Sweetbeats' thoughts on CLASP...

miroslav said:
Well I believe you are right about the machine control...
...but I still see that as separate from the actual tape deck’s need to sync-lock to the CLASP in the traditional Master/Slave way.

Since the CLASP system cares not where on the tape its dropping/retrieving the audio...then the tape deck doesn't actually need to chase lock back-n-forth.
They make a point of saying you don't need to keep RW/FW to specific time code points on the tape, it just runs all the way to the end of the tape, and the CLASP system just uses whatever empty piece of tape it finds along the way and records while almost instantly pulling the output off the PB head....and then sample-adjusting/correcting that bit of audio digitally in the DAW to line up with existing digital audio.

So yeah...CLASP may be controlling the transport of the deck...but it’s no more a slave than an outboard processor would be. The audio goes in and comes out. That’s it.

In a way..you are right...the CLASP system is "raping" the tape deck at will...the deck has nothing to say about it other than to “put out”. :D
Click to expand...

Okay. Makes sense...heheh...kinda sick huh?

But my hope is that CLASP is opening the opportunity for people to experience tape the way the folks did in that video cjacek put up...what fun watching folks get blown away by the sound...to have that "no way!" experience and its not the DAW or CLASP but that tape machine in corner...puttin' out.
 
sweetbeats said:
But my hope is that CLASP is opening the opportunity for people to experience tape...
Click to expand...

Yup...it may provide an additional bit of "tape revival"...it's just too bad the price will keep the CLASP system only in the high-end studios where they probably already have a pretty good appreciation of tape and analog! :)

I don’t see many new people running out and buying tape decks…at best they might find a studio that uses the CLASP system…or just go to one that has the traditional tape/analog gear.

But it’s still cool…tape ain’t dead by a long shot!!!
Ten years ago, on another forum during a typical digital VS tape debate where the digital crowd was saying “tape is dead”…I said tape would be around for at least another 20 years if not longer. Now ten years later, and I think I will end up being right about that! :D
 
miroslav said:
Yup...it may provide an additional bit of "tape revival"...it's just too bad the price will keep the CLASP system only in the high-end studios where they probably already have a pretty good appreciation of tape and analog! :)

I don’t see many new people running out and buying tape decks…at best they might find a studio that uses the CLASP system…or just go to one that has the traditional tape/analog gear.

But it’s still cool…tape ain’t dead by a long shot!!!
Ten years ago, on another forum during a typical digital VS tape debate where the digital crowd was saying “tape is dead”…I said tape would be around for at least another 20 years if not longer. Now ten years later, and I think I will end up being right about that! :D
Click to expand...

Hmph...good point about the price point of CLASP and its typical residency in high-end establishments.

Still pleased though that IMO the message folks will likely get in that setting is "if you want the best sound its going to touch tape."
 
If there was no such thing as negative implications of digital recording of music and digital production process of musical recordings, then there would be no such thing as benefits of analog recording of music and analog production process of musical recordings.
As a matter of fact, if there was no such thing as "digital recording" then there would be no such thing as "analog recording", but insted there would be just RECORDING , period.

Negative implications of digital recordings are product of one of the three below or combination of all of the three below processes:
1. Analog-To-Digital conversion process.
2. Digital-To-Analog conversion process.
3. Process of Manipulation of digital data.

The greater "amount" of the above processes applied during the recordion/production - the greater negative implications.

Negative implications of the processes above are irreversible.

Non of the processes above provide benefits of any kind what so ever.
******************

The so-called benefits of analog recording / production only exist in respect to existence of negative implications of digital recording / production.
Therefore, the very essence of such "benefits" simply lies in the absence of the processes 1, 2 and 3, and consequentially, in the absence of the negative implications of digital recording and production.

******************

Therefore, one could conclude the obvious:

A. Analog recording does not have any "benefits" on its own (in respect to "recording, period." , that is).

B. "Analog recording/production benefits" is rather an imaginary notion , a reflection of existence of negative implications of digital recording/production.


Analog recording CAN NOT "fix" (reverse) the negative implications of digital recordings.

There's no such thing as "analogization" of a digital recording.

The whole notion of "analogization" of digital recording in any and all its forms is nonsense.

*******************

There is only ONE and only ONE way to "analogize" digital recording and it is to never record digitally in the first place.
Period.
Case closed.

THEREFORE:
Any "music producer" who claims hearing "negative implimentations" of digital recording has only one and only one option when wishing to take advantage of "benefits" of analog recording, and it is: Eliminate digital recording process, period.

******************
Having said all the above!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S.

1. A signal passing through a "system" can be (and actually always is being) altered.
Any system ( be it a "Reel-Tape Plug" from digi-wigi, a CLAPS for a clap, a literally smoking old amp or even just a cut of wire... - ANY system, that is) can change the "sound".
And then, it's all up to the "listener" to decide.

2. As for "goodness" in "business" and all that crap , To paraphrase Will, who onece said: "Deserve's Got Notin' To Do With It"... heh heh , so I say: "BUSINESS got notin' do do with IT"...



3. Speaking of "deserves". Any "producer" who ended up purchasing and using "analogizing" ("vintagizing" ...heh heh ;) ) plug-ins or a system ala "CLASP" deserves every penny of it. :spank:

4. "Time is Money" - TRUE, as both ARE fiction. ;)
 
I know we've gotten to this point by a "natural progression" in electronic technology, and it is somewhat obvious why analog electronics came first in the progression, but I just wonder how the analog-digital debate would be today if by some technological weirdness, digital recording formats somehow preceeded tape recording...:eek:...and then all of a sudden one day someone came up with the notion of storing analog signals on tape rather than converting them to 1-0-1-1-0-etc...??? :D

Imagine if we had lived with digital audio for like 40-50 years...and then along comes the first tape deck. ;)
 
miroslav said:
...
Imagine if we had lived with digital audio... ...and then along comes the ... tape deck. ;)
Click to expand...
I personally do not need imagining this. Not for as long as 50 years, but in my "music recording/production" life: my first "multitrack recorder" was AKAI DR4d and my "master recorder" was TASCAM DA-30. And then one day (BY ACCIDENT) I "discovered" a tape deck. :drunk:

I was looking for an extra "effect device" and found THE! "way to record music" :cool:

:D
 
Dr ZEE said:
I personally do not need imagining this. Not for as long as 50 years, but in my "music recording/production" life: my first "multitrack recorder" was AKAI DR4d and my "master recorder" was TASCAM DA-30. And then one day (BY ACCIDENT) I "discovered" a tape deck. :drunk:

I was looking for an extra "effect device" and found THE! "way to record music" :cool:

:D
Click to expand...

No kiddin'!

That's tremendous!

I guess that's sorta the case for me, though I had limited experience with the Teac 3340S in the mid 90's and then it was digital for 10 or so years during which my ears grew enough to know something had to be better (besides my equipment) and then I messed around with a 238 and got my answer.

Mike, thanks for the post a couple back. I still feel a little like I'm whoring tape by nudging a positive message for CLASP. Its selfish I guess...in my selfishness I figure anything that increases the "value" (very subjectively) of analog tape recording technology will somehow benefit me. Very selfish indeed AND obtuse because:

  1. Why do I assume tape needs a "friend" like CLASP?
  2. What makes me think its going to have ANY effect on the tape media, machine parts or service markets?

I'm just twitchy that way...nervous. I'm the kind that wants to "future-proof" my machines though that's taming with the realization that I'm overboard on many counts.

Your post makes me think...a lot. Before digital the battle was "tape noise". Along comes digital the "noise killer" and people were very excited...and the whole "random access" thing...drastic changes in recording media management...it was actually very exciting. Even though I was not as interested in recording at the time I can remember the inarguable "benefits" of digital. I zoom to today and I don't mind a little tape noise...I don't mind that the machines are heavy and bulky or just plain huge...I don't mind that media storage is a real issue with which to contend...because in the end it sounds "better" to me; much...much better. BUT...when my ears were opening to music as a young boy and they were tugged by Fleetwood Mac's "Dreams" (for instance) it was just music. And it had been "recorded".

Hard to have polarization with only one element.

That's all. I had more to say but it sort of...got gone...I'm...I'm trying to remember why I started this thread...
 
A tool to add tape coloration to poorly implemented, sterile sounding digital recording rigs. No thanks.

What is the friggin' point of it anyway? Couldn't you do essentially the same thing by tracking to digital then mixing down to tape? Or by doing mix down in the box then running the final mix to tape? Haven't people been doing that for eons now?

I always thought using "tape" sound plugins were stupid. This is just an incredibly expensive version of it.
 
miroslav said:
It's not really a tape "sound" plugin...you're actually tracking to tape and bringing it right into the DAW off the tape deck.
Click to expand...
Correct.
Also, "re-tracking" is a form of tracking, so it can be used as a "plug-in" in its classical sense IF DESIRED ;)
It does not really matter.
What does matter is this:
That system is for a producer whose mind is firmly settled on the following:
1. Digital recording is innocent.
2. Analog tape recording is just a useful effect.
3. There's no life without a DAW.



/ :drunk:
 
miroslav said:
It's not really a tape "sound" plugin...you're actually tracking to tape and bringing it right into the DAW off the tape deck.
Click to expand...
I understand how the system works. I know it's not a software plugin.

You're still using it for coloration like a software plugin though, hence my comment. If you want tape sound but need to crank out projects more quickly, which a DAW affords you, I can see this as an attractive solution. It's a clever bit of kit, I'll admit, but it's still just coloring the sound. I don't see it as being revolutionary.

Besides, who needs it when your album is just going to be compressed to shite anyway for commercial release?

You know how vinyl is really hip nowadays with the fixed gear bicycle riding, scarf wearing, PBR tallboy chugging hipster twats nowadays? They all have it in their heads that vinyl just sounds better but they'd never be able to tell you why they think so. On top of it, they're all using poorly set up old $5 thrift store turntables or even worse, one of those $100 USB affairs. Ick. Yet they think they're hearing great sound! In reality they've probably never heard a decent audio system in their lives. It's a gimmick. A cheap CD player sounds better than a poorly set up turntable with speed issues, a worn stylus, and noisy or dead sounding vinyl. But the kids want records.

Many (most) musicians aren't all that savvy when it comes to audio, and just what makes for a great sounding recording. I can see this magic little box making a lot of money for studios where their clients want tape (for whatever reason) but can't afford the expense. Fact of the matter is, well done digital recording sounds absolutely gorgeous, as does well done tape. Neither one necessarily sounds better than the other though, which is why I find all this business silly.

Hey, I figure if you want tape then record to tape. Otherwise track to hard drive. I like both.
 
TheGuitarMan said:
Besides, who needs it when your album is just going to be compressed to shite anyway for commercial release?
Click to expand...

And there you have one of the major bane's of production today IMO. And I feel it is due in large part to the 0dBfs limitations of the digital format. All of my diital productions sound much better when I can raise the threshhold on the mastering compressor (a plugin, okay?) and let the music breathe, and then just use the volume knob to turn it up. I'll openly admit this is due in (large?) part to my inexperience using the technology appropriately, but trying to get masters to compete on a nominal spl level with other stuff is just aggravating and I guess part of why I don't care much if what I'm doing is accepted by the masses. It sounds better. Is it just silly that stuff is getting squashed so...so...why is it getting squashed anyway??? Oh yeah...to save me the effort of having to reach up and turn up the stereo. :rolleyes:

I listen to Toto's "Toto IV". Early digital production IIRC and it was always "quieter" than my pther CD's, so I'd have to turn it up, but I always would because I wanted to hear it. Very nice. Much more to it than leaving more breathing room of course...so much talent on the artist side and production and engineering side and I'm sure lovely equipment to match the talent. Marc Johnson's "Bass Desires" is another one that is VERY quiet but sounds fantastic!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top