mixdown/noise reduction

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peck
  • Start date Start date
P

Peck

Guest
Hello,

I am trying to mixdown from a 1/2" 8 track to pro tools... and I am getting a lot of tape hiss. I am not using noise reduction right now. Is there a way I can eliminate the tape hiss in pro tools with a plug in of some sort? Limiter? I don't know this is all new to me.. :confused:

If not I guess I would buy some noise reduction units (although I would rather not of course) when I have some money, but I was hoping to solve it quicker.

If I do need noise reduction, how many units would I have to buy? 8 separate ones for each track? I'm a bit lost.

I'm actually mixing on an old allen heath board, and just recording the mix into pro tools. I guess it could always be the board that is adding the hiss.

Also, the tape machine is an older version of the otari mx5050 (two separate units). Any suggestions? Thanks...

Robert
 
Is there a way for you to monitor your recording directly from tape, not using the mixer ? Don't the Otari's have a headphone amp ? That way you'll be able to diagnose where the hiss is coming from. Could be the tape, board or anything within your signal chain. If you find that it's actually the original tape recordings which are very hissy then of course you could use noise reduction in your protools but problem is that you'll definitely degrade your source material to some degree.

When you were recording didn't you notice hiss, especially when playing back, overdubbing etc .... ? To expect a bit of tape hiss is fine, especially on quiet passages. It's all subjective so I'd want to know how bad is it really in your case ? :confused:
 
to know if your board got some hiss at output(s) - just listen to the the board 'itself' (at the 'regular' channel's and mix-outputs' faders level(s) (or a bit above it) with nothing plugged into mixer's inputs ) , if you hear nothing - there's no hiss there ;)

Using plug-Ins of any sort sucks, (imho, of course )... using computer software plug-ins to "correct" analog recording(s) sucks period. :D

The solutions are:
a. using noise gate(s) on recorded tracks (and maybe on tw0-track mix as well), (which is an art on its own btw)... so that the hiss is in present only when the recorded sound is in present.
b. using noise reduction (such as dbx). you may or may not be happy with the result, though... you have to try and hear for yourself to know for sure, no other way around it.
********
If I do need noise reduction, how many units would I have to buy? 8 separate ones for each track? I'm a bit lost
Click to expand...
you have 8-tracks , so you may want to have/use 8-channel of noise-reduction. the amount of units would depend on amount of channels per unit. so, for example, if you get 4-channel noise-reduction units, then you'd need two units to cover the amount of tracks on which you would like to apply noise-reduction processing.
*********

having said all that, just as a side note: don't forget, that Noise is a natural sign of life, while Silence is a natural sign of death. Oh, and I don't think that it's subjective matter, or am I wrong? :D :D :D :p
 
Thanks for the responses guys.

Here is a pic of the tape recorder. There are four different headphone jacks on the front (where the cable is plugged in). One for each pair of tracks. So, the only way I can play them all back together is with the mixer using the xlr outs on the back. But I guess I could listen to them all separately from the headphone jacks.

Anyway, I did notice a hiss buildup while I was tracking/overdubbing. I noticed it got louder each time. After recording six tracks or so, it had gotten pretty annoying. It's not terrible, but it definitely needs to be brought down considerably. I like the character of a little hiss, but I don't want it to be as loud as the freaking guitars. So... it sounds like I need to possibly purchase a noise gate or two for tracking? (only recording one instrument at a time) and then use them again for the two track mixdown? I think i got that right.

Dr. Zee, I coudn't agree more about plug ins. I like to minimize my time on pro tools. Eventually I will mix down to tape, but in the meantime I have pro tools to work with.

I am getting the vibe that noise reduction units aren't exactly everyone's favorite way of going about taking the hiss out. Sounds like a lot of people think they take away from the recording.

Thanks again.
 

Attachments

  • otari.webp
    otari.webp
    30.8 KB · Views: 108
Peck said:
Hello,

Also, the tape machine is an older version of the otari mx5050 (two separate units). Any suggestions? Thanks...

Robert
Click to expand...

do have the model where the VU meters and input levels are seperate from the recorder? Those looks so cool.....

EDIT: Woah, didn't realize the picture was RIGHT ABOVE ME! :eek: :rolleyes: Those things look awsome.
 
I doubt you need noise reduction. I've never used that specific model before, but my 5050 has no real problem with that, and the NR units that would actaully make a huge difference I've heard aren't easy to install and cost A LOT! But don't take my word for it.
 
Thanks for the kind words. Yeah I really like this recorder. When I clean up the hiss a little, I'm going to be pretty happy. Then I'll have to start shelling out cash for outboard gear. Always something else, you know.
 
Nice looking rig. That Otari shouldn’t be overly hissy. Minimizing hiss without noise reduction involves operating level, bias and maintenance – cleaning and degaussing. Have you had the machine calibrated?

:)
 
one more generic thought
it is hard to guess how and what you record exactly and what kind of material, but something to keep in mind.
let's say, in general you do not want to 'drive' your tape recorder/tape over its limit (you do not want much (or any) tape saturation to be "applied"), then you record all the tracks to the maximum highest level.
You may like the levels of your different tracks (some higher, some lower) as you record few tracks at the time (or overdubbing track by track) and monitor the mix through your mixer, another words you adjust the recording level(s) of the tracks to the point when it sounds good in the monitor-mix, but NOT to the highest possible level as your tape/recorder allows. Then when you mixing your recordings down you may have to bring the tracks'/channels' faders up here and there or maybe all of them to get the good mix and overall main mix output level. And so you get all the hiss level up as well from all the tracks/channels that you had to adjust-up in the mix.
Now, if you'd record each track at the maximum possible level (without unwanter coloration/saturation/distortion) , then to get your mix right when mixing down you would move your faders down here and there or maybe on all the tracks/channels ... and so the overall hiss, coming from all the tracks, will be brought to the minimum possible in your specific situation without (or say: before) applying any special treatments like NR or gates.
(btw, it's easy to blah blah about this, but things don't go so smoothly at all as you do it all by yourself. Part of the problem is the fact that you may be trying to work this all out while you are the performer and you are the guy who pushes the rec-button and monitors the sound and makes the adjustment(s) ...heh heh .. :p It's tough.)
Then, if you still have some hiss you wish to get rid of, you employ what ever you can (got in your arsenal). In some situations depending on recording material gate(s) may work well, in some DBX-NR, in some situations you will simply have to follow your priorities and maybe compromize. Well, this may mean buying couple pieces of gear and it sure means actually using those pieces of equipment for some time and collecting personal experience (meaning working with your specific set-up on your specific material to meet your specific tastes and demands), which simply can not be substituted by gathering information.
**********

The machine a$$-Kicking-ROCKS, btw! :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:
 
Dbx is my preferred & favorite noise reduction, and it's really effective,...

but it's an encode/decode process that has to be applied on recording and playback,... so it's not good to apply to a "normal" recording after the fact.

Most of my Tascams have dbx NR, and I'm perfectly happy with it. In 25 years of dbx encoded multitracking, I only have one solid example of "pumping", an artifact of dbx as it reacts to extreme percussion. That's not a bad track record! Heh, pun!;)
 
yeah, "apply" is the wrong word to use when talking about dbx NR. nor you can experimen/decide to use it or not after the recording is done. nor you can "undo" it after the recording is done with dbx nr, nor in the future your recordings are 'useful' without dbx playback process if it was recorded with dbx process. You decide whether to engage it it or not based on your experience, I should say. dbx NR is great if you are happy with the result, but there's no "middle ground" there. dbx NR is rather a "format", and not an "effect". It's a problem as I see it. Another words, you can not really know for sure if your mix would come out better with dbx nr after you recorded the tracks without dbx nr, nor you can know for sure (nor you have a chance to check) if your mix could be better without dbx nr if you've recorded all the tracks with dbx nr. so? :D what you can do, of course is double your set-up, have two machines running in synch, make two recordings one with the other without, then make two mixes, then go through the painful process trying to decide which mix is better ... lol , if it gets too hard to decide, you can ask your mother in law for an opinion on which one is better, (if you are lucky to have mother's in law opinion available, of course). :D
 
Dr ZEE said:
It's a problem as I see it. Another words, you can not really know for sure if your mix would come out better with dbx nr after you recorded the tracks without dbx nr, nor you can know for sure (nor you have a chance to check) if your mix could be better without dbx nr if you've recorded all the tracks with dbx nr. so? :D what you can do, of course is double your set-up, have two machines running in synch, make two recordings one with the other without, then make two mixes, then go through the painful process trying to decide which mix is better ... lol , if it gets too hard to decide, you can ask your mother in law for an opinion on which one is better, (if you are lucky to have mother's in law opinion available, of course). :D
Click to expand...

:D That hemming and hawing is exactly what I went through. Ultimately I've decided not to use it. One reason is as you said. If in the future you don't have a unit it will sound like ass playing it back. Also, trying to learn the new/old gear I'd like to know what it does without it first. So if I have a problem I know it's not DBX.
 
Yeah, thanks for the responses again. Beck, I did have the machine calibrated before I started recording with it. It cost me a lot. It seemed close to impossible trying to find someone here in Austin who would even do it. I just didn't want to mess with trying to do it myself, because I knew I might go insane. Recording on tape is new to me, let alone calibrating a machine. So I shelled out some cash.

Anyway, I'm starting to think that it is the mixer that needs to be cleaned up... because, when I first got the otari back from the shop I recorded a couple of guitar tracks (this was before I had received my mixing board)... and they turned out sounding really clean with not a lot of hiss.

So after hearing everyone say that the otari shouldn't be the problem, I went back and listened to those guitar tracks and they do sound a lot cleaner (almost no hiss) because I wasn't going through the board. So.... I think I need to get the board cleaned up. Any advice on that situation? Some of the faders (lower tracks 1-4 or whatever) are scratchy when I move them up and down. Right now I'm just using other mixer channels that sound fine.

The person who sold it to me actually told me it would need to be cleaned, because it had some "low level hum on the outputs". Always maintenance with this old equipment.

One thing that is messed up with the otari deck is that the counter starts getting obnoxiously loud when it starts going fast in rewind or fast forward. Is that common at all? It sucks.
 
Peck said:
Yeah, thanks for the responses again. Beck, I did have the machine calibrated before I started recording with it. It cost me a lot. It seemed close to impossible trying to find someone here in Austin who would even do it. I just didn't want to mess with trying to do it myself, because I knew I might go insane. Recording on tape is new to me, let alone calibrating a machine. So I shelled out some cash.
Is that common at all? It sucks.
Click to expand...

just out of curiosity, how much did it cost for the calibration?
 
Peck said:
That's good to know, because I had nothing to gauge it on.
Click to expand...

Do you know generally what type of callibration the tech did ?
 
You're in AUSTIN, huh?

Where did you take your machine to get calibrated? I took my Otari to Pyramid Audio, and they asked the same price for their job. However, I'm not sure if they knew how to TRULY calibrate it, as they do not deal with multitrack open-reel machines very often. When I took my Otari in, they were impressed with the unit, and he actually told me he hadn't worked on one of those in several years. He said the otari is the largest machines he ever works on, though he does ocassionally work on 2-track machines.

MY POINT IS, I don't exactly trust them with such an advanced machine. So, food for thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top