Using 2" Tape AND Pro-Tools live

Y

YooDooRight

New member
My band are heading into the studio in a couple of weeks and are looking to track live using both 2" tape and pro-tools. Like many people we much prefer the transients and warmth of analogue recording (for drums, bass and acoustic guitars especially) but as our stuff relies on heavy editing of live improvs to comp tracks we need the speed and ease of pro-tools too.

I've been in situations before where the engineer has 'bounced' all the tape elements down into pro-tools after a session to begin editing but its very time consuming and we like to edit very quickly as we go along (NOT at the end of a session).

Is there any way of using the tape as a kind of audio processor and having drums, bass guitar and acoustics record live onto 2" tape and back off into pro-tools in real-time and at the SAME time that all the other instruments are being recorded live directly into pro-tools with everything lining up neatly as it goes in?

I'd like to get some opinions before bamboozling the poor engineer with impossible requests.

Thanks,
YDR
 
It is probably possible, if the 2" recorder has a playback head after the record head. This way you could record and play back at the same time, but the tape machine has to be able to do this.
 
YooDooRight said:
The tape machine in question is an Otari MTR 90 MK2. Is this capable?

YDR
Click to expand...
You can do it, but the sound quality will be lower than using the playback head. All 2" decks have the ability to playback in the synch mode from the record/synch head BUT this head is used for monitoring the recorded tracks in time so you can overdub another track. If you use this head to send the tracks to the Pro-Tools rig, the sound quality will suffer. This head is not optimized for playback quality but to merely allow you to hear the tracks for overdubs.

Best to record the "bed' tracks and import to Pro- Tools from the playback head.
 
woah slow down, relax. Why are you in that much of a hurry that you can't have the time to quickly digitise the tracks...other than a few patches, it couldn't take any longer than the length of the song. Get a coffee. lol. Do you get angry that it takes 10 seconds to warm a pop tart in the microwave? :)
 
hey times money... times money!! :)

Seriously i was just asking as i have seen it done before although im almost certain the engineer in question no doubt used the technique MCI2424 described... ie; running in from synch/monitoring head rather than the optimized playback head.

We're not a conventional 'song' band where there's a descernable end to a take, we'll continuously comp and layer onto improvised full band tracks as we go along... that often means reviewing takes through cans and directing edits to the engineer from the live room without stepping away from our instruments... so that 20 minute coffee break will undoubtedly ruin the creative flow somewhat but hey, we do like coffee ;)

thanks,

YDR
 
why not just record as high quality as possible into PT (good A/D/A conversion, clocking, etc), do your edits, then send your edited tracks out to the Otari? That way, you get one clean pass onto tape, plus it's cheaper with cleaner results.

And that's assuming this studio keeps the Otari top notch. Cause if not, you're going to be wasting a shitload of money. Believe me.
 
take the output of the 2" and send it right into PT, what will go into PT is the analog warmth you want and the editing ease you crave.
 
You could do it all at once if you were recording everything to the Otari first, by sending the output from the repro head to Pro Tools. What's happing is the repro head is playing back what the record head just recorded a split second earlier.

If simultaneously recording some parts directly to Pro Tools and others through the Otari to Pro Tools there’s a time delay because of the physical distance between the record and repro head on the tape machine. The engineer has to line the tracks up after the recording session is done… and if you need to hear those tracks during the session to lay down more tracks, the engineer will have to stop and align the analog/PT tracks after each take.

It's easier for the engineer to transfer later because there's more control. Even though the real-time transfer is possible you may have better results if the engineer can focus on the idiosyncrasies of the digital medium, which are different than the idiosyncrasies of the analog medium. The more tracks there are to manage, the more critical this consideration.

A real-time transfer is more manageable and practical when using a half-track machine in between for mixdown to a digital format.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top