Mixing & Mastering a 100% analog session to vinyl

  • Thread starter Thread starter vinyvamos
  • Start date Start date
So why didnt you tell us from the outset that you knew "most vinyl cutting studios have a digital delay"? Most of us including myself didnt know that until some hours ago.

Why didnt you tell us straight that you were wanting to bypass that digital delay that apparently the vast majority of vinyl ME's use?

It might have saved a lot of confusion here.

I couldnt work out why you were apparently wanting to do the ME's job for him. Did the ME tell you that if you wanted an all analog chain you would have to do the vinyl mastering yourself and then take your chances on his cut. Is that what was going on?


All the best with your project.

Tim
 
Last edited:
Victory Pete said:
The beauty of our Analog Machines is they are never obsolete in function. I think they get better, at least I appreciate them more now than when I bought them new.
VP
Click to expand...

The biggest hurdle IMO, is that we cannot ignore the fact that electronics can degrade with time (caps & such). Parts can be machined, and the discrete components will probably be available for a long time, but the intensive labor can be a challenge.

At what point do you say the cost and labor involved with keeping an old machine running outweighs the benefit? How will that equation be affected if or when higher-resolution digital becomes the norm instead of loss-y formats like MP3 and 44.1?

I'm torn right now between tape and using high-end tube/transformer preamps and high-end mics into high-res digital. Keep it away from plug-ins, use outboard when I can. It sounds great until I have to convert to 44.1/16 or MP3.

I love tape, don't get me wrong. But it's getting tougher for it to compete sometimes.
 
I have not had to recap any of my Tascams yet. I am not looking forward to it. I look at the maintenance as a "Necassary Evil"!

VP
 
The thing is, though, that at least these machines are serviceable. They're not like the stuff made today, where your only choice when it goes belly up is to upgrade or replace it.
 
That's not really a true picture of the situation though--there is no reason that gear cannot be made fully serviceable, and a lot of pro audio gear still is. One factor is the cost involved--if you end up having to double the price of a bit of kit to make it serviceable, then you haven't saved the customer any money over replacement. The next factor is the cost of bench time--DIYers may value that at zero, but a manufacturer can't. So they are likely to simply replace a circuit assembly because skilled SMT rework will cost them $80/hour. Maybe they ship a replacement and send your unit overseas for cheaper techs and then sell as refurbished if it's a valuable unit.

The other problem is people want really small stuff, and because small is possible that demand will be filled. 40 years ago you just couldn't make gear very small, so it was big and easy to service. That isn't what people want anymore (with the exception of guitarists).

When you get into stuff like digital ICs, yeah they do go obsolete but at a slower pace than you'd think--you can still get nearly all ICs made in the last 10 years, and plenty of converter chips that old are either still in production or have pin-compatible replacements. If we are talking MCUs then we have a different problem; you can still get a replacement but you're going to need to program it, which you probably can't do without being the manufacturer.

But we love MCUs because they can greatly simplify controls, which is not only more functional but smaller and cheaper than big electromechanicals.

BTW try finding an analog BBD . . . I think Behringer started making them again, but otherwise they are getting very rare and expensive.
 
Jon Stoppable said:
That's not really a true picture of the situation though--there is no reason that gear cannot be made fully serviceable
Click to expand...

But there is a reason, and you just defined it eloquently. It's not cost-effective anymore for companies to do that with the current state of technology. That's as valid a reason as any. The state of technology can't be ignored when looking at what products are being produced and why.
 
But that's because the technology is *less expensive* than the old-style serviceable gear. If I can give you four widgets for what one used to cost, then you get three spares for the same price and you don't even have to know how to solder. It has less to do with cost than the price the consumer is willing to pay. It's *cheaper* to do through-hole all-discrete work than it used to be, but it's still much cheaper to use SMT and ICs (or even fully discrete SMT), so that's what people are willing to pay for.

The technology also makes all kinds of things possible that used to be impossible. Case in point, a guy who is ordering one of my boxes (about the size of a smartphone, a little thicker) said he ran a repair shop and could do repair so long as it wasn't surface mount or multilayer PCB. Of course the device in question has a four layer PCB and about 200 surface mount parts inside with a density such that they aren't labeled. I mean I can service that, I solder the things by hand even though that's usually done by pick & place machines and ovens these days.

Could I make a version that people could service who can't do SMT rework? Sure, but it would be 60 in^3 rather than 6 in^3, and it would cost probably twice as much because the parts are more expensive and they take longer to assemble. They generate more waste too. And when you get into high speed circuits, they don't work as well.

Actually I had a prospective competitor at one point, and that was what he did: all thru-hole, big PCB with lots of space, all components labeled. His box was about 60 in^3; he was going to charge about 2.5 times what I do, until he realized that assembly was a giant pain and not enough money for the work so he would have to go to about four times what I charge. He already had another much more profitable niche, so he dropped the product.
 
Jon Stoppable said:
But that's because the technology is *less expensive* than the old-style serviceable gear. If I can give you four widgets for what one used to cost, then you get three spares for the same price and you don't even have to know how to solder. It has less to do with cost than the price the consumer is willing to pay. It's *cheaper* to do through-hole all-discrete work than it used to be, but it's still much cheaper to use SMT and ICs (or even fully discrete SMT), so that's what people are willing to pay for.

The technology also makes all kinds of things possible that used to be impossible. Case in point, a guy who is ordering one of my boxes (about the size of a smartphone, a little thicker) said he ran a repair shop and could do repair so long as it wasn't surface mount or multilayer PCB. Of course the device in question has a four layer PCB and about 200 surface mount parts inside with a density such that they aren't labeled. I mean I can service that, I solder the things by hand even though that's usually done by pick & place machines and ovens these days.

Could I make a version that people could service who can't do SMT rework? Sure, but it would be 60 in^3 rather than 6 in^3, and it would cost probably twice as much because the parts are more expensive and they take longer to assemble. They generate more waste too. And when you get into high speed circuits, they don't work as well.

Actually I had a prospective competitor at one point, and that was what he did: all thru-hole, big PCB with lots of space, all components labeled. His box was about 60 in^3; he was going to charge about 2.5 times what I do, until he realized that assembly was a giant pain and not enough money for the work so he would have to go to about four times what I charge. He already had another much more profitable niche, so he dropped the product.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying; I think you're missing my point.

You said (in effect) that there's no reason that machines couldn't be made today to be serviceable the way they once were.

And I'm saying yes there is a reason, and it's just like you said: because it's much cheaper and faster for them to do it the way they do it today. That is the reason. And because of that, big, easily-serviceable (relatively speaking) machines like our beloved tape machines will (I'm 99.9% certain) never be made in widespread distribution ever again. Because it's not profitable for them to do so anymore.

It's the same reason that, although I always record analog when doing my own songs, I always record digitally when I'm recording "on the clock" (i.e., recording audio for a guitar instructional book I've written or a demo for someone else's song or whatever) because I simply can't stay competitive if I don't. Digital is just too cheap and too easy, and I can't afford not to use it in those situations. I wouldn't be able to support my family doing this if I didn't.
 
Yes, but manufacturers don't make decisions on profitability really, consumers do.

Look, let's say that Tascam decided, just for fun, to reissue the 424mkII (because that just happens to be the model I dissected). Let's further say they decide to manufacture two versions. The first is all-original, including the SIP opamps that are now discontinued, so you have to either source NOS or use adaptors. The second is redesigned to use the same components but all in SMT versions.

The customer has a choice of paying $600 for the original thru-hole that they can service themselves or $400 for the SMT version. Profit for the manufacturer is the same either way.

Which do you think is going to sell?


I personally think that if people can't do basic SMT rework--I ain't talking BGA, QFN stuff; I mean just basic capacitors, resistors, opamps, etc.--then they can't solder. You don't need a hot air rework station to do the simple stuff. I don't have one; I use braid. Works fine. Doesn't hurt that the PCBs I get are pretty sturdy so it's very hard to lift pads and traces.
 
Jon Stoppable said:
The customer has a choice of paying $600 for the original thru-hole that they can service themselves or $400 for the SMT version. Profit for the manufacturer is the same either way.

Which do you think is going to sell?
Click to expand...

Exactly. And if the $600 models are not going to sell, why would the company waste their resources bothering to manufacture them? They wouldn't be able to stay competitive if they were manufacturing products that didn't sell. That's my whole point.
 
I think Reel to Reels will be made again someday, regardless of cost, quality or performance.

VP
 
Victory Pete said:
I think Reel to Reels will be made again someday, regardless of cost, quality or performance.

VP
Click to expand...

They may very well be, but I know I won't be able to afford them anytime soon.

Evidently, Otari is making the MX-5050 BIII half track machine still. But I think I heard someone say they inquired on the price, and it was near the $5K mark.

http://www.otari.com/product/recorder/mx5050/index.html

I bought one of those used about 10 years ago for about $250 back in my bachelor days---and it worked well too! I don't have it anymore, but I sure wish I did. $250 was much easier to part with back then when I had a roommate and my rent and all bills combined were about $550 monthly. :)
 
Last edited:
Victory Pete said:
I think Reel to Reels will be made again someday, regardless of cost, quality or performance.
Click to expand...

As much as I would like to see that...I honestly think that's just a pipe dream.

While making a RR deck isn't absolute rocket science...there are still certain technologies, craftsmanship/experience and knowledge that are needed...and most of those guys are out of it, retired or dead. Plus, making a few machines is pointless, and would not be worth anyone's time or investment...so why would anyone bother to dive into that venture...
...and the need to make large quantities doesn't exist.

There are some guys modifying and cobbling stuff from existing decks...thgouh that's at the higher-end, where there are customers willing to still drop serious $$$ on a super modified deck....but someone making brand new decks, starting up a completely new production line....mmmmmm....that's a long shot, IMO.

I would be pleasantly surprised though...so I hope you end up being right! :)
 
miroslav said:
As much as I would like to see that...I honestly think that's just a pipe dream.

While making a RR deck isn't absolute rocket science...there are still certain technologies, craftsmanship/experience and knowledge that are needed...and most of those guys are out of it, retired or dead. Plus, making a few machines is pointless, and would not be worth anyone's time or investment...so why would anyone bother to dive into that venture...
...and the need to make large quantities doesn't exist.

There are some guys modifying and cobbling stuff from existing decks...thgouh that's at the higher-end, where there are customers willing to still drop serious $$$ on a super modified deck....but someone making brand new decks, starting up a completely new production line....mmmmmm....that's a long shot, IMO.

I would be pleasantly surprised though...so I hope you end up being right! :)
Click to expand...

They won't likely be made again. The original multi-tracks would have to get to the $10,000+ level on the used market for such a thing to even be considered. Home recording has put the 'studio business' virtually out of business, which means there is no market for new 'studio quality' decks.

Home recordists rarely owned 'Pro' recording gear in the '60s-'70s. Studios leased large decks and paid them off as they made income from clients. They cost more than a car or a house. This industry was nothing like it is today.

It wasn't until the Teac stuff came around that regular folks could even think about mutli-track recording.

Some food for thought:

Scully 280 2-track cost, 1970: $2,890.00
$2,890.00 in today's dollars (adjusted for inflation): $16,043.37

Scully 284 8-track cost, 1970: $12,450.00
$12,500.00 in today's dollars (adjusted for inflation): $69,391.75

Scully 288 16-track cost, 1970: $24,950.00
$24,950.00 in today's dollars (adjusted for inflation): $138,505.94

--

Teac 80-8 8-track cost, 1977: $3,500.00
$3,500 in today's dollars (adjusted for inflation): $12,444.39

I could potentially see something like a Chinese-made 388-type deck if the demand is high enough ... but the days of the big boys are over.
 
This has been discussed at length, but I'll throw another US$0.02 at it, or maybe a 2 eurocent coin, (Found one of those laying around the other day...)

There isn't that much circuitry really in a tape deck, that couldn't be put on smt/ic/vsli etc. (Yeah ok but there aren't any discrete opamps in my MX5050BII-2 either...) DIY repair, no, "black box" circuit board change sure thing. The problem is there is way more mechanical thingamajiggers. That is where you really can't cut too much cost, a motor is still a motor, a head is still a head, and those mechanical parts have a finite lifespan.

I'm not sure we'll see new manufacture, but I am fairly certain that necessary spare parts will be manufactured. An entire MSR-16 assembly line, not likel any time soon, however, it isn't outside the realm of possibility for a small company to manufacture replacement heads, rollers, etc, nor is it the same overall tooling cost to make one thing as opposed to a complete unit. After that, maybe, as manufacturing costs continue to decline with automation etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top