Mixing down to 1/4 inch tape.

EdisonRex · Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:08 pm Post subject:

It is truly a good feeling to see someone enjoying themselves so thoroughly over something discussed here. Rock on.

KarmanHardon · Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:08 pm Post subject:

Yes, with the help of electro-music.com, I have found true love.

Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.

blue hell · Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:01 pm Post subject:

From here it just looks like it was always there.

This was a good story to read, glad you found happiness Very Happy

KarmanHardon · Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:42 am Post subject:

Oh boy!!!

I found a place in Montreal where they still have lots of 406 407 and 456!!!

At 20% discount!! How's that!

Very Happy

EdisonRex · Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:51 am Post subject:

I used mostly 456. How cheap can you get it?

KarmanHardon · Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:57 am Post subject:

The 456 reels will cost me something like 51$ (can) with a reel. And 406 and 407 is like 31$. I think that's for pancakes.

Also, the lady on the phone was lovely. Sounded like a true sweetheart.

KarmanHardon · Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:36 pm Post subject:

Oh wow.

Guys. Wow.

I'm so glad I put my money there. It's excellent. The highs are soooo silky to my (very) sensitive ears. And learning to work with that is fascinating.

It's inspiring me to make good music worthy of being captured on it.

That's all. Thom is a happy camper. Very Happy

elektro80 · Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 5:57 am Post subject:

I´m sure you will have a lot of fun with that machine.

KarmanHardon · Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:27 am Post subject:

I need to take a decision as to what tape I should buy and bring to the technician for him to calibrate my machine.

I bought 2500' 456 yesterday from the store in question. I made a test... and I reckon that tape quite loud (or more sensitive??...saturates faster?), I'd say 1.25 db "louder" than the Maxell UD stuff I have here (it's a few years old, though... even the new ones). And crisp... very crisp, detailed sound. Oh yes it sounds good.

I did read somewhere that "Maxell UD 35-90 is a rough equivalent to Quantegy 407 or 457"... as well as tons of contradictory crap... I read somewhere that 456, 406, 407 and UD35-90 are all bias-compatible... and others say otherwise.

I'm not sure what my deck was calibrated for... but possibly Revox 631.

I'm about to spend all I have left on tape and the services of a tech. The 406 and 407 tapes are quite more affordable. People on forums talk a lot a bout bias compatibility but little is said about the sound character differences...

You guys know who I trust by now.
So... what differs between 406 407 and 456, sound-wise? I have a feeling 406 and 407 might be able to be recorded on a few more times than 456...

Oh... and "print-through" is not much of a concern for me as I will usually bounce the tape to Daw in real time (better timing accuracy).

EdisonRex · Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:44 am Post subject:

Once I got a taste of 456, I didn't really want to use anything else. Yes, more expensive, but oh so good.

elektro80 · Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:51 am Post subject:

KarmanHardon · Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:26 am Post subject:

Alright. I'll get it optimized for it. It really sounds a good notch better than the 407, if the UD is it's equivalent.

EdisonRex · Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:49 am Post subject:

jksuperstar · Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:37 pm Post subject:

That's a good one. I spent 8 years designing digital backup tape drives, print-through is a VERY big deal. (for more detail on print-through...it's the effect that happens when you load the tape into the take-up reel, at the center of the reel where you mount the leader on the tape. This leaves a little "bump" in the winding of the tape as it's wound on top of that leader, meaning for that small area, the diameter is different, and so the speed of the tape being taken up is slightly off also. If this changes with each forward/reverse (and it will), subsequent playback or recording will have slight variations in pitch).

seraph · Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:57 pm Post subject:

I know I'm going to disappoint anyone reading this thread and raving about mixing down to 1/4 inch tape Twisted Evil

but I threw away my last reels of tape before moving where I live now (2 years ago) after having used them exclusively as book holders for many years because I had sold my Teac A-3440 many years before. (I had also had a Revox A-77 previously).
Rolling Eyes

EdisonRex · Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:06 pm Post subject:

KarmanHardon · Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:58 am Post subject:

It's all an ocean away from you? I have free storage space here. Laughing

Why did I mentioned "print-through" again... oh, because it appears to happen with 456 more than other tapes (so I read, again)... and as I said, I'll be capturing the audio on the comp before any print through can actually happen.

Reminds me... I was told yesterday that I should bounce the tape back in the daw at 96khz if I mixed down using 48khz. Makes sense... But that means using a second computer if I want to do it in real time.

The lady at the store where they have tape told me she could arrange something for me to buy a good bunch of what they have left and pay chunk by chunk...
Hmmm...There is this company called ATR Magnetics... http://www.nothingsoundsliketape.com/
Cool.

Anyway...

A friend was making fun of me yesterday: " You're just going through some phase, man. Those big reels are the boobs you don't get to see enough, being such a hermit... ". Then I called him a closeted freudian.
My roommate added:" I haven't heard much more than sine waves coming out of your studio in the last two weeks... especially that tv frequency one.
-1000 hertz?
-Yeah... 1000 hurts."
Hehe... My friend Hubert asks: "Is that a DAT?". That was funny.

I have to put an hour and a half of techno together by november 17th... Must get back work and stop fooling around for now.

KarmanHardon · Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:38 am Post subject:

Ok... I'm reading about sample rate conversion here and there...

Shocked

This is hell.

elektro80 · Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:25 am Post subject:

Advice: Unless you have some seriously upmarket converters and plan to produce content for other than plain CD Audio, sticking to 44.1khz/88,2khz at 24bit will be the best choice for you.

A bit OT but..
A suggestion:
An interesting test of what is really going on is to record to digital at say 88,2khz and use a spectral meter plugin thingie to check what is going above 14-15khz. Keep in mind that whenever you record from analouge sources you better check if there are high frequency signals at high levels ( above what you ordinarily can hear ) . Sometimes it is smart to use a high cut filter in order to kill stuff you simply don´t want to capture. I have several times seen tape decks with serously high levels of high frequency shit. This has nothing to do with what is on the tape though.

Also, many digital synths will leak high frequency shit ( some PPGs were pretty nasty ) that you simply don´t want to send into a tape recorder. Do some tests and check if you need some cut at input too.
Always keep high energy RF sources away from your recording gear - including stray emissions from cable TV. This is more problematic than people tend to be aware of.

KarmanHardon · Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 11:30 am Post subject:

Thanks. I will check that out.

I'm kind of stuck with 48khz...

Hey I saw some graphics you posted illustrating the differences between softwares when converting from 96 to 44.1khz. Damn.

That old G3 and Peak will come in handy in the end.

Kassen · Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:08 pm Post subject:

Excellent point.

Another thing to consider when going down from 48 (or a multiple) to 44 is that you don't *need* to literally re-sample; you can also play it back at the high rate, through a desk and re-record it immediately at the low one (asuming your soundcard will do this).

The sad thing is that these days quality soundcards are easier and often even cheaper to come by then quality re-sampling. Of course you can do both, then compare how you like aliasing v.s. analogue hiss.

KarmanHardon · Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:18 am Post subject:

KarmanHardon · Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 11:17 am Post subject:

he sold it... Funny thing is, when I go t my revox I called him to tell him he should clean the heads and give it another go before selling it. He did clean the heads... and sold it for 200$ more 'cause that's what was apparently wrong.

One reason why I still was interested in it is the balanced xlr ins and outs
ah well...

I finally used my deck as an echo yesterday(finally making music again). I slammed some shitty tape on there and...

Oh my god! Oh my god! Oh my god! hm my ghd! Oh my god! Oh my god! Oh my god! Oh my god! hmrhhsook hmshrrrk hmrhhsook hmshrrrk rshhhmmrrkgh rshhhaarhhh hmrhhsshhhk hmshrrrk

It's been a while since I "played" a delay... had forgotten how intensely fun it is.

EdisonRex · Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:51 pm Post subject:

You'll be doing musique concrete next. Wink

Learn to use that splicer, competently.

KarmanHardon · Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:57 am Post subject:

I will try for sure at least...

Look where the a810 I was stupid enough not to buy is now: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=170149719396&Category=67812&_trksid=p3907.m29

That'll teach me.