Another typical "new to analog" question

  • Thread starter Thread starter papamaverick
  • Start date Start date
P

papamaverick

New member
Hey all...question coming from a 20yr old Virginia Tech student double-majoring in electrical engineering and music technology. Young, inexperienced, sure...but I know I have the ears (they just need to be developed) and the resolve to make it in the music recording industry.

I'm hoping to put together a home/project studio for my last couple years in school, and am trying to figure out the best intersection of quality and price on stuff. I want every piece of equipment that I buy (with maybe a few small exceptions) to be equipment that I can keep and use when building a pro studio once I graduate. Buying the best stuff now will be more expensive in the short term, but much less expensive long term.

My recording goal would be to be able to record a 16-track live session. More than anything, though, I want to gain experience with recording, because in the final product, experience wins out 100% of the time over equipment.

I am interested in adopting the track-in-analog, edit-in-digital (if necessary) formula. For the digital stuff, I already have a fast computer and am thinking Digi001...just cause the "Pro Tools" name would give me more business, as sad as that sounds. I count on using Pro Tools and autotune and stuff with the crappy bands that I will inevitably start out recording...and then go 100% analog with bands whose chops are good enough to not need any editing and few punch-ins. As I acrue money, I'd probably start out by buying the Digi001 and then adding the analog part at a later date.

As I said ealier, I would want to buy equipment that would still serve me as a professional down the road. This means that I would probably look into buying a 1" 16-track recorder or better (although I've read enough to know that 2" gets very expensive with tape). I would also need to buy other equipment that would work just as well with analog as with digital.

Now to my questions...

(1) In terms of a mixer, if I want to record 16 tracks simultaneously, what should I look at? I'm not sure I'm clear on the difference between "channels" and "busses" - couldn't I just run a 1/4" line level out from each channel to the analog recorder?

(2) Apart from the cost of the actual recorder, what other (hidden) costs are there? I know that tape would be one...but what else? Any cleaning tools? What about replacing tape heads, etc? I want to know upfront how much going analog will cost. Compared to a full Pro Tools HD + DAW, it might not be much, but to a college student it is!

(3) Is portability basically not a possibility? I would hope to be able to record bands live and mix them...and I could buy a couple of ADATs to do that, but quality suffers.

(4) What else should I know so that I don't get blindsided down the road?

Btw, I'm very serious about recording...analog is something I'll have to do just because I'm a perfectionist and want the best sound. Digital is something I'll have to do because customers will expect it.

Thanks for the help,

Dave
 
:) AS for mixers the Alesis sstudio 32 or the Behringer mx3242x, these are really decent home studio products,not real pro though.
The market in the last 10yrs or so has lacked, most companies are making smaller digital types now, not real handy considering the scrolling through the menu thing.
2 you'll probably have to buy used, find a new 16 or 24 track analogue todoy!!??? YES tons of little care goodies for the machine.
3 Instead of ADATS you'll probably have to go to 24 trk digi-corders
4 Every few years the technologies change and in goes more money in your studio, I know and so does most all other posters on these forums,My studio can be a money drain!! A pain!!!
A big analogue mixer may have to be purchased used or SSL has them from $300k, on up.

I know this is not real encouraging super Dave, but most new studios are doing the 24 input digi-mixers w/24 track digi-corders. They are affordable and do sound realyy quit good.


da MUTT
 
I wanted to get into analog, the only reason I just got a reel to rell is because it was free. It works, but the heads are supposed to be $$$EXPENSIVE$$$ if I need new ones.

If you edit in ProTools off of an analog format you will need quality A/D (analog to digital) and D/A converters (digital to analog). Those are pricey.........
 
Dude, to go from zero to live-to-16-tracks-in-analog is very ambitious,...

and will prove to be fairly expensive, but not astronomical in cost. Here's how I see it, minimum:

Tascam M520 mixer, 20X8 mixer, appx $600-$900
Tascam MSR-16, 1/2"-16-track recorder, r/r, appx $1000-$1200
Tape, 1/2" x 10.5" reels, appx $35/reel
Mics, cables, adapters, accessories, extra $, NO LIMIT.

That puts you up to appx $2000+, right out of the gate.

If you want to be the big man on campus, and have an extra $1000 to spend, you may want to score the Tascam MS-16, 1"-16-track, appx cost $1500-$2000. And, 1" tape costs appx $60/reel.

That puts you up to appx $3000, before your first live-to-sixteen session even counts the downbeat. However, as expensive as it may seem, you may end up spending the same amount on a new computer and fancy soundcard, so IMO, the cost's about equivalent. Other than that, analog is better, especially when you're considering this level of equipment, vintage or not.

Other than the associated cost burden, this [MS-16/M520 or MSR-16/M520] would be a very nice analog recording system to have. It's great vintage equipment, of the type that used to be called "pro audio", [or in the case of the MSR-16, "semi-pro"].
;)
 
:) Were on this planet are you getting 1/2" stock for 35 bucks a reel???
 
Yeah, thanx from me too, for the link.

;) Trust me,... I wouldn't lie to you!

I still think that zero-to-live-to sixteen-analog is very ambitous to take on all at once, but it illustrates where people's heads are at when it comes to "home recording". It's flat-out that people are spoiled by the DAW-reality we live in, and to jump into analog home recording right at 16-tracks from scratch makes sense, in this "unlimited track count"-universe we live in.

Back a few years ago, a new home recordist would be happy to get his first 4-track Portastudio, or at the most would be 1/2"-8-track,... which is a fine format indeed,... but the M520 and MS-16 were never targeted at the "home" recording market. It just so happens in this post-2000-all-digital-everything market, the M520 and MS-16 have come down in [used gear] price, so as to become practical to the home-recordist. Just a sign of the times, I guess. I know too well, since I have an MSR-24, 1"-24-track, that I surely could not have afforded ten years ago, but I got at a very reasonable price in 2001.

Okay, I told you,... IMO you cannot pass "GO" for less than $2000, and possibly up to $3000, for live-to-sixteen-in-analog, given the above gear list. It's a very ambitious and worthwhile goal, and would be a nice recording system to have, for relatively reasonable cost. You'd be well set for pro or semi pro "indie" recording with this type of gear.

There may be other members who can give you an alternate gear list or alternate price estimate.

Oops, sorry for the mini-rant.

Good luck, & happy Ebay'ing.;)
 
Last edited:
PS: This is not the typical "new to analog" newbie question.

;)
 
Hey all

Thanks for the help...and yeah, I guess its not the 'typical' newbie question. I've done a little recording before, but not a whole lot. The stuff I've done has all been digital, actually with only stereo input -- that'll teach you to make use of what you have, esp recording a full drum kit.

As far as price, I'm hoping to spend (between myself and a couple other guys) between $6k and $10k within the next couple years. Its a lot of money, especially for the college student, and my parents don't have any money to give me. However, being an electrical engineering student gives me the advantage of high-paying co-ops...I made $5500 AFTER tax this past summer working at a top-20 fortune 500 company. All said, if I work the coops, I should have a good chance at getting the money I need.

Buying all of this stuff now, AND coming out of school debt-free (I'm on a full-ride scholarship) will hopefully put me in great shape once I get out of school. Also, having some CDs that I've recorded on analog tape that sound good will hopefully REALLY help my chances at getting my foot in the door at a studio. Add to that a degree in EE and hands-on skills repairing audio equipment (which I will acrue between class and simply messing with my own stuff) and hopefully I'll have a good resume.

16-track on 1/2" tape just doesn't make that much sense to me from a sound standpoint. And yes, 16 tracks seems like a WHOLE lot to ask for, but I want my recordings to set myself apart from the rest of the crowd. Seeing as there's no studios around here that rent out rooms for free ;-) I'll be dealing with less-than-ideal sonics in my room. Close-miking drums might save me a lot of hassle in terms of noise bleed, bad-sounding room, etc.
 
Question...

Do you all think it'd be better for me to buy a 1/2" 8-track and sync that with my Digi001 box? Or should I go with the 1" 16-track?

I'm asking cause the extra 8 tracks that I'd be recording "live" would probably not end up being keeper tracks...like a keyboard (digital anyways), DI acoustic guitar (unless there's enough isolation), DI bass, scratch vocal, etc. If it turned out that any of those was a keeper performance, then I'd still have the digital copy.

1/2" tape is 1/2 the price of 1" tape...thats why I'm asking. At the same time, how much would a sync machine cost? What would I need to get?
 
Well papa, that's a different question, isn't it?

Analog/digital sync setups are doable, I guess, although sync can be a bit finicky and remember you'll lose one analog track to timecode. That brings your hypothetical setup to 7 analog tracks linked to your digi. However, I will definitely recommend the 1/2" 8-track format on it's own merits.

Is either a 1" 16-track reel system or an 8-track analog/digi-sync system is better? I honestly think a single unit solution is better than a sync setup. The single 1" 16-track reel deck is better, IMO.

Sync's cool sometimes, but it can be too finicky for me, with drift and dropouts, and I'm no huge fan of digital to begin with. Some people may swear by digital and sync, but not me. For my scope of production, my tastes & needs, the 1" 16-track reel deck is "it". I'm an analog fan. Coudn't tell, I bet.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top