thoughts on reel to reel recordings

[YEK]

i guess what i have is nothing special but i found a nice picture of it

 

 

 

sony tc-w530

 

http://www.vintagecassette.com/sony/tc_w530

 

 

 

even though it isn't great, i'm up to trying. in fact , i like dirty sounding stuff so if i can get something rough sounding i might just use it.

[Cryptowen]

I've had one of these sitting in my closet for a few years now

 

 

mint condition, got it for free from a guy I know who owns a recording studio

but I ain't never used it because I don't know where to get tape locally

[LimpyLoo]

Nice.

 

Yeah, it's gonna make a difference. You'll be glad you did it.

[YEK]

also about type 1 2 and 4. is that what the tapes are called or is it the buttons on the decks. cause i have all three options on that

[LimpyLoo]

also about type 1 2 and 4. is that what the tapes are called or is it the buttons on the decks. cause i have all three options on that

 

I think you set the deck according to what tape you use.

 

 

Dunno. It might be related to Dolby.

[oscillik]

the types are definitely related to the kind of tape.

 

the majority of cassette tapes you'll get hold of will be type 1, normal.

 

CrO2 tapes are a bit more upmarket, and might be a bit more difficult to get hold of.

 

Metal ones, I believe, are better.

 

i think.

[LimpyLoo]

the types are definitely related to the kind of tape.

 

the majority of cassette tapes you'll get hold of will be type 1, normal.

 

CrO2 tapes are a bit more upmarket, and might be a bit more difficult to get hold of.

 

Metal ones, I believe, are better.

 

i think.

Yeah, type 2 tapes are the shit. Noticably better than type 1 tapes.

 

 

If you can find those metal tapes though, use those.

[YEK]

word

[joshuatxuk]

also about type 1 2 and 4. is that what the tapes are called or is it the buttons on the decks. cause i have all three options on that

 

Decks have a variety of playback options for tapes. Your can press those buttons so the deck will optimize playback for whichever tape your playing. If you have a type 2 tape then ideally it should sound better with the type II button engaged. Some old decks don't even have the type 1, 2, or 4 listed, just the metal type (type 1 + ferric aka iron oxide, type 2 = chrome or colbalt, type 4 = metal). Yours seems to have both, which is pretty neat! Decks vary so much in other display options - I have a Technics that identifies what tape you're using (or tries too anyway) and seen Onkyo decks that recognize the tape length of the tape you've put in.

 

Apparently type 3 never took off, it was a hybrid of chrome and ferric. Anyhow, these deck button options have nothing to do with recording, just playback. Dolby options do though - but I wouldn't mess with Dolby either, it's meant for boosting the more musical frequencies and cutting out hiss overall, especially with recordings for genres like classical (which arguably sounds best with digital, where hiss during silence is non-existent). Yours is old enough to only have Dolby NR, later ones have Dolby B, C, and HX - though I guess you could play around with these as a rough compression method for boosting mids. If you record in Dolby C, it's supposed to sound ideal in Dolby C - though you can run any tape through Dolby NR and noticeably hear it cut out hiss and boost mids. Some pre-recorded tapes tell you what Dolby it's meant for too. There's also something called the MPX filter which is for recording radio signals (FM) with - apparently FM stations have a test frequency of 19kHz and it simply cuts it out to prevent the tone from affecting your tape recording.

 

As far as recording goes, nicer decks also have bias controls which you can adjust during recording. Some have pitch control or ports in the back where you can screw motors back into alignment.

 

I just found this, pretty helpful in explanation. Wikipedia article also gives dates for when such technology emerged. Keep that deck for sure, personally if you get really into taping I'd add others to the arsenal, depending if you want lo-fi, hi-fi or something different altogether.

[LimpyLoo]

Also, you might consider turning dolby off and recording hot.

[BCM]

fuck dolby

[joshuatxuk]

Also, you might consider turning dolby off and recording hot.

fuck dolby

 

^lol, kinda meant to say that, just felt like explaining why it's there because it confused the fuck out of me at first

[LimpyLoo]

Some folks print 'bright' (crank the hi-end) and then afterwards turn it way down so the hiss gets turned down and the hi-end gets restored to normal.

[ryancolecreate]

tapeline.co.uk is a great place to buy tapes.

 

I bought some form there for an ambient release I'm planning this year. Red translucent. :)

 

They have tons of stuff to choose from.

these are fucking rad.

 

https://tapeline.info/v2/6-minute-endless-loop-tape.html

[YEK]

tapeline.co.uk is a great place to buy tapes.

 

I bought some form there for an ambient release I'm planning this year. Red translucent. :)

 

They have tons of stuff to choose from.

 

these are fucking rad.

 

https://tapeline.info/v2/6-minute-endless-loop-tape.html

 

 

that's pretty dope.

 

i saw something similar in an art installation and the tape machine was opened up and it was just a small bit of tape circular that spun like that

[futureimage]

Chrome cassette tape is good to record to and playback from on an irregular basis, but using it regularly will cause your tape heads to wear out mega quickly, and is why ferric is still the most common form of tape used.

[joshuatxuk]

Chrome cassette tape is good to record to and playback from on an irregular basis, but using it regularly will cause your tape heads to wear out mega quickly, and is why ferric is still the most common form of tape used.

 

Really? Would demagnetizing prevent that or is it a different issue? Good to know either way.

[marf]

 

 

Small enough to ship to a tech if something goes wrong

[kinski]

not too long ago someone here made a good point on making masters on vhs (using a vcr) for extra saturation. i liked that. reel to reel or tape for any kind of electronic music is a bitch to synch from scratch. but then again, why go the easy way? if you master analog precision nothing's going to stop you, ever. if i had the resources i would do it.

[LimpyLoo]

not too long ago someone here made a good point on making masters on vhs (using a vcr) for extra saturation. i liked that. reel to reel or tape for any kind of electronic music is a bitch to synch from scratch. but then again, why go the easy way? if you master analog precision nothing's going to stop you, ever. if i had the resources i would do it.

 

I don't understand all this talk about sync problems.

 

Obviously it's not a concern with multitrack recorders, nor with dubbing down a mix to 2-track tape (e.g. stereo vhs).

 

So why are people bringing it up?

[ZoeB]

not too long ago someone here made a good point on making masters on vhs (using a vcr) for extra saturation. i liked that. reel to reel or tape for any kind of electronic music is a bitch to synch from scratch. but then again, why go the easy way? if you master analog precision nothing's going to stop you, ever. if i had the resources i would do it.

 

I don't understand all this talk about sync problems.

 

Obviously it's not a concern with multitrack recorders, nor with dubbing down a mix to 2-track tape (e.g. stereo vhs).

 

So why are people bringing it up?

 

I haven't used a tape based multitrack recorder, but reading Multichannel Recording for Electronic Music, it sounds like in order to lay down more than one channel of music to be played by a sequencer rather than live, you first need to record the tape sync signal, so there goes your first channel right there. I also can't help but notice how the play and record heads have to physically be separate, in slightly different locations, so I can only imagine if or how that's compensated for in some way. (I guess if you don't listen to the already recorded music, it's OK; your synth listens to the clock pulses, and even if there's a slight delay, it should be consistent for everything you subsequently record, which is great until you physically run out of channels and have to mix down.) Analogue recording generally sounds like a big mess, trying to do something a bit more ambitious than it's well equipped for.

 

Unless we're talking about recording all the channels at once, but then again, if you can do that, I'm not entirely sure if you'd be multitracking in the first place.

 

As I say, I've never actually used a multitrack tape recorder, so I'm sure someone more experienced can put my mind at rest on some of these possible issues, but from what I've read in that book and several Wendy Carlos interviews, I'm glad I can go to work without having to bring my namesake razor blade! Sliding along visible waveforms in a DAW is much easier than I imagine splicing tape to be, especially as the different channels aren't physically stuck together.

[kinski]

yes, this ^^^ and i have a simple 4track, so i guess i have experience. in a way. and if you record pre-sequenced stuff track by track rather than live at the same time you also have to deal with speed issues of the motor of the tape recorder, as it can go slightly up or down, not enought to notice by ear, but enough to bend stuff out of sync. not a problem if you play everything by hand, though.

 

and obviously there's no problem with making a mixdown master on vhs as there's nothing to get out of sync. but you can actually get out of sync on simple tape machines as simple bend to the left on the recording head can make one side being recorded slightly earlier which will be kinda noticeable on a machine with straight head.

[futureimage]

Chrome cassette tape is good to record to and playback from on an irregular basis, but using it regularly will cause your tape heads to wear out mega quickly, and is why ferric is still the most common form of tape used.

 

Really? Would demagnetizing prevent that or is it a different issue? Good to know either way.

 

I'll see if I can dig my audio engineering notes from a couple of years ago when we covered tape - IIRC it's something to do with how chrome is composed and this literally wears the head down or something, I definitely remember a physical reason rather than something sound-based.

[joshuatxuk]

not too long ago someone here made a good point on making masters on vhs (using a vcr) for extra saturation. i liked that.

 

I've been meaning to find out more about that, haven't seen any really clear answer on the technical advantages or how to set it up compared to a R2R or cassette deck.

 

Chrome cassette tape is good to record to and playback from on an irregular basis, but using it regularly will cause your tape heads to wear out mega quickly, and is why ferric is still the most common form of tape used.

 

Really? Would demagnetizing prevent that or is it a different issue? Good to know either way.

 

I'll see if I can dig my audio engineering notes from a couple of years ago when we covered tape - IIRC it's something to do with how chrome is composed and this literally wears the head down or something, I definitely remember a physical reason rather than something sound-based.

 

Oh ok. I was aware that any tape use (especially type I ferros) will eventually magnetize the head and can snowball into the head actually stripping the tapes you play. Most people run into issues from never cleaning at all, otherwise it's not a big problem.

 

What you describe with chrome tape affecting tapeheads sounds a little different and more physical. It seems condition of R2R heads are often a make-or-break factor with repair too and restoration as well, from what I've read, so I wonder if R2R tape has a similar problem.

[LimpyLoo]

not too long ago someone here made a good point on making masters on vhs (using a vcr) for extra saturation. i liked that. reel to reel or tape for any kind of electronic music is a bitch to synch from scratch. but then again, why go the easy way? if you master analog precision nothing's going to stop you, ever. if i had the resources i would do it.

 

I don't understand all this talk about sync problems.

 

Obviously it's not a concern with multitrack recorders, nor with dubbing down a mix to 2-track tape (e.g. stereo vhs).

 

So why are people bringing it up?

 

I haven't used a tape based multitrack recorder, but reading Multichannel Recording for Electronic Music, it sounds like in order to lay down more than one channel of music to be played by a sequencer rather than live, you first need to record the tape sync signal, so there goes your first channel right there. I also can't help but notice how the play and record heads have to physically be separate, in slightly different locations, so I can only imagine if or how that's compensated for in some way. (I guess if you don't listen to the already recorded music, it's OK; your synth listens to the clock pulses, and even if there's a slight delay, it should be consistent for everything you subsequently record, which is great until you physically run out of channels and have to mix down.) Analogue recording generally sounds like a big mess, trying to do something a bit more ambitious than it's well equipped for.

 

Unless we're talking about recording all the channels at once, but then again, if you can do that, I'm not entirely sure if you'd be multitracking in the first place.

 

As I say, I've never actually used a multitrack tape recorder, so I'm sure someone more experienced can put my mind at rest on some of these possible issues, but from what I've read in that book and several Wendy Carlos interviews, I'm glad I can go to work without having to bring my namesake razor blade! Sliding along visible waveforms in a DAW is much easier than I imagine splicing tape to be, especially as the different channels aren't physically stuck together.

Oh okay.

 

I guess I took it as read that most stuff would be performed. For instance, you track your (sequenced) drums first, and then perform the rest.

 

And I also took it as read that someone wanting to multitrack sequenced parts would midi-sync all of the instruments (e.g. drum machine, hw synth, samplers) and track them all in one pass.

 

And in the event that one wanted to use solely audio (and midi) coming off a computer then--as all audio interfaces should have main stereo outs for monitoring, --one could get two tracks of audio.

 

 

So worst case with a DAW is that we have two tracks of audio, plus the interface's midi out (don't tell me you're using an interface that doesn't have midi?!?). That's (at least) three tracks of sequenced material. And depending on how you use the midi-out, it could easily be four.

 

(I guess this is the point at which I'll say you should be performing at least one of your tracks)

 

 

Now, all this is assuming that the interface doesn't have additional 'insert' or monitoring outs or what-have-you. If it does then congrats, you have made your four track quota.

 

 

"Mastering":

 

 

If one simply wants to dub down to a tape machine (which I highly recommend for offsetting the sterile, clinical vibe that is common with entirely-sequenced DAW tracks), then obviously your interface's main outs will suffice. If one wanted the overall timbre of their DAW music to to resemble the washed-out quality of--say--Selected Ambient Works 85-92 (I'm looking at you, Zoe!), then "mastering" to cassette is a great great great great idea: It will tame the all-too-perfect digital-ness; It will pleasantly roll off the high-end (the less "ips" the better for that); It will slightly smudge the audio like a thumb across a charcoal line.

 

And if one wanted the full extent of pre-Geogaddi haziness, then you are all but legally required to dub down to either cassette or VHS (on "long-play," obv).

 

-LL