Tascam 58-OB Story...

[pianodano]

Danny,

Awesome, awesome post. I get it now!

The historical bits are extremely valuable and really, really interesting. Its one of the best parts of these forums.

While my ES-50/51 is a bit antiquated (by virtue of the fact that it does not speak MIDI), I'm really impressed so far with how solid it seems to operate. In other words, the problems that I'm having are not related to a flaky synchronizer, its my setup and lack of knowledge at this point with the gear. I know the ES-50/51 was not built by Tascam, but outsourced. I have no idea who built it, but if Tascam was invested in synchronizer technology, I wouldn't be suprised if they were choosy about their suppliers. The innards of the ES-50 are very impressive. The quality of the PCB's and associated components are a cut above.

I'll keep at it. Your time in explaining things the way you have done is helping me keep my perspective and drive to stick with it.

Your inadvertant reminder to me about the link between Avid and Digidesign explains why their systems provide for successful DAW slave environments.

Grrreat stuff.

Danny,

It is an issue.

You might recall some of our discussion from a year ago or so over at the Tascam Forum that, while you are sending MTC over (duh) MIDI to your MicroLynx to which it is locking your atr via SMPTE from the MS-16, I am sending SMPTE (recorded to a track in the DAW) from the PC over audio, to which the ES-50 is synchronizing the SMPTE from the 58. I think back when we were discussing this you figured it should work, but whether or not it would be frame accurate you didn't know. My tests so far show that I can get the 58 to phase-lock to the DAW with a variance of less than a frame (i.e. about 3 or 4 subframe accuracy over a 15 minute run), and it isn't drifting, just varying over that range.

Now that I've figured out how to jam and restart the sync generator in the ES-50 I *should* be able to record phase identical stripes in the DAW and on the 58 and chase-lock them with the same accuracy. Don't know yet how audio reproduction will sound, and I still need to work through the mechanical issues (58 does a crazy scrub-dance when I command it to locate to different offsets...). I think I'm going to have to try and manually calibrate the settings for the 58 in the ES-50 since the auto-calibration procedure requires two atr's to be connected. It errors out because only the 58 is attached. Once I build my MASTER I/F cable to connect my 48 with the ES-50 in addition to the 58, then I should be able to do a proper auto calibrate procedure, note the settings and then manually set the ES-50 for the 58 when I'm locking the 58 to the DAW.

Sorry...more than you wanted to know...did I answer your question?

I realize I could get a simple SMPTE to MTC converter, but I wanted to see if I could get it to work in a SMPTE exclusive environment first.

Ok. If you decide to eliminate the potential hassles of recording and using a dedicated smpte audio track on the daw, I believe a Midiman Syncman will, 1: accept the input of MTC from any available midi port from the DAW. 2: Automatically pass this thru as translated smpte in 29.97 or whatever frame rate you use. 3: always calculate the correct offset wherever you happen to be on the grid in the DAW.

You can find a Syncman on Ebay for cheap. I just read thru the manual of my Midiman Syncman (PLUS) which I have had many years, and I am fairly confident it will work in your situation.

That MTC to smpte time code it outputs would then be just plugged into the Synchronizer as the MASTER machine. The Synchronizer, when the machines are grouped, should dutifully follow along to this TC and when you stop the DAW, it should stop the ATR imediately AND if you rewind the DAW, always (THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT), hit transport play (spacebar in Sonar, don't remember what it is in Cubase) for a split second and then hit stop to send the new TC position to the synchronizer . I doubt if Cubase (Sonar sure doesn't) outputs MTC on rewind. Sonar only spits out MTC when the transport is running, if you catch my drift.

Always allow at least 4 or 5 measures at the head of the song to allow subframe lock. You should see, optimally, a 0 subframe error in a measure or 2 but upon start you may see it pull the machine down from say 20 or more subframes over a couple of measures, to 0 error. That's not to say that you can't start playing anywhere in the song, You surely can. You will just need to allow a bit of preroll to resolve and lock the machine. Don't confuse that with preroll in the synchronizer setup. I mean in this case preroll as in if you want to start a punch recording on measure 30 in the DAW while the ATR is locked to it, it would be a good idea to start the daw at maybe measure 25 or 26. Don't forget to develop the habit of ALWAYS HITTING PLAY for a split second and then HIT STOP whenever you rewind the DAW.

BTW, I don't think there is anything at all wrong with your synchronizer choice. Are you sure it doesn't alreay have the 58 transport stored as one of maybe a 100 other machine transport options ?

Keep me posted.

Danny

 

[Beck]

Beck, I agree with you as far is I am concerned. I think my mind is centered on digital and my heart is centered on analog, and yet as my mind and heart are inseparably interdependent, so I see the analog and digital worlds. I just know that everything is going to end up in the DAW. That's where my mastering tools are and such, and the clock in my Digimax FS is more accurate than the capstan motor on the 58...splitting hairs.

By all means experiment with what you have for now, because it's a great learning experience.

If you want to switch roles at some point in the future with the ATR being the master, all you need is a used JL Cooper PPS-2 off of ebay ($25.00 $50.00) and you're done.

Of course your DAW hardware and software must be able to follow MTC as one of its external sync options. Cubase has plenty of options, I’m sure.

The most important bit of info to remember from my previous post that sums up my perspective is this:

One can technically sync either way with the right equipment, but in my experience using the ATR as the master is easier, less expensive, more reliable, provides better system response and causes less wear and tear to the ATR heads and transport. That last point can’t be over emphasized since these days we should treating our ATRs with lots of TLC.

Any DAW is more accurate timing wise and more responsive to changes than an ATR in a synchronized system, but that’s exactly why it fits better as slave than master. It compensates at the speed of light compared to the ATR transport, which has momentum from motors and such to contend with.

Even the least expensive SMPTE/MTC boxes have error correction to deal with things like tape dropout. Normal flutter and speed variation on the ATR aren’t really issues unless it’s terribly out of spec and needs servicing. The problems with things like pitch variation and loss of sync are on the digital side – how well your DAW deals with MTC. But it would have the same problems if receiving MTC from a digital system.

Another bit of info that may come in handy is that the DAW doesn’t have to be the sync master for the ATR transport to be controlled via MMC from the DAW. They are separate systems. I’m not familiar with you’re system, but broadly speaking you can engage PLAY on an ATR from a DAW or a remote via MMC, and the SMPTE track on the ATR will in turn control the DAW via MTC. This is how my studio works.

Man, we're going to need a concordance fro this thread.

 

[sweetbeats]

cjacek,

The above excerpt was taken from the excellent article in Electronic Musician by Eddie Ciletti, "Joining the reel world". Here's the original link [a great and informative read]:
http://emusician.com/daw/emusic_join...rld/index.html

I read this whole article a couple days ago...I recommend it to anyone. It is a good primer/refresher, and it is a pretty quick read. Good for the reference library.

Thanks, cjacek!

 

[pianodano]

Sweetbeats,

After reading this entire thread again, I gather some of the guys here must have absolutely awesome DAWs that are capable of processing far beyond anything I have ever seen. I would love to see a couple of those systems in operation.

Please understand that I have only given you my experience in locking together systems that result in trouble free operation here and places I have worked. I have nothing to gain whichever way you choose to accomplish your tasks.

After discussing so much with you in the past and sensing just how through and meticulious you are, in my estimation, I would very much like to ask you to do the following:

If you have a native DAW, open a new project and record 8 or 10 audio tracks. Insert a couple busses. Insert some La-2a compressors on some tracks and 4 or 5 other plugs of whatever variety you choose. Maybe a add a reverb or 2 on some busses. If available, insert a couple of instances of EWQLSO filled with 8 instuments each and get those 16 or so midi tracks going to a couple audio tracks. If you have a hardware midi keyboard connected via USB, please use that for a couple of midi tracks also. Also, if you have it, insert a instance or 2 of RealGuitar using maybe the stereo huitar samples. To see if things really get intersting, open up BFD drums if you have it and record some drum tracks on the DAW. Output your audio tracks and busses to as many sound card outputs as you have available. Try to get the CPU loaded to around 75%.

Every plug and soft synth above has reported it's expected latency to your DAW which it must use and juggle to keep everything in sync.

Be sure to record all of the above on the DAW alone. Keep the midi tracks as midi. Don't render or freeze them. Then transfer the drums to tape.

Then set your your DAW up to chase tape as a slave and listen for the accuracy of all component parts. I'll be on pins and needles until you let us know the results of this setup.

Thanks,

Danny

 

[sweetbeats]

Danny, I realize you are completely serious about your request for me to try it out both ways, but I use, and have very limited virtual instruments available to me...this goes for MIDI utilization as well. I'm about 90-plus percent audio.

I do have a project with a couple virtual instruments and a couple dozen audio tracks...

But even at that I don't have the ability to slave the DAW at this time since the ES-50 doesn't do MTC. I'd have to get one of those units about which you and Beck spoke above...

 

[cjacek]

I read this whole article a couple days ago...I recommend it to anyone. It is a good primer/refresher, and it is a pretty quick read. Good for the reference library.

I liken it a bit to 'cliffsnotes', a good, clear, not too lengthy but a pretty thorough explanation on the subject.

Say, Cory, was it difficult to pull those audio cards out, from your 58? Is it the same on the 48?

Thanks.

----

 

[sweetbeats]

cjacek,

The cards weren't too hard to get out of my 58. I did have to grip them pretty firmly and sort of lever the heels of my hands on the face of the deck the first time, but that was as much to ensure I was pulling straight as it was for power. They pull in and out nicely now that I've had them in and out a couple times and treated the connectors with deoxit. They seat with a nice firm solid detent now.

The 48 I don't know...I haven't pulled them yet. I'm going to be in the studio tonight to try and make some more headway on the 58 sync issue, and I'd be happy to check the 48 and report back if you'd like. Let me know.

The 58 is heaps-a-lot easier to get to the cards. Maybe you already know this...the 48 cards pull from the bottom, but you've got to pull a bunch of the sheet metal off to get to them. There's just an access plate to pull to get to the trimmers, but to actually pull the cards you have to pull a lot of the shell off.

Hey, thanks for posting that article up. I think it should be a sticky. Of course there are minor differences in what the procedures are between my 58 manual and the article, but the article does stress that a manual is mandatory if you're going to keep the deck. Its a great article.

I'm going to add a couple links I've referred to as well...hopefully they are pertinent.

 

[Beck]

If you have a native DAW, open a new project and record 8 or 10 audio tracks. Insert a couple busses. Insert some La-2a compressors on some tracks and 4 or 5 other plugs of whatever variety you choose. Maybe a add a reverb or 2 on some busses. If available, insert a couple of instances of EWQLSO filled with 8 instuments each and get those 16 or so midi tracks going to a couple audio tracks. If you have a hardware midi keyboard connected via USB, please use that for a couple of midi tracks also. Also, if you have it, insert a instance or 2 of RealGuitar using maybe the stereo huitar samples. To see if things really get intersting, open up BFD drums if you have it and record some drum tracks on the DAW. Output your audio tracks and busses to as many sound card outputs as you have available. Try to get the CPU loaded to around 75%.

Yikes! I think that would fall under DAW abuse. Maybe illegal in several states... at least Massachusetts for sure.

We’ve discussed things like this in threads addressing the limitations of the digital audio workstation, or how to use digital intelligently (if you must use it). Despite manufacturer claims and/or user practices, there’s a limit to what features one can use simultaneously without degrading performance, using sync or not.

In Windows, with the processor at 75% I believe all that is required to exceed system resources is to accidentally bump the mouse.

 

[cjacek]

cjacek,

The cards weren't too hard to get out of my 58. I did have to grip them pretty firmly and sort of lever the heels of my hands on the face of the deck the first time, but that was as much to ensure I was pulling straight as it was for power. They pull in and out nicely now that I've had them in and out a couple times and treated the connectors with deoxit. They seat with a nice firm solid detent now.

The 48 I don't know...I haven't pulled them yet. I'm going to be in the studio tonight to try and make some more headway on the 58 sync issue, and I'd be happy to check the 48 and report back if you'd like. Let me know.

The 58 is heaps-a-lot easier to get to the cards. Maybe you already know this...the 48 cards pull from the bottom, but you've got to pull a bunch of the sheet metal off to get to them. There's just an access plate to pull to get to the trimmers, but to actually pull the cards you have to pull a lot of the shell off.

Hey, thanks for posting that article up. I think it should be a sticky. Of course there are minor differences in what the procedures are between my 58 manual and the article, but the article does stress that a manual is mandatory if you're going to keep the deck. Its a great article.

I'm going to add a couple links I've referred to as well...hopefully they are pertinent.

Hey, thanks for letting me know about the 58 cards. No worries about the 48 tho. If you ever get it open or service the cards then please feel free to post. All in due time... but please do not rush as there is no need.

Sorry to have you potentially repeat it but what exactly was made better by the servicing of the cards?

Yeah, while that article from EM surely could have been even more exhaustive, information wise, I do think it serves as a nice baseline. We'll surely 'upgrade' it with followups, links etc....

-----

 

[pianodano]

Yikes! I think that would fall under DAW abuse. Maybe illegal in several states... at least Massachusetts for sure.

We’ve discussed things like this in threads addressing the limitations of the digital audio workstation, or how to use digital intelligently (if you must use it). Despite manufacturer claims and/or user practices, there’s a limit to what features one can use simultaneously without degrading performance, using sync or not.

In Windows, with the processor at 75% I believe all that is required to exceed system resources is to accidentally bump the mouse.

Yes Beck. I am fully aware of the limitations. I gave the above as an example so that Sweetbeats could see his system absolutely fall apart when trying to chase tape but a properly tweaked system would have no problem as master. I use a measely old P4 and it would have no problem at all in the above scenario EXCEPT if I configure it as a slave. And that is precisely why I myself don't run my system chasing and I would never under any conditions except Protools HD, recommend to others that they have a daw slave to tape.

Regards,

Danny

 

[Beck]

Yeah, I know what you were trying to demonstrate. One difference between most members here (most forums really) and myself is that I’ve been synchronizing hybrid systems for over 25 years, as I stated previously before MIDI existed. It’s how I’ve always worked. It’s something I embraced early on and grew with, adapting new technologies as they emerged. I can assure you the Web and web forums are full of misinformation on this topic.

If a DAW cannot reliably follow an external clock, including MTC, it may be time for an upgrade and/or to reevaluate one’s usage habits with the current system. Granted, some software or hardware isn’t designed to use MTC as an external clock, but if it is, it should work. Otherwise you have a defective product or are exceeding the limits of the system in other areas, which many people do on a regular basis.

I’m a computer/network consultant by day, so I find myself in a rather unique position of fully understanding both the old world of analog and the new world of digital in a recording environment. I have no problems making them work together. I don’t often need the DAW at all, but when I do it all works together without issue.

Perhaps mere mortals couldn’t pull it off… but I rather doubt that, since I’m accomplishing this with 10-year-old technology -- original Echo Layla 20, Cool Edit Pro, a measly old PIII built on an Asus P3B-F, 512 MB of RAM and Win 98SE.

I purposely chose the above components and OS for my DAW based on real world performance and reliability. It’s a dedicated DAW built for that purpose, but hardly a "Super DAW."

Based on my experience and success with synchronization, and the reasons I listed previously I would never recommend using the DAW to control the ATR, unless that’s the only way one could accomplish it. But even that should be a temporary solution until the proper equipment is acquired.

Sync is one of those tip-of-the-iceberg issues that can reveal weak links in the studio chain, or how far off one’s methods are from best practices in employing a DAW. The worst thing someone fairly new to syncing these two worlds can do is to adopt a narrow focus early in the research phase. There’s plenty of time for that after they know what they’re doing. Best thing to do is zoom out as a first step. Everything should be on the table -- methods, equipment, etc.

 

[sweetbeats]

I think this is going to be a long post...



Oh boy.

Bear with me folks...I was re-reading some posts above and I want to reply to a number of things and get you all an update on the battle...

Pianodano first:

The Synchronizer, when the machines are grouped, should dutifully follow along to this TC and when you stop the DAW, it should stop the ATR imediately AND if you rewind the DAW, always (THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT), hit transport play

YES! That works! It doesn't work when phase-locking the 58 and the DAW, but it DOES work when chase-locking...I got to experience this last night after figuring out how to store offsets, reset the clock generator and such...more on this below as well as a scary problem I'm having, but the transport thingy is pretty cool. Because I remote-control Cubase with my Yamaha 01X, I now have the ability with the 58 and DAW chase-locked to remote the 58 transport and the DAW with a single firewire device. With repeaters and cabling that gives the relatively affordable ability to be at great distances from the control room as long as the appropriate tracks are record-armed on the 58. I do have the RC-51 full-function remote for the 58 as well, but it is outfitted with about only 20' of cable...could easily extend it if needed. Very cool. I realize this is not anything special to the fact that I'm slaving the 58 to the DAW vs. the other way around, but its just new for me to have the atr and the DAW linked this way and controllable via new technology. What a novelty!

Always allow at least 4 or 5 measures at the head of the song to allow subframe lock. You should see, optimally, a 0 subframe error in a measure or 2 but upon start you may see it pull the machine down from say 20 or more subframes over a couple of measures, to 0 error.

Still seeing a variance of 2-3 subframes, and I'm assuming this could be related to lots of things...I'm actually pretty impressed to be able to do that much, but while I don't have the 0 subframe accuracy, the 58 does resolve very quickly. Like for instance (and maybe this isn't that impressive) if the transports are in stop mode and there is an offset in the arena of 2~3 seconds, I have lock within 2~4 seconds of hitting play in the DAW.

BTW, I don't think there is anything at all wrong with your synchronizer choice. Are you sure it doesn't alreay have the 58 transport stored as one of maybe a 100 other machine transport options ?

The ES-50 doesn't have the ability to store more than one transport at a time, and doesn't have any pre-mapped parameters for certain transports. Its a simple 'hook up your deck, hit "calibrate" and you're done unless the battery backup goes bad or you change machines'...so I have to figure it out unless I can get the auto-calibration to complete, and I think I'll have to make the MASTER I/F cable and get my 48 hooked up as well before that's going to happen.

I gave the above as an example so that Sweetbeats could see his system absolutely fall apart when trying to chase tape but a properly tweaked system would have no problem as master.

Danny, I think the choice is mine because my DAW, when playing back 23 audio tracks at 24bit/48kHz while recording 2 and having two virtual instruments open and *at least* 36 plugin instances running my collective CPU load is about 30-35%. At this point it is more a matter for me of utilizing my equipment to the fullest, utilizing it in a logical way (and again, logically, it makes sense to me to anchor the system on the most accurate timekeeper), and to avoid collecting even MORE gear I don't need.


Beck:

Another bit of info that may come in handy is that the DAW doesn’t have to be the sync master for the ATR transport to be controlled via MMC from the DAW. They are separate systems. I’m not familiar with you’re system, but broadly speaking you can engage PLAY on an ATR from a DAW or a remote via MMC, and the SMPTE track on the ATR will in turn control the DAW via MTC. This is how my studio works

I'm trying to get my head around this...


cjacek:

Hey, thanks for letting me know about the 58 cards. No worries about the 48 tho. If you ever get it open or service the cards then please feel free to post.

Yes. I will definitely do that. I'll probably start a thread at that time to follow the process of rehabilitating the 48 back to working order.

Sorry to have you potentially repeat it but what exactly was made better by the servicing of the cards?

No prob...Its hard to say for certain, because some of my issues I now know were related to oxide buildup from my faulty SM911 tape...some to my lack of knowledge that when you pump 20kHz at +4dBu into the deck and monitor the input via the sync or repro heads *while recording* *and* if there is already signal on the tracks adjacent to the track(s) being recorded, it will excerise your meter ballistics if you know what I mean...needles doing their own little wave dances...but there were other things happening as well that are now gone, like I was having intermittent playback and record response issues. In one instance I could remedy the issue by pressing gently on the bottom corner of the card...I think some issues were also related to sticky or ill-conducting relay terminals...just some intermittent levels mostly, thinking I'd set the trimmer wrong but I was chasing a bad connection either on the amp card socket or in the relay. Those issues *seem* to be gone, and the meter response when reproducing tones accross all tracks and switching between the sync and repro heads is really snappy now. I will know for sure when I go back through and do another full calibration now that I have the tentelometer and have learned a bunch (and have some hopefully non-shedding tape on the way).

Now for the latest news...

As mentioned above, I was able to figure out how to define offsets on the ES-51 controller to compensate for the fact that there was a greater than 15 hour spread in the timecode phase from when I striped the 58 and striped the DAW. I also figured out how to reset the clock generator or define the start time. Being able to dial in the 15+ hour offset allowed me to test the chase-lock function, which works great. Still only resolves to +/- 1~2 subframes, but I'm not worried about that right now. As mentioned above, when in chase-lock the 58 transport responds to start/stop transport executions in the DAW, and chases to a new timeline point if I jump the location of the cursor in the DAW BUT...

grrr...

I *think* the ES-50 is not getting the tach info from the 58...when the 58 is having to chase a differential that is great enough that the ES-50 puts the 58 into FFWD or REW, the lifters naturally push the tape off the guides and heads and the output is muted, so now the ES-50 should be gauging the approximate tape position via tach pulses right?? Well, in this scenario, without fail, the ES-50 keeps the transport fast winding until the tape runs off the reel. If I cause the 58 to chase to any distant location, I have to manually retract the lifters the entire way. It makes me sick to even have to do this in running tests...that shedding RMGI SM911 tape is pooping all over my tape path. (better the bad tape get abused than the replacement roll which should be here any day...)

Ideas anybody? How would I go about checking if there are tach pulses at the ACCESSORY pin on the 58? I'll double-check the continuity on my interface cable as well for that signal path...

I did do an audio test in chase-lock though. My patch bays are all torn apart right now and a bunch of cabling is buried. I'm embarrased to share how I simultaneously tracked spoken vocal to track 1 on the 58 and a track in the DAW, so suffice it to say that it involved an SM-57 plugged into a line input on my Yamaha i88x preamp/interface...

Anway, got them both tracked and then played back both in chase-lock with both outputs in mono to the headphones. There was latency there due, I think, to how I had to route things in absence of the proper cabling, and also to get both tracks monitored in mono, but it was only a few frames. Once I got the offset dialed in it sounded great stability-wise, and, even though the noise floor was horrendous on the vocal track on the 58 (the program peaks were barely hitting -20VU ), the quality of my spoken voice sounded so much better on the 58 to my ears...I can't wait to get this stuff all figured out and starting making music on the thing because it handles the audio information so differently. The DAW track was, of course, quiet and clear, but the sound of a human voice is the result of vibrating muscles acoustically amplified by the throat, sinus cavities and mouth...I could hear those vibrations so much more naturally and distinctly on the track on the 58...and I wasn't listening for it...I played back the 58 track first and got the level set and then switched to the DAW track and...something was just missing. After doing a quick A/B test it was the throat sound...It gets brittle and sort of...squared-off for lack of a better term on the digital track, while the analog track leaves it whole...it was so much more pleasant to listen to in spite of the tape hiss...wow!

I really hope I can get this chase-lock shuttling thing figured out. This could be ugly I'm guessing. Its a little discouraging because I feel I'm getting so close, but this could be a real hurdle/setback unless I want to sit there and hold the lifter retractor every time I have to fast-shuttle. Um...no.

On a positive note, I calibrated the Tentelometer last night, which was easily done so I now have confirmation that it isn't whacked. I cleaned everything up (case, meter, etc.), which there wasn't much to do, but it looks like new.

 

[cjacek]

Yes. I will definitely do that. I'll probably start a thread at that time to follow the process of rehabilitating the 48 back to working order.


No prob...Its hard to say for certain, because some of my issues I now know were related to oxide buildup from my faulty SM911 tape...some to my lack of knowledge that when you pump 20kHz at +4dBu into the deck and monitor the input via the sync or repro heads *while recording* *and* if there is already signal on the tracks adjacent to the track(s) being recorded, it will excerise your meter ballistics if you know what I mean...needles doing their own little wave dances...but there were other things happening as well that are now gone, like I was having intermittent playback and record response issues. In one instance I could remedy the issue by pressing gently on the bottom corner of the card...I think some issues were also related to sticky or ill-conducting relay terminals...just some intermittent levels mostly, thinking I'd set the trimmer wrong but I was chasing a bad connection either on the amp card socket or in the relay. Those issues *seem* to be gone, and the meter response when reproducing tones accross all tracks and switching between the sync and repro heads is really snappy now. I will know for sure when I go back through and do another full calibration now that I have the tentelometer and have learned a bunch (and have some hopefully non-shedding tape on the way).

Man, it's too bad I had not waited for this type of info when I sold off my own, low use 58-OB........ with the same problems (likely bad solders, oxidized contacts on cards etc...) . That is why your "Tascam 58-OB Story" is so important, to show the non-tech persons out-there, ones intimidated by service issues, that 'it can be done'. Surely and slowly but it CAN be done.. Thanks for this thread Cory.

-----

 

[ausrock]

Cory,

I'm following this with interest even though I've no intention of using my PC as a multitrack "recorder", well at least not until I'm ready to mix down a stereo mix to CE Pro, etc. however, I'm getting confused over what specific gear you have...........I know there's a DAW and a 58 but then I see the repeated mention of an "atr" which is confusing me.......is this a 2 track R2R, a multitrack R2R or something entirely different?

EDIT.........It just accored to me that you're probably using "atr" as an acronym for "analogue tape recorder" as opposed to using "R2R"



My basic setup involves a Soundcraft 24/8 console feeding either a Fostex D160 16 trk h/disk recorder OR my Tascam ATR-60 1" 16 track and after talking to Beck quite some months ago, I purchased a JL Cooper PPS-2 synch unit which when I've finished the major rebuild in our "studio" (hopefully in a couple of weeks) will let my D160 and ATR-60 talk to each other with the ATR as master.

Cheers,

ChrisO

 

[sweetbeats]

You bet!

I'm glad you said that. I have *some* skills and experience, but at this stuff I'm more of a hobbyist, and typically hesitant to mess with such a complex beast, but with the right advice, time and patience, it is actually coming together!

It can indeed be done!

A big thanks to all who have contributed thus far. You're a part of my 58!

 

[sweetbeats]

*bump*

Sorry to whine, but I really need help with this issue, particularly with how I might troubleshoot whether or not the tach pulses are making it to the ES-50...

I realize this is getting in pretty deep...I think I'm the only one here actively that is using the ES-50, but the tach circuitry must be similar to the 48, MS-16 and maybe even the ATR60 series...dunno 'bout all that, but I need any ideas for where to start...not sure if there is a way to effectively test with a standard true RMS multimeter whether or not the tach circuitry is doing what it is supposed to do.

I'm going to start looking at schematics later.

Thanks in advance.

 

[pianodano]

not sure if there is a way to effectively test with a standard true RMS multimeter whether or not the tach circuitry is doing what it is supposed to do

What makes you think something is wrong ?

EDIT: oops, Sorry, I just saw your long post above. Let me fire up the studio and do some checking and I'll get back with you.

Danny

 

[pianodano]

Sorry to whine, but I really need help with this issue, particularly with how I might troubleshoot whether or not the tach pulses are making it to the ES-50...

I realize this is getting in pretty deep...I think I'm the only one here actively that is using the ES-50, but the tach circuitry must be similar to the 48, MS-16 and maybe even the ATR60 series...dunno 'bout all that, but I need any ideas for where to start...not sure if there is a way to effectively test with a standard true RMS multimeter whether or not the tach circuitry is doing what it is supposed to do.

I'm going to start looking at schematics later.

Thanks in advance.

Sweetbeats,

OK, I just tested my machine. It has no problem at all following tc with lifters extended. With that said, I suspect the Microlyx is computing tach pulses based on previous tc read vs pulse comparisons. That's my best guess only and with that said, Tascam clearly states in my MS-16 manual that the lifters will be retracted during fast winds (SEE THE SECTION I COPIED BELOW.) Maybe that's peculiar to their synchronizer? But as I stated above, that is not the case in my situation in fast winds; and the tc will jitter a bit for a split second when the machine enters into play mode at which time of course, the lifters are retracted as per normal.



A couple thoughts come to mind, since the 58 and MS-16 is so similar.

You do have it set to external control ?

You do have DBX defeated on track 8 (16 on mine) ?



AND FROM 4-2-1 in my manual "SYNCLOCK OPERATION"

Track 16 is used to record smpte tc and needs to be held in the sync output mode so that the tc can continuously be read by the synchronizer/controller regardless of OUTPUT SELECT switching.
To SYNCLOCK channel 16 to the sync head, reproduce mode, set it's record function switch to off and it's INSERT (INPUT/SYNC) to SYNC. The channels INSERT LED lights up to orange, a different color than the other LEDS providing a positive visualization of the "locking up".
Note that in fast winding mode the the synchronizer reads the time code by retracting the lifter. Therefore audio signal appears at the channel outputs (1-15) unless the LIF/DEFEAT MUTE is engaged.

Danny

 

[sweetbeats]

Wow, Danny, thank you.

I just spent some time out in mine.

I did some preliminary re-reading of some sections of the 58 and ES-50 manuals to try and get some idea of what I might look for at the ACCESSORY connector to test and see if the proper tach signal is reaching that point.

The 58 manual says there should be a 12Hz pulse at 15ips at terminal L...I set my DMM to frequency counter and put the probes accross the 0V control voltage (I have NO idea if that is the correct thing to do...) terminal RR and terminal L. The frequency was all over the place when the transport was in PLAY. Then I tested while I was in REW SPOOL mode and it was a steady 60Hz...I *think* (according to the spool wind time in the manual) the spool rate is 72ips, which would make sense with the 60Hz, so that means maybe I'm putting the probes in the right area and something is wrong with my tach...

I suppose I'll test it in fast wind mode which, by my calculations would be about 240ips which would equate to about 192Hz.

I checked and my interface cable is doing what its supposed to do as far as passing signal.

BTW, I tested the replacement roll of RMGI SM911 that Phil Paske at RMGI promptly sent out to me and it runs clean as a whistle! Play-spooled it from one end to the next and then a mix of REW SPOOL and fast REW back onto the supply reel...nothing undesirable visible on anything in the tape path.

 

[pianodano]

Oh boy.

Bear with me folks...I was re-reading some posts above and I want to reply to a number of things and get you all an update on the battle...

Pianodano first:


YES! That works! It doesn't work when phase-locking the 58 and the DAW, but it DOES work when chase-locking...I got to experience this last night after figuring out how to store offsets, reset the clock generator and such...more on this below as well as a scary problem I'm having, but the transport thingy is pretty cool. Because I remote-control Cubase with my Yamaha 01X, I now have the ability with the 58 and DAW chase-locked to remote the 58 transport and the DAW with a single firewire device. With repeaters and cabling that gives the relatively affordable ability to be at great distances from the control room as long as the appropriate tracks are record-armed on the 58. I do have the RC-51 full-function remote for the 58 as well, but it is outfitted with about only 20' of cable...could easily extend it if needed. Very cool. I realize this is not anything special to the fact that I'm slaving the 58 to the DAW vs. the other way around, but its just new for me to have the atr and the DAW linked this way and controllable via new technology. What a novelty!


Still seeing a variance of 2-3 subframes, and I'm assuming this could be related to lots of things...I'm actually pretty impressed to be able to do that much, but while I don't have the 0 subframe accuracy, the 58 does resolve very quickly. Like for instance (and maybe this isn't that impressive) if the transports are in stop mode and there is an offset in the arena of 2~3 seconds, I have lock within 2~4 seconds of hitting play in the DAW.

I use a Tranzport, Motif XS and or a Tascam Dm24 as a controller here, depending on where I am sitting and love it. Yes it is so cool that no matter where you are at on the grid, the synchronizer causes the recorder to go right there - if you just hit play for an instant (and then hit stop to send it the new location). Naturally depending on where tape tc is at relative to where you went to on the DAW grid, it may be close enough that it will ffw/rew and sync up in a few seconds anyhow. You will quickly get a good feel for when to hit play/stop because you're "too far out" or just hit play and let it roll. I hope that makes sense.

Sorry I can't be more help on the tach pulse might not be working issue. Silly question for you. So you have positively verified the synchronizer "CAN"T read TC at all with the lifters extended ? You can do that by soloing the recorder and manually holding the lifters out while the tape is fast winding in either direction. The TC should display continuosly. And as I said above, when you enter play mode from fast winding and retract lifters, the EXACT location on the display might jump around for a fraction of a second and very quickly show the exact location.

PS: don't be concerned about a 2 or 3 subframe error in pull down/pullup. That's not much error.