Boss SD1

[El Dunco]

I used to record my cds onto high-quality type-II cassettes through the dolby on an early-90s pioneer setup, and the tone was better IMO than the cds or an original cassette of the same album. The tone that the recorded cassette had was fuller and warmer than the original cd, and it sounded clearer and wider than the factory cassette of the same album..

The right grade of cassette (chrome etc.) calibrated correctly sound surprisingly good. Most people can’t pick a high fidelity tape with Dolby S from a CD. Cassettes and players were getting pretty fancy even after they were technically obsolete.

 

[Mincer]

The right grade of cassette (chrome etc.) calibrated correctly sound surprisingly good. Most people can’t pick a high fidelity tape with Dolby S from a CD. Cassettes and players were getting pretty fancy even after they were technically obsolete.

Keeping a deck calibrated and clean was the hard part. Good decks were $$, and listening to that chrome cassette on a bad deck still sounded dreadful.

 

[GuitarStv]

Interesting. Possibly knowing that you have limited takes could motivate one to play better.

Sent from my SM-A115A using Tapatalk

I dunno. I've found that all the snapping to grid and pitch correction in the world doesn't actually save a bad take. Any time I sit down to record I'm pretty damned motivated to play as well as I can . . . the more takes you do the more time it ends up being. And then the more time you need to sort through and find the good takes. And God help you if you need to do pitch correction/fix timing issues. And then after spending all that time it never seems to sound right anyway. Figure you might as well just spend that time practicing - and cut out the middleman.

 

[El Dunco]

I dunno. I've found that all the snapping to grid and pitch correction in the world doesn't actually save a bad take. Any time I sit down to record I'm pretty damned motivated to play as well as I can . . . the more takes you do the more time it ends up being. And then the more time you need to sort through and find the good takes. And God help you if you need to do pitch correction/fix timing issues. And then after spending all that time it never seems to sound right anyway. Figure you might as well just spend that time practicing - and cut out the middleman.

That’s great. That’s you though. Do you have any what some “musicians” who aren’t like you put sound producers through? I’ve got some stories… :lmao:

 

[Mincer]

At the risk of sounding elitist, I don’t think you can really call yourself a sound producer if you don’t know your way around tape. We had to show we could not only record and mix a song on 2” tape, we had to set it up, including the patchbays and loading the tape from scratch to pass the first trimester at SP school.

Digital is the clearest, more accurate medium, capturing well in excess of the human hearing range. Tape is an imperfect recording medium, which does make it desirable for some sounds, particularly distorted guitars.

I have a hybrid set up, it’s 1/4” tape because 24 track goes for as much as a new car, but I use it for guitar tracks on some songs for the low-mid warmth, sweetness in the treble that can be less fatiguing than digital and of course tape saturation in a way “tape emulation plugins” can’t do.

That being said with the smaller dynamic range and higher s/n, I’d rather not go back to full analog, though it would break some musicians out of the idea that they don’t have to play well enough because I can “fix it in pooost.” Editing no longer being at a premium is one of the worst things to have happened to recorded music.

Actually, most producers in the top 40 never touched or worked with tape. I grew up in the tape era, but after working with good DAWs and getting my ideas and edits done quickly makes me not want to go back. I do think the terms 'engineer' and 'producer' is different now, just like it was different in the 80s vs the 50s. Sort of like how newer guitarists never listened to Clapton or Page. I get it, it is old, and most likely irrelevant if you want to create new non-b;ues based rock or metal.

 

[El Dunco]

Actually, most producers in the top 40 never touched or worked with tape. I grew up in the tape era, but after working with good DAWs and getting my ideas and edits done quickly makes me not want to go back. I do think the terms 'engineer' and 'producer' is different now, just like it was different in the 80s vs the 50s. Sort of like how newer guitarists never listened to Clapton or Page. I get it, it is old, and most likely irrelevant if you want to create new non-b;ues based rock or metal.

I think it’s a useful skill to have and at least have a passing interest in the history of music and recording technology. You don’t “have” to know how to use tape, fine. Even in the digital domain, there’s a lot to know about how to effectively run and operate a fully decked out studio. But not everyone who just goes out and buys a powerbook and a pirated DAW and some waves plugins is a “producer.” Engineer usually refers to someone who deals with all the technicals of capturing the sounds. A producer can do that too and wear a lot of hats, up to mixing/mastering if that’s not being handled by someone else. A producer as I understand oversees the direction of the whole project.

I could be wrong, that’s just how I understand it. My degree says “Sound Production.” I imagine if it said “engineering,” it wouldn’t have taken as long to get haha.

 

[Animal]

I've always wondered . . . if people want the sound of real tape, why not just record fully digital then play it back and record onto tape when you're done? It would be cheaper to buy an outstanding reference monitor, mic, and a small anaechoic chamber to do the recording in than buy a 24 track tape deck.

People would try to cheat achieving the tape sound this way, though some would argue it's not quite the same. Also the workflow requires less planning, preparedness, rehearsal and patience creating a different vibe to the process.

Even re-routing the through an analogue mixing console then captured back to digital is said to also warm up a recording.

Tape on the recording front end seems to be where the "magic" is captured. Then afterwards, the convenience of digital for mixing and mastering. This one of the more popular tape/digital hybrid methods.

 

[Mincer]

This is why guitarists still love the sound of a tape delay. I used to do it with a reel-to-reel (feeding the output back into the input). I've never heard anything that sounds like that.

 

[El Dunco]

This is why guitarists still love the sound of a tape delay. I used to do it with a reel-to-reel (feeding the output back into the input). I've never heard anything that sounds like that.

I have the Fulltone tape tube delay (basically am echoplex without the noise.) As bulky as it is as much the company guy whatsisname can be real prickly about servicing and sending more tape cartridges, there’s no beating it and even using just the tube preamp (which I believe the EP booster emulates) or the tape with the original signal mixed out and no repeats as well as it’s intended use as a delay, there’s no beating it. It’s so good.

Sample:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/s8tfdkq5qcxr6b7/IMG_0264.MOV

The very end is what happens when you flip the high speed/low speed switch which is really fun for people like me who like making really weird noises.