DAW vs Classic Reel to Reel, Bitter?

[Cult_Status02]

I was just reading on another thread about "Flying in" which preceeded the clever banter and I got to thinking:

Are you more analog guys that record to tape bitter about the guys using DAWs and hard drives to record? I know DAWs have made things a lot easier, and I feel bad that I didn't have to ever go through a reel (haha, I crack myself up) headache and have been spoiled by my new school approach to recording. I'd like to do some reel to reel so I can say I did it. Should I just not waste my time though? does it really matter. The fact of my matter is that I record to a hard drive and can edit a waveform easily, I don't have to cut anything or flip anything over.

What does everyone think, are we DAW users spoiled?

 

[bigwillz24]

Do you really care? Or are you just trolling for an argument?

 

[danny.guitar]

I would not have the patience to work with a reel to reel, or any analog recording. I barely have enough patience with DAWs.

 

[ez_willis]

I would not have the patience to work with a reel to reel, or any analog recording. I barely have enough patience with DAWs.

Yep. Me too.

The time it takes to finish a song on my computer is about half the time I used to spend waiting for my Adats to rewind and fast-forward, then sync.

 

[MessianicDreams]

well, i have found that using reel to reel tape has made mixing a whoole bunch easier. track your drums thru tape and boy does it make mixing them a joke. recently i've been using a 2" 24-track Otari MTR90 and its seriously revolutionised the way i've been thinking. sure, it's a bitch waiting 30secs for the tape to rewind everytime, and punching in and out requires quite some experience, but you honestly cannot beat the sound.


oh yeah, and don't forget the 30-40mins at the start of each and every session to line, calibrate and clean the machine.


so in some ways DAWs are easier, but in other ways they make things hard. all this automation has made the way we mix a much more long-winded and convoluted process. you try doing a mix with a 2" thru an analogue desk with no automation...

 

[xstatic]

I grew up on tape, and made the full switch to DAW recording when it was pretty much still in its infancy. Here is what I have decided.... If I and my clients could afford 2" tape than I would DEFINATELY use it. Yes it can be a pain, yes editing is harder, certain things take longer etc... However, I am not in this business to be "fast". I own my studio because I want to be a part of making music ion the best way I possibly can. Part of this includes making good equipment choices. Part of getting the best sound I can is acheived through using 2" tape. However, some tradeoffs just have to happen when you own a business. As a result I no longer have tape machines. I lvoe the ease and felxibility of DAW recording and mixing, and I especially love the recallability of software. I do not feel like A/D and D/A conversions "hurt" my recordings, but that stage of a recording used to be handled by tape which in my opinion "helps" my recordings. I also found that there was a bit more of an art involved in mixing off of tape. I had to really give thought to what equipment and tricks I would use and where I would use them since outboard gear was limited. DAW mixing is excellent because I pretty much have all the tools I need for every channel, but it also makes it really easy for me to overuse them and kind of paint myself into a corner.

In the end, my favorite solution is a well integrated system made up of both sets of equipment. If integrated properly, there can be very few negative trade-offs for a plethora of positive attributes. This is one reason why the big pro studios are still head and shoulders above the rest. They can offer you all the best of all the different aspects of making music.

 

[peopleperson]

Yeah, to each his own. I'm glad that I'm old enough to have spent a good amount of time with both.

 

[MessianicDreams]

I grew up on tape, and made the full switch to DAW recording when it was pretty much still in its infancy. Here is what I have decided.... If I and my clients could afford 2" tape than I would DEFINATELY use it. Yes it can be a pain, yes editing is harder, certain things take longer etc... However, I am not in this business to be "fast". I own my studio because I want to be a part of making music ion the best way I possibly can. Part of this includes making good equipment choices. Part of getting the best sound I can is acheived through using 2" tape. However, some tradeoffs just have to happen when you own a business. As a result I no longer have tape machines. I lvoe the ease and felxibility of DAW recording and mixing, and I especially love the recallability of software. I do not feel like A/D and D/A conversions "hurt" my recordings, but that stage of a recording used to be handled by tape which in my opinion "helps" my recordings. I also found that there was a bit more of an art involved in mixing off of tape. I had to really give thought to what equipment and tricks I would use and where I would use them since outboard gear was limited. DAW mixing is excellent because I pretty much have all the tools I need for every channel, but it also makes it really easy for me to overuse them and kind of paint myself into a corner.

In the end, my favorite solution is a well integrated system made up of both sets of equipment. If integrated properly, there can be very few negative trade-offs for a plethora of positive attributes. This is one reason why the big pro studios are still head and shoulders above the rest. They can offer you all the best of all the different aspects of making music.

couldn't have put it better if i tried.




daayumn straight!

 

[Cult_Status02]

Do you really care? Or are you just trolling for an argument?

What a silly thing to say. Of course I care otherwise I would not have asked.

I don't really see how an argument could start with this. Either some reel people think the digital guys should "do some time" or they don't, it's a simple discussion...those can still exist on this board. Now if you want to bring a bitter attitude to the table, I ask you to please spend your time elsewere.

 

[ssscientist]

Now if you want to bring a bitter attitude to the table, I ask you to please spend your time elsewere.

You're begging for trouble with a post like that.

There's no 'table' here. This is a BBS where home recordists of varying experience levels come to share knowledge, reviews, tips and tricks and to help tutor the younger generation.

To put it in plain English, have more respect for everyone who donates their time and effort --- whether you think they have a 'bitter attitude' or not.

.

 

[bigtoe]

really it's however the client wants to work. i could care less...unless the client wants to start micromanaging his/her song or the performances while recording...in that case it's a drag either way but you know...it's their buck.

if yer talking fidelity the analog thing sounds much better to me.

Mike

 

[bigwillz24]

What a silly thing to say. Of course I care otherwise I would not have asked.

I don't really see how an argument could start with this. Either some reel people think the digital guys should "do some time" or they don't, it's a simple discussion...those can still exist on this board. Now if you want to bring a bitter attitude to the table, I ask you to please spend your time elsewere.

You missed the point of my post. Let me put it this way. It doesn't really matter what you use. The reason it probably sounds sarcastic to you is because you haven't read through all the numerous analog vs. digital threads. It usually boils down to whatever works for you and whatever you can afford that gets the job done.

The same thing will happen in this thread as well.

There are people who are gonna prefer the sonic quality of analog and there will be those that prefer the ease of digital. Both get the job done well. It depends on how you like to work.

Now go away kid you're bothering me.

 

[ez_willis]

. Now if you want to bring a bitter attitude to the table, I ask you to please spend your time elsewere.

bigwillz has been here long enough to spend his time wherever he pleases.

 

[TuoKaerf]

I enjoy using both. I've only tracked to tape a few times, and even at that it was only drum or bass tracks. I've never had anoyone who could afford a full session on tape.

One thing I do notice, is that you spend a lot more time getting the track right in the first place rather than a bunch of takes to edit together. Cutting tape is much more of a pain in the ass than using beat detective.

If I can get my hands on an inexpensive reel, I'll dump the recorded drums to tape then back into the DAW for mixing.

 

[omtayslick]

There's definately some magic that happens with tape that's not there with a DAW. But....... I think it's an age that is passing away. Kind of like muscle cars. Today's cars are technically better, but no magic.

 

[LeeRosario]

Do you really care? Or are you just trolling for an argument?

my sentiments exactly. Probably not the real question to ask if someone is bitter about analog vs digital. Perhaps the result of all the things new gear and todays competitive standards bring out of the sounds we hear could be more relevant.

Any professional engineer should be able to embrace the new technologies and techniques that come their way. However, we'll always have our preferences. Thats what we call "the evolution of self".

 

[beezelbubba]

I spent 10 years recording on reel to reel before going digital.About 1/2 through that I got a keyboard and sequencer that I tape synced and could instantly see the possibilties if I could only "sequence" my audio, as well.It was only a matter of time before the technology came down enough in price for a poor fuck like me to make that a reality.Every take all the way through that I fucked up, every bounce to 2 tracks,etc. was done grudgingly.
I've always been more into the writing and creating process than the warmth of analog thing.I don't miss it a bit.I'm secure enough in my musicality to not worry about what I've lost in not having to play as much as I used to.Fact is, I want to play as little as possible to get the job done.I want to play the riff once and copy/paste it wherever I need to.I want to see the waveforms, and visually see how the kick and bass guitar tracks interact.I don't know or care how computers have impacted the music industry.Computer recording is the best thing that has happened to me, creatively.

 

[Cult_Status02]

The question does not beg for debate on digital vs analog. It asks if people that use to use analog or still do are bitter about how easily accessible it is to get into recording, instead of having to really dig in and do an apprenticeship as it were.

Bigwillz24, I think you have misread the question at hand. I'm not asking for personal preference, but wondering if anyone is annoyed at how easy it is to get into recording now. Also, the reason I said to spend your time elsewhere is because if you keep instagating shit and you probably would start a debate. I have read through the analog vs digital debates, as if there was even a debate there. It's mostly just "I like anaolg because it's warm and digital is too plain," or "Analog is yesterday, digital is clean, easy and practical," hardly a debate more of just people repeating their opinions over and over and over. Don't try to talk to me like some kid, I'm married, live with my partner, and self-employeed making damn fine money. Don't judge me on my age.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

The question does not beg for debate on digital vs analog. It asks if people that use to use analog or still do are bitter about how easily accessible it is to get into recording, instead of having to really dig in and do an apprenticeship as it were.

I think the question is making a false assumption, and that assumption is really what's at the core of any "issues" that veterans may have with the new technology:

The assumption that just because sophisticated recording and engineering gear has become easily accessible that one no longer needs to dig in and actually learn the craft. That is just not correct, and it's along that somewhat understandable misunderstanding where the rift usually develops.

Tracking, mixing and mastering, to be done well - and often even to be done well enough to suit the expectations of the rookie self-recorder - requires a knowledge and skill set that cannot be bought in a box, and the things that do come in boxes (or via broadband download) these days are not meant to be used properly by Joe Punchclock and Sally Housecoat without proper training.

This is one good reason why we don't have flying cars yet. At leat DAWs can't be flown into buildings; nothing gets hurt except the listener's ears and the engineer's pride (and wallet.)

G.

 

[Cult_Status02]

I think the question is making a false assumption, and that assumption is really what's at the core of any "issues" that veterans may have with the new technology:

The assumption that just because sophisticated recording and engineering gear has become easily accessible that one no longer needs to dig in and actually learn the craft. That is just not correct, and it's along that somewhat understandable misunderstanding where the rift usually develops.

Tracking, mixing and mastering, to be done well - and often even to be done well enough to suit the expectations of the rookie self-recorder - requires a knowledge and skill set that cannot be bought in a box, and the things that do come in boxes (or via broadband download) these days are not meant to be used properly by Joe Punchclock and Sally Housecoat without proper training.

This is one good reason why we don't have flying cars yet. At leat DAWs can't be flown into buildings; nothing gets hurt except the listener's ears and the engineer's pride (and wallet.)

G.

I agree, I was afraid I would not be able to word that part correctly. What I was trying to get at was that it seems to take a certain skill to record to a reel, where as anyone can plug a mic into their SoundBlaster card and record. I did not mean to say technology does the work for you now, but I do think many people think that.

I record digitally but I read anything I can get my hands on about recording. I sit down and download console manuals and read them for the fun of it, I realize there is so much to learn, even in the digital realm.

I didn't mean to sound ignorant and say that you don't need talent to make a good recording these days. If this thread could be compared to anything I think it is most like the old (and thankfully mostly over) Commercial studios vs project studios.