Tascam to 2" 24 Track - technical opinions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Simon Baker
  • Start date Start date
S

Simon Baker

New member
Hi guys, I'm planning a session soon where I will be tracking acoustic (ambient/new-age style) guitar to Tascam DA88 and I'm contemplating the idea of running it through a Sony 2" to 'warm it up'. It will ultimately have to go into Protools for editing purposes as well. I'm tracking to Tascam first because the tracks can be quite long. I wanted to hear from anyone who has any experience with this, I will be using Quantegy GP9 at 15ips. . . . Anyone?? . . . .
 
i would stay away from a DA88. They aren't so pretty sounding. However the 2" 24 track should sound pretty nice. Hopefully its in good condition as its a studio from what i understand. Ditch the DA88s, don't even use them for A/D converters.
 
Yeah?? . . . I use the Tascams all the time (a lot of people do) and I've had good recordings from them. What do you use (apart from analog tape)? What about the practice of transfering from (any) digital tape to analog tape? I would like to retain the original multitracks on Hi8s.
 
How about tracking to the 2" then transfereing to Pro Tools, after your edits the take it back to the Tascams digitaly ..That way your Tascams have your edited cleaned tracks..Are the songs really that long?How much time are you getting at 15ips?...If not then it would seem that you could always mix to1/2 track{tape} and just stay with the Tascam/Tools and save the tape for mixdown..

Don
 
there is nothing wrong with some people using a DA88. If you can afford a 2" 24 track and maintain it to its useable quality you should have better A/D then the original A/D on the DA88s. There has been A LOT of improvement since then.
 
Yeah, both valid points. I guess at 15ips I will get about 30mins of tape time and that probably would be sufficient. The tape machine possibly still has a few problems though, a bit of calibration is needed, so I guess tracking to Tascam means I will get reliable levels but I'm willing to experiment with tracking straight to tape. I will be using a 888 for A/D into tools and once it's there it will stay there. Has anyone had any good results tracking straight into protools and then run into tape and back into tools?? I know it's A/D/A/D but I'm trying to come up with the best solution. I might just take my chances with (slightly uncalibrated) tape > tools. I could fix up level differences in protools. Hmmmm. . . . the mixdown to tape idea is good too. . . .thanks for the responses guys.
 
You'd be better off tracking direct into pro tools using a very good AD converter, especially if its a PT rig with a good quality external clock. Your sound quality would be the same or better, with a substantially lower noisefloor.
 
The Sony 2" tape machine available sounds quite good compared to the TDM protools system, I'd go as far as to say that it's on par with it, as much as you can compare analog to digital. I'm certain that I want to track to tape because the material is very emotive and I want that 'natural' sound from tape. I also need to transfer the material to digital for editing purposes. I'm guessing that this practice is somewhat common (mabye more in larger sized studios) and I'm wanting to pick peoples brains for any points of view on the subject. Basically, the meshing of high quality analog and digital recording formats. The best of both worlds?? Thanks for your reply sjoko2.
 
Well ....... I think I'm trying to perhaps save you some money, and definately save you some noise ;)

We've now arrived at a time where even the most well known anal analogue people are starting to admit that sound quality in digital is now at a level where it can surpass that possible on 2".
If even people like Alan Sides (Ocean Way) admit that he recorded his last award winning project through one of Ocean Way's 1 million plus modified analogue consoles ....... onto Pro Tools ........ while there is a machine room with a bunch of 2"machines in the room next door.....

Of cause there are some "non-stock" essentials that do turn something like PT into world class sound. Without these essentials it sounds like - Pro Tools / digital sound.

First Pro Tools generic clock is inadequate. It needs to be clocked from a good external source. Second, the Digidesign converters are not useable.

Considering the above, you would gain substantially from going the direct into PT way - and staying digital.
 
Just a hint......with the Sony 2", I'd definitely set the tape speed as fast as possible. I think you can push it to 30 IPS???

I did a comparison between the 2 speed settings and the difference is quite huge. Clarity/definition is HEAPS better at the faster tape speeds
 
Firstly. . . money is no object!! :D I'm studying at Uni where we have a couple of fairly up to date pro studios. (I am a pig in mud;) ) I understand what you are saying about the ideal setup but I believe that tape (noise and all) has a better connection with our subconcious brains, which is largely why I'm using it. People keep describing it as 'warm', a term rarely used for digital equipement. Don't get me wrong either, PTools and the whole digital environment is very good.
I'm yet to do the sessions, so I'll see how it turns out.
Link, I can't remember whether 15 or 30ips is better for high freq? :confused: I thought it was 15ips, that's why I decided to use that. Although I probably need 15ips for a longer tape time. Cheers guys :D Simon.
 
Depends what machine, 15ips has the "warm" head bump that gives the low end. I would use that for rock. At 30ips you shift that head bump an octave up where its not as noticeable, you will have a fairly flat response if the machine is set up well, and you will be going WAY over 20kHz, even over 30kHz on the best machines.
 
People keep describing it as 'warm', a term rarely used for digital equipement.
Click to expand...
That's a nice sentiment, but it's really not true. "Warm" is between 200Hz - 600 Hz.

I think 2" tape is nice, mostly because it smells really good when it's been running for an hour. I'm talking Ampex 456 or 499, not the new Quantegy stuff. That GP9 is sonically much better tape, but it doesn't smell anywhere near as rich. Actually, the newer Quantegy tapes do away with a lot of the noise, and audibly reduce the compression artifacts inherent in tape. In short, the analog tape manufacturers are striving to get closer to digital, while the digital manufacturers are striving to emulate tape.

I think the digital people are winning.
 
The term 'warm' is quite overused and can mean alot of things and you're right about it being around the low mids. Although generally speaking the 'warmth' is the entire sound of analog I think, particularly the top end that is not 'quantised' by digits, this is why I believe it can be more pleasing to listen to.
SB.
 
If you can hear that high (I know Rupert Neve can) then you're a lucky man.

Anyway, the faster you run your tape, the better it will sound.

Admit it, you really like the way it smells. I know you do, people!
 
Yep, Chargers right.......the faster u run the tape the better it will sound.
Comparing 15ips to 30IPS, A fair bit of the highs are noticably lost with the slower tape speed.....If you have the means you should A/B the two tape speeds.....but definitely stick with the higher one.....for clarity's sake
 
Yeah, sounds like 30ips could be the go. Although I might need 15ips for a longer tape time and it might be cool to have a more noticable tape sound with the 'head bump' on the bottom end.
Cheers guys. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top