Recording Analog & mixing to Digital. . . ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter studiodrum
  • Start date Start date
S

studiodrum

New member
I was wondering if it would be possible to record 8 tracks on a Tascam 38, . .and then physically bring the 38 to a digital studio and have them upload all 8 tracks separately into Pro-Tools, or whatever popular software they are using today, . . . :rolleyes:

The idea is to record on analog, and mix on a digital system, . . .will that work, . and are they any problems that I should be aware of that I might run into, . .?


Also, will the 38 need to be re-calibrated, if I put it my my car and transport it to the studio?
 
studiodrum said:
I was wondering if it would be possible to record 8 tracks on a Tascam 38, . .and then physically bring the 38 to a digital studio and have them upload all 8 tracks separately into Pro-Tools, or whatever popular software they are using today, . . . :rolleyes:

The idea is to record on analog, and mix on a digital system, . . .will that work, . and are they any problems that I should be aware of that I might run into, . .?


Also, will the 38 need to be re-calibrated, if I put it my my car and transport it to the studio?
Click to expand...
It's done all the time.
 
No problemo.

Tape outs to record in on whatever DAW you want to use. Just make sure you're using a DAW with halfway-decent analog-digital converters.

-callie-
 
As others have said there's no problem with this at all. I had stuff transferred from an MSR16 into ProTools and am editing/mixing in Audition - it sounds great.
 
One of the most well-regarded studios in Austin, TX, called Cedar Creek Recording Studios, does this all the time.

They track at 30 IPS on a Studer 2" 24 track, and slam the hell outta the tape to get those really nice saturation effects. They do all overdubs and tracking in the analog realm, then they dump everything to Nuendo, and mix in the box.

Thousands of really stinkin' good recordings have come out of that place.

I should also mention that they have a one-of-a-kind 1973 neve console. But that's besides the point ;-)

-callie-
 
What if you want to employ this method but you are going to need well more than 8 tracks (and you've only got an 8 track machine). Would your best bet be to mix the first 8 tracks digitally and then bounce them back to the recorder, or possibly to sync the recorder to the computer and line up multiple sets of tracks later? Or, would you lose much of the analog effect by only recording the first 8 tracks on the reel to reel and doing the remaining overdubs on protools say? And what if those first 8 tracks are all drums? I realize there is probably no 'best' answer, but I was curious as to the various opinions/approaches. BTW, I'm talking about a Tascam 48 and a protools setup.

Thanks
 
Well, you could dumpt the initial 8 to the DAW then do a 'scratch mix' back to one track (mono) and stripe another, so you would have 6 tracks, then could possibly record over the scratch track too for seven, then sync to the DAW and dump those seven tracks, and repeat as needed.
 
pbergo said:
Well, you could dumpt the initial 8 to the DAW then do a 'scratch mix' back to one track (mono) and stripe another, so you would have 6 tracks, then could possibly record over the scratch track too for seven, then sync to the DAW and dump those seven tracks, and repeat as needed.
Click to expand...

This is a subject that interests me also. What do you mean by "stripe another?" If I understand your post, I had considered a method such as this, but isn't there a problem of varying playback speed of the tape recorder?Also, how are you gonna sych the second batch of tape-recorder tracks with the initial batch you've dumped to your DAW? Do you see what I'm saying?
 
Last edited:
What about DBX. . .???

Thanks for the comments guys!
:rolleyes:
So, if you were to record 8 tracks with either an Tascam 80-8, or 38, . .and then upload the 8 tracks into a Pro-Tools, . .Would you recomemd recording using dbx, . .or would it be better to record withput dbx since you are going to clean it up in pro-tools anyway???
 
studiodrum said:
Thanks for the comments guys!
:rolleyes:
So, if you were to record 8 tracks with either an Tascam 80-8, or 38, . .and then upload the 8 tracks into a Pro-Tools, . .Would you recomemd recording using dbx, . .or would it be better to record withput dbx since you are going to clean it up in pro-tools anyway???
Click to expand...

dbx is a personal issue so you'll have to see what sounds better to you. Generally, you want to get the best sound coming out (from your analog recorder) and into your computer. You really don't want to butcher the original sound too much so I'd stay away from any noise reduction plugin program in pro-tools, if this is what you meant by "cleaning it up".
 
pbergo said:
Well, you could dumpt the initial 8 to the DAW then do a 'scratch mix' back to one track (mono) and stripe another, so you would have 6 tracks, then could possibly record over the scratch track too for seven, then sync to the DAW and dump those seven tracks, and repeat as needed.
Click to expand...

Could someone please explain this to me? And, is he right?
 
You need a smpte time code generator and converter. You will record the time code on an open track, disable any NR on that track. When you play back, you send the code from the track (usually the last track on the machine) out to the converter/controller. This sends a control message to your DAW. The DAW follows these commands. The timing of the slave (DAW) is dicatated by the code, so it should follow any fluctuations in the speed of the tape.
I don't know if I worded this well, but that's it in a nutshell.
 
Hey, so am I right in guessing that for someone who wants to mix digital but track to tape, you don't need a reel-to-reel with a lot of tracks. I.E. You can mix 24 tracked-to-tape tracks digitally even if you only have a 4 track tape recorder. Do you understand my question
 
Yes, and you are correct.

However, it would be easier and less painstaking with more analog tracks.

Another 'bastard' way of doing it is if you get enough tracks recorded to know what you want, 8 should do it depending on what you record, then you can mix that down to whatever, track r2r, DAW, and then record that back in to 2 tracks of your 8 track (stereo) and have 6 tracks to work with.

You lose some editability of the original tracks, so I would at least save that tape and do the new tracking to new tracks if you do this.

Generally, the loss of edit capabilities of the original tracks is no big deal since it will probably be rythm section that was good enough (hopefully) to keep, and shouldn't require editing.

My personal belief is that a good rythm track that doesn't need digital trickery should always be the goal anyway.
 
laodobs said:
Or, would you lose much of the analog effect by only recording the first 8 tracks on the reel to reel and doing the remaining overdubs on protools say? And what if those first 8 tracks are all drums? I realize there is probably no 'best' answer, but I was curious as to the various opinions/approaches. BTW, I'm talking about a Tascam 48 and a protools setup.

Thanks
Click to expand...


You can record 7 tracks on your tape machine (say the drums) and use your computer for the scratch tracks. Then mix analog and bounce those tracks to the on the remaining 8th track Make sure the mix is perfect because you are going to record over tracks 1-7 Now you have 7 open tracks for guitars, vox, ect... There are many varoius ways of doing this depending on what kind of equiptment you use.
 
I think you guys may be missing the point....

You track to analog, then import and store those tracks to a digital storage medium. There is no advantage at that point to leaving them in analog storage because you will end up bringing them into digital to mix anyways.

Also, unless I am mistaken (please correct me), the reason you would track analog in the first place is for tape saturation. Once tracked, your objective is obtained, and you can bring it in and store digitally. So why bother playing games bouncing tracks, which is one of the major drawbacks of anolog anyways?

The only other reason I can think of is to take advantage od analog summing, but that's another step altogether that takes place after the ITB mix.
 
There are a lot of detailed threads around on various procedures. I've done a bunch of this over the years with and without synchronizers.

One easy procedure is to create your first analog tracks, preferably with a beat or drums also there, dump to daw, submix those 8 tracks back out of the daw in a rough mono or stereo mix onto two tracks of the analog 8-16-24 track and then turn off the daw. Use that rough mix that's now on the analog recorder to overdub more stuff to...then dump just those new analog tracks (not the rough reference mix) back into Protools. Erase the analog tracks (but not the one or two ref mix tracks)..and overdub some more.

You end up with a huge number of "analog" tracks sitting on Protools..that perhaps started life on just a little four track or 8 track....or stereo tape recorder.

Once all the random tracks are in Protools, they can be manually nudged around to get them in sync with each other and you end up with your finished project.

There's one place out here in Los Angeles that specifically deals with these kinds of Tascam transfers for people who don't want to haul their tape recorders all over the planet. You send the tape(s), they do the transfer to whatever digital format you need, and then send the tape and data dvd of the individual tracks....or even a hard drive bay with the tracks...back to you via fed ex. I guess a lot of their business comes from people who have a garage full of tapes but have long since gotten rid of their machines.

You could walk into a studio with your recorder and tape and then dump to Protools (or whatever they have)....but then if you didn't want the studio to have possession of your digital transfers, you'd either have to pay them to give you a dvd or drive of the data...plus they probably charge more for the transfer time than some of these independent places that specifically do these transfers.

Another cool thing they do here at the place in L.A is take tracks that started as digital (people send them in on dvd or upload via ftp) ....run them through analog machines..and then supply the customer with a new set of "analogued" individual tracks on data dvd, hard drive, or back vit ftp. I've heard some of that stuff and it's pretty cool for people with no access to tape.
 
pbergo said:
Because he wants to do more analog tracks than 8.
Click to expand...
Please reread my post. You can hoave as many analog tracks as you have digital tracks in your DAW. I'm asking, what is the advantage of leaving those tracks on tape once they've been tracked?
 
BRDTS said:
There are a lot of detailed threads around on various procedures. I've done a bunch of this over the years with and without synchronizers.

One easy procedure is to create your first analog tracks, preferably with a beat or drums also there, dump to daw, submix those 8 tracks back out of the daw in a rough mono or stereo mix onto two tracks of the analog 8-16-24 track and then turn off the daw. Use that rough mix that's now on the analog recorder to overdub more stuff to...then dump just those new analog tracks (not the rough reference mix) back into Protools. Erase the analog tracks (but not the one or two ref mix tracks)..and overdub some more.
tracks are in Protools, they can be manually nudged around to get them in sync with each other and you end up with your finished project. do these transfers QUOTE].

The convenience of this method appeals to me, but how well does it work. I mean won't you have timing issues when you record your digital mix back since the analog recording will vary in speed from the digital AND when you play back the new batch of tracks since their speed will vary not only from the digital mix but from the original batch of analog tracks you've dumped to digital??
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top