What do you say?

[longsoughtfor]

What do you say when someone asks: "Why do you use tape when you can just use the computer?"


The common things I hear are:

Tape is so expensive
My answer is to try and explain that all media has an expense. If you were to buy a new drive per project (which happens quite a bit) you would be looking at similar expenses to tape. Tape is re-usable to a point and can lessen the expense.

DAW's are so much easier
Yeah, but they are computers. One thing I am deathly afraid of is that mid session my Windows PC decides it's time to die. I can't speak about Apples... I don't have one. But I am very confident that my tape machine will keep running no matter what.

Any others?
Kevin.

 

[SS454]

I just found a place where I can get Quantegy 456 tape for about $65. That's not too bad. 16 min/reel. My songs are usually about 3 minutes long, so I can get at least 4 songs on there. My projects are usually drawn out for months at a time/song, so it takes me a while to go through even one reel.
I don't know. I don't think DAWs are really that much easier, once you get used to the analog gear. I mean sure if your doing editing, but I never do this, and wouldn't edit even if I had a DAW.
I don't mind the sound of DAWS. I think most sound pretty good. It's really the analog mixing that I absolutley can't live without. I hate mixing on a DAW. And don't care much for most plug-ins.
I'd like a DAW for composing music though. If I had one, I could dump my tape recordings onto a DAW and get more tracks.

 

[pipelineaudio]

"DAW's are so much easier
Yeah, but they are computers. One thing I am deathly afraid of is that mid session my Windows PC decides it's time to die. I can't speak about Apples... I don't have one. But I am very confident that my tape machine will keep running no matter what.
"

tell them they are 100% insane! DAWS are much more repeatable, and edits can be made at an EXACT point, but that doesn't mean easier. As a confirmed DAW freak ( hardly mix analog at all anymore) I can tell you that you can expect DAW mixes to take much longer than a garden variety analog mix. At the hi end, I think theyll take about the same amount of time, but for mixing fast, on a budget, analog kills DAW!

theres a great thread here about this https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=66481

I'll defend digital mixing till the end of my days, but instead of having a stupid closed mind, I see both as having strengths and weaknesses...speed and ease of use for a DECENT mix is more in the analog domain.

 

[blues-hacker]

I work in front of a Damned computer all day ....

when I want to play music, I want to <<Play>> music, not fiddle with another computer......

And besides, alot of the time, the thing I do is to record jam sessions; with tape I get some levels, make a few settings, set the reels spinning, and go play. If we occasionally get hot, I'm not worried about the recording turning to trash. I have a tascam 1/4", that I can run at 3 3/4 ips and still get 30 - 20K Hz response from, and soak up 1.5 hours on a reel.... and then put the reel aside and go on and do other things..... what would that do to your typical hard drive based system ??? ( I know, cause I've also got a Fostex 8-track hard drive unit, with a large drive - I can get an hour, and then it's download and dump time !!)

anyways - for an example of this jam-type recording, go to mp3.com, search on Patrick Ginnaty, scroll down to the last song listed "And what We Could Do" and give a listen....

That was 3 mics, into the board, mixed, and out to tape, live, done at my friend Pat's home studio up in Maine.

The way music should be.

b-h