything is lined up.

:D
 
Another way, though perhaps less purist analog:

Track through the Neve to Pro Tools. Do all your overdubs and edits and get it PERFECT. Print your mix as multitrack stems to tape- that way you can hit the tape as hard or soft as you want for different sections of the song. You can even print your effects returns to their own tracks if you want- I would if you have different send levels within your groups of instruments and couldn't recreate the effects levels from the mix stems.

Mix stems are easy to remix since you're really just balancing groups of tracks against each other- all the EQing, compressing, tweaking, etc. is already done. Just get the balance of the tracks right again with the stems on tape and print your stereo mixs from that.

That may be how you're engineer was going to fix an album on 1 reel of 2" 24- carefull stem mix recording- 6 tracks for that song, 8 for that one, 4 for that one- staggered across the tape.

Anyway- that gets you more tape effect and easier overdubbing at the same time. Otherwise you have to do your overdubs AFTER the bed tracks have already gone and left the tape- no tape for your guitar and vocal tracks... :(

Take care,
Chris
 
mixandmaster....

:D

Now.... I have to find a way to monitor off the playback heads on my 48 while recording with the record heads. Not sure how to do that or even if the machine can. Darn good trick, though, if I could pull it off.

Take care,
Chris
 
^^^^^^

Nevermind, I figured it out. I didn't realize you could record while monitoring off the play head. Pretty simple... Oh, the hours I'm going to lose experimenting with this... :D

Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top