Mastering from a 1" 8-track

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seanyworny
  • Start date Start date
S

Seanyworny

New member
Hey,

I've just invested in a 1" 8-track but i'm in the dark as to the best way to master from it. I'm contemplating buying my own mastering deck but my before I do, i'd like to know, regardless of price, should I be looking to get a 1/2" or a 1/4" machine?

Is there really any difference? Should I be looking to keep the Inch per track the same e.g. by buying a 1/4 or could I improve my original recording in some way by investing in a 1/2 inch machine?

Any help (audio examples) would be kindly appreciated- at this moment, resolving this quandary is my sole priority and it's bugging me!

Cheers fellas,
Sean
 
Any 15ips 1/4" half track deck will do. That's pretty much standard. The track width is the same and so is the speed (if you're tracking at 15ips, which you should IMO). I think that the higher cost, tape, maintenance, parts (and relative rarity) of 1/2" half track is not justified. The majority of records have been mastered to 1/4" half track.
 
cjacek said:
Any 15ips 1/4" half track deck will do. That's pretty much standard. The track width is the same and so is the speed (if you're tracking at 15ips, which you should IMO). I think that the higher cost, tape, maintenance, parts (and relative rarity) of 1/2" half track is not justified. The majority of records have been mastered to 1/4" half track.
Click to expand...

Ditto that 100%
 
Seanyworny said:
I've just invested in a 1" 8-track
Click to expand...

What model 8-track do you have? Just curious.

As already stated 1/4" half-track is a standard mastering format. Wider tracks will get you better signal-to-noise ratio, but 1/4 half-track has slightly wider tracks than 1" 8-track or 2" 16-track, which is more than adequate. For all practical purposes you can consider 1/4” half-track roughly equivalent to 2” 16-track. With noise reduction track width becomes less of an issue.

As for sound samples... pick a favorite 70's, 80's and even up to mid-90's song and you're probably hearing a work that was mastered on 1/4" half-track with Dolby A. With a little research you can find out exactly what machine an album was mastered on. 1/4" and 1/2" half-track were both used, but 1/4" was/is a bit more common.

~Tim
:)
 
Unless you have clients who expect an analog mix deck to be 1/2" at 30 ips, I'd start with a 1/4" machine. I prefer IEC1 eq but YMMV. You can always add a 1/2" machine if you have to. For many makes, it's just a matter of getting another headstack, changing out the guides and a full alignment.
Cheers,

Otto
 
Thanks for the kind responses fellas, greatly appreciated.

To Beck who's interested in the multi-tracker we just picked up- it's a modified TEAC 80-8 in good as new condition- top machine. And for contextual purposes, the sound I hope to be able to regularly achieve is more early Dylan @ Columbia & Nick Drake rather than crystal audiophile 2" 8-track 30ips kinda stuff.

Along with mastering to a seperate mastering deck, elsewhere some have also now suggested that if i've ever two spare tracks on my multi-tracker, that i'd be able to master to that- is this doable/worthwhile? Obviously it'd save me finding, buying and maintaining another machine if I could keep my mixes down to 6 tracks.

Others have told me that i'm foolish even wanting to mater to tape if i've already tracked to tape because as the tracks are ultimately going to end up on CD anyway, there's no need to 'tape it twice'. These folk suggested that i'd be better mixing down from my multi-tracker to a 2-channel digital converter...some saying PCM will suffice, some saying get hold of DSD technology.

Jeez...will I ever be able to resolve this? Thanks again though chaps for the replies, and any further opinions/help would be really appreciated,
Sean
 
Well, I ignored this thread for about a week, and now that I have viewed it, I have lots of question, myself. Not trying to hijack, but I thought it would be better to ask them here, instead of starting a new thread.

Hmm. Just looked at pics of the 80-8- except for level controls, it looks suspiciously like my TASCAM 80 (I own a TASCAM 80.) Same DNA, so similarities are expected, but how else do they differ? Any advantages of one over the other? I know TEAC was the company's "consumer" name, TASCAM it's "pro" name, but really, was Shakespere right- "What's in a name...?"

If a 1/4" half track is "matched" for 1" 8 track, what would be similarily standard for a 1/2" 8 track machine? 1/4" half track??

And what does "half track" mean, anyway? I thought it referred to a tank... Is a 2-track machine that only records in one direction a half-track, or what?

OFAJEN says "For many makes, it's just a matter of getting another headstack, changing out the guides and a full alignment (to convert from 1/4" to 1/2".") I know of one company that markets kits and conversions to convert a 4-track Hi-fi consumer-type machine to 2-track- vwery* cool but I suspect they are overpriced (as I recall, prices of about $1000 or so.) What other sources are there? Is it a difficult conversion? I imagine you would have to realign the heads, but couldn't someone with decent skills do the convo and then bring it to the shop for alignment (like you might do with your car...?)

And yeah, what about "double taping" like Seanyworny ask- make sense to me, but really, what do I know? On a related topic, I have heard that if you want "analog warmth," the best way (or is it the easiest?) way to get it is to do all one's work in the digital rhelm, and bounce the final stereo mix to tape, then back to digital, and make reproductions from the digital final mix. If that is the case, what would be the optimal tape width and speed? Wouldn't it be that "wider/faster is better?", and if so, what width/speed would get bandwidth (or whatever the limiting factor is) of tape closest to digital?

And finally, are there any disavantages of using an 8-track, 1/2 or 1/4 inch machine as a 2-track?

* The "w" was a typo, but the "Elmer Fudd" reference was so funny to me, I decided to leave it alone.
 
stevieb said:
Well, I ignored this thread for about a week, and now that I have viewed it, I have lots of question, myself. Not trying to hijack, but I thought it would be better to ask them here, instead of starting a new thread.

Hmm. Just looked at pics of the 80-8- except for level controls, it looks suspiciously like my TASCAM 80 (I own a TASCAM 80.) Same DNA, so similarities are expected, but how else do they differ? Any advantages of one over the other? I know TEAC was the company's "consumer" name, TASCAM it's "pro" name, but really, was Shakespere right- "What's in a name...?"
Click to expand...

TEAC is TASCAM's parent company so people tend to interchange the two trademarks. As far as I know, all 80-8 machines were TASCAM products.

If a 1/4" half track is "matched" for 1" 8 track, what would be similarily standard for a 1/2" 8 track machine? 1/4" half track??
Click to expand...

Back in the day when everything pro was analog, all multi-tracks, regardless of format, were routinely "mixed" (that's the term by the way, not "mastered," a whole different stage) to 1/4" 15ips machines. 1/2" and 30ips began showing up relatively late in the game. The concept of matching track widths from multi-track to mix down was a non-issue as far as the folks I knew were concerned.

............. Is a 2-track machine that only records in one direction a half-track, or what?
Click to expand...

Yes. Each side of the stereo takes 1/2 of the tape.



OFAJEN says "For many makes, it's just a matter of getting another headstack, changing out the guides and a full alignment (to convert from 1/4" to 1/2".") I know of one company that markets kits and conversions to convert a 4-track Hi-fi consumer-type machine to 2-track- vwery* cool but I suspect they are overpriced (as I recall, prices of about $1000 or so.) What other sources are there? Is it a difficult conversion? I imagine you would have to realign the heads, but couldn't someone with decent skills do the convo and then bring it to the shop for alignment (like you might do with your car...?)
Click to expand...

Scully and Ampex used to offer machines with convertible heads and guides options, allowing customers to buy one machine that could be used as either a 1/4" 2-track or 1/2" 4-track. Other pro companies might have as well. I don't know about the current crop of conversion kits but I suspect they aren't for "quick change" between session procedures.


And yeah, what about "double taping" like Seanyworny ask- make sense to me, but really, what do I know? On a related topic, I have heard that if you want "analog warmth," the best way (or is it the easiest?) way to get it is to do all one's work in the digital rhelm, and bounce the final stereo mix to tape, then back to digital, and make reproductions from the digital final mix. If that is the case, what would be the optimal tape width and speed? Wouldn't it be that "wider/faster is better?", and if so, what width/speed would get bandwidth (or whatever the limiting factor is) of tape closest to digital?
Click to expand...

As stated earlier, going from analog to analog was the way it was done. The results went from stellar to crap, depending on the gear and who is operating it.

Re: optimum speed - MCI built a prototype 3" 24 track that ran @ 20ips back in the late 70's. It never got off the ground but supposedly sounded better than either 15 or 30 ips. Someone else came up with an 18 ips standard for their machines based, I think, on the ATR Ampex. All I can tell you is that it is hard to beat a 1/4" Ampex ATR 102 running @ 15ips.




And finally, are there any disavantages of using an 8-track, 1/2 or 1/4 inch machine as a 2-track?
Click to expand...

It can be done. It wouldn't be the way I would go but if it works for you, knock yourself out.
 
You could mix to empty tracks, but you can only keep one mix that way. You'll be much better off with a separate mix deck.

Cheers,

Otto
 
Yeah it was a 32-track...

JH-32.jpg


Wow...that thing is...SHOOT! [nose begins to bleed]...*THUMP!*
 
Otari also made a 32-track MX-80 on 2" but it didn't really take off. I only ever saw one in magazine ads in the late 80's.

vinAd87Otari.jpg
 
Hey folks,

To Ofajen: what you're saying makes sense mate- many others have suggested the same. My main mix down issue is now whether to go digital through a high end stereo converter/8-track converter or to go to a separate tape deck 1/2" or 1/4" and at what speed.

On this issue I've heard many conflicting opinions, each side with valid assertions so at the minute I'm in the situation of thinking that it maybe time to purchase a couple of things and try them out. Either that or head to a couple of local studios and see if i can recognise any difference like that.

Thanks for the replies,
Sean
 
Any chance you could borrow a 1/4" machine for a bit and see how it works for you? You could always decide later to go to 1/2" tape or a digital recorder.

Cheers,

Otto
 
Seanyworny said:
My main mix down issue is now whether to go digital through a high end stereo converter/8-track converter or to go to a separate tape deck 1/2" or 1/4" and at what speed.
Click to expand...

One of the main benefits of mixing down to a quality 1/4" half track deck @ 15ips is retaining more of your original signal (staying in the analogue domain) than any present digital technology. That way, it's not going to be a limiting factor when you decide on a distributable medium, whether that would be MP3, CD, DSD, Vinyl, Cassette etc.. I see tape as a future proof medium and I'd store my recordings in that fashion or at the very least I'd always keep my multi-tracks should I wish to mix-down to digital.

You mentioned the idea of using your spare tracks (on the 1" 8 track) to mix-down. Sure, that would work but only if you intend to do all your mastering and duplication yourself. A mastering house most likely will not accept the format.
 
To Ofajen- At present I don't know anyone with a 1/4" deck to mix-down to but if I was to buy one in decent working order, I'm sure I wouldn't lose much if I had to sell it on. I'm gonna be visiting a few studios soon- maybe they'd be so kind as to borrow me something- spose i'll have to wait and see.

To cjacek- a couple of interesting points there mate cheers. I've since given up on mixing down to the same deck though now- seems like there's to many limiting factors and that it'd be easier to either buy another deck to mix down to or some high quality converters.

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