How is hybrid recording generally done?

[LazerBeakShiek]

How is analog recording done, so that it is digital? One track at a time, analog and then into the interface? At some point the interface needs to be used, but for what? And how much?

 

[sweetbeats]

There are many ways to do it. Some people with limited analog track count fill tracks on tape and dump to digital in chunks, building a larger project in their DAW. Some kind of synchronization can be helpful here, but depending on the project and the equipment it’s possible to line the chunks up manually in the DAW. Alternatively if you have adequate analog track count you can fill those and dump everything at once. Another way is to track through the tape machine to the DAW in real time. This requires a three head tape machine so you can playback from the reproduce head while recording on the record head. In this way you’re only using the tape for the tracking pass. It still getting whatever non-linearities you are after from the tape to the DAW along with your source content. Then of course the other way is to track to analog, and mix to stereo and just use the DAW in essence as a master recorder. There are in-betweener things people do too, tracking to the DAW and then dumping stems to tape to get the tape non-linearities and then back to the DAW, or mix down from there…or a combination of tape tracks synchronized to DAW tracks and the two bundles mixed down to stereo master from their native states. It really depends on what your goals are and what gear you have or can afford.

 

[LazerBeakShiek]

Another way is to track through the tape machine to the DAW in real time. This requires a three head tape machine so you can playback from the reproduce head while recording on the record head. In this way you’re only using the tape for the tracking pass. It still getting whatever non-linearities you are after from the tape to the DAW along with your source content.

Yes, this sounds like what I am looking for.

What models of 3 head tape machines are out there?

 

[jpmorris]

Yes, this sounds like what I am looking for.

What models of 3 head tape machines are out there?

Lots.

At the low end of the scale, Akai decks often have three heads. However these are quarter-track stereo machines from the 1970s. They won't be studio quality and will also be fussy about the kind of tape they're given. Apart from Capture, most of the tape on the market today is intended for studio machines running at a higher bias level than consumer decks are capable of without adjustment and possibly modification. Also since they tend to run at 3.75 or 7.5 inches/second the delay will be fairly long.

Most professional recorders will have three heads since it makes alignment much, much easier. However professional decks tend to be more expensive because a lot of people are using them to bounce stereo mixes.
Lower-end professional machines include the Revox PR99, high-speed models of the Revox B77, and the TASCAM 32. More upmarket machines include the TASCAM BR-20, Revox C270, Studer A807, B67 and A810. Also the Otari MX5050 and MX55.
At the top of the tree you have things like the Studer A80, Otari MTR10 or Ampex ATR-102 which have been used to master lots of famous albums.
There are countless others which I'll probably remember later.

All this is assuming you want to work in mono or stereo. If you need to process more than that, multitrack decks are often 3-head, although not always. The TASCAM 38 records 8 tracks on 1/2" tape, and this is also a 3-head machine (the later TSR-8 is 2-head as a cost-saving measure). I think all the 1" 16-track recorders are 3-head (though the 1" 24-tracks are all 2-head because those heads are ungodly expensive). 2" machines are generally 3-head as well, the only exception I know of being the Cadeys which were very strange and built by some insane genius in the UK during the early 1970s.

 

[LazerBeakShiek]

Could I use my Fostex A8? It is locked at 15 ips , and only 2 head 1/4" 8 track machine.

If I record analog instruments to that A8 off the Mackie mixer bus, it does not sound like the digital recording. It sounds analog. Nice. The sound I am chasing.

How would I use that in the DAW? Just record a track while monitoring the DAW. Then play it into the DAW through the face?

Edit- I tried it to see if that does make it sound analog. It seems to be what Im after. Really coming round full circle. Back where I started . 1/4 inch.

 

[Farview]

It depends how many ins and outs your interface has. If you have 8 IO, you can record into the daw, then send 4 stereo stems to the tape deck. Playback those stems back into the daw.

Or you can record to the tape deck, then dump the tape tracks into the daw.

If you get a sync device, you can go back and forth in any manner you wish.

I've done projects where I recorded drums to tape and everything else in the daw.

It's really how much equipment you have and what your goals are. You can use any of it in any combination.

 

[jpmorris]

Could I use my Fostex A8? It is locked at 15 ips , and only 2 head 1/4" 8 track machine.

If I record analog instruments to that A8 off the Mackie mixer bus, it does not sound like the digital recording. It sounds analog. Nice. The sound I am chasing.

How would I use that in the DAW? Just record a track while monitoring the DAW. Then play it into the DAW through the face?

Edit- I tried it to see if that does make it sound analog. It seems to be what Im after. Really coming round full circle. Back where I started . 1/4 inch.

You can record to the A8, rewind and play back afterwards. That definitely works although if you do multiple passes you'll need to manually sync them up inside the DAW.

What you can't do is the 3-head trick where you record to tape and get the playback 1/15th of a second later. If you do try that, all that happens is that it echoes the input back out again, probably after passing it through a couple of op-amps. It never makes it as far as the tape and you'd get exactly the same effect with no tape loaded, though there might be some small colouration from the electronics.

Unless it's the A8LR it only has four inputs. That might be enough but I'd be hesitant to use it for stereo mixes as the A8 has very narrow tracks. That said, no technique is wrong if it gets you the sound you want.

 

[assman]

I record one track at a time on my four-track. Once I'm done recording the song and I want to add more tracks, I transfer the ''song'' (the four tracks) onto my computer using a rudimentary DAW and Audacity. Once it's on Audacity, I check the levels, see if it's fine, once it's good, I transfer the song back onto the four-track using the first 2 tracks (sterererereo). That leaves me with two more tracks to record on. I do this back and forth until I'm satisfied with the number of tracks I have on my song.

 

[fstrat76]

I used to sync my DAW (Logic) to tape (Tascam 38), which means I could record to tape as well as to DAW but it got to be too cumbersome. Then I started using the 3-head real-time method Sweetbeats mentions above. All good results but not a very fast workflow. These days, I'll take some digital drum tracks and run it through the tape machine via the real-time method then back into the DAW and re-align.

One thing I still do is mix to my 2-channel Tascam 42. All tracks (or stems) in the DAW are sent to interface outputs directly into my outboard analog mixers and summing devices then to the Tascam 42.

 

[James Tree]

I do what assman does for the most part, but with a cassette 424. Someday I hope to have an 8 track r2r so the tape doesn't get filled up as soon. It would make for a better work flow since I just record myself, and there's no going back to edit/ change parts once it's down to stereo(eoeoeo)

 

[Track Rat]

My humble opinion. but its how you approach and handle the audio. Storage is neither here nor there. I personally capture audio with nice mics and preamps. It;s stored on an HD24 as 24 bit/44.1 sample rate. I use plugins and hardware simultaneously side by side. I mix on a console totally in the analog domain. Digital storage, analog process.