Is anybody making new tape heads? If so, it would seem possible for some Chinese company to build a new multitrack machine. All those drones use motors that are reliable. Surely they can apply that know-how to a tape deck.. If nobody makes new heads, then how does one service them? Do I have to take it to some pro shop?
Nobody is making tape heads of quality today in mass quantities. Someone like JRF Magnetics can build custom heads but it is expensive. Professional and higher end tape heads can be relapped if not too worn down. JRF Magnetics does this. Those drones aren't tape machines, and don't have be as speed accurate or have to meet stringent wow/flutter standards. let alone meet frequency response standards. Most studios who use analog machines professionally have maintenance engineers on staff or hire them as they need. Most professional recording engineers have to know how to do basic maintenance, bias and align their tape machines, and know when they need to get their maintenance engineer in to do more involved repair work. And you should being in New York City have people who work on analog tape machines, but the odds are better when you leave behind the prosumer and consumer machines and get quality professional machines. Some machines are easier than others to repair or get repaired, and to find spare parts for. Lots of things to consider on purchasing, evaluating, care and feeding of analog tape machines. Got to know what you're getting into. Make a poor choice, it can be an expensive money pit in the long run. Google BASE (Bay Area Studio Engineering). Their site is quite informative on this subject. You can learn a lot. Professional Studio Open reel machines will likely be supported in some way longer than a Cassette based multitrack will be. And the Type II tape used by a PortaStudio is also no longer being made new. Teac changed hands (Gibson now owns them) and spare parts for the analog Teacs and Tascams in the USA, are limited to what's in stock now.
I think some music benefits with tape saturation and some distortion. Other genres of music demand accuracy and a clean clear sound, with minimal noise. I do not think there is one answer to all types of recording. I did own a Tube Open Reel recorder for years, and loved the sound it had, but it was not totally accurate for sure.
"Bad" as in not like the original. Sure, it's close but it also comes with noise, and unless the machines are top quality and in perfect condition, you get flutter. Open reel betters cassette here by a mile, but it still has limited range and higher noise levels. You are not looking at huge pro consoles here, so discussion of that is simply for illustration. You are asking about "prosumer" gear. In that realm, digital rules. You should try a new machine to hear for yourself. Take a tape, record it and play the digital file back and see if you can hear any difference. The modern units sound better than the older ones, even those from just a few years back. I get that many people like a "Lo-Fi" sound and compression, etc. As you say, you can get those plug-ins and add whatever you like. Way more flexibility with what can be added and how much than with a stand alone analog deck and mixer. You have to try it to hear what I mean. We can describe the sound that we want and the sound that gear can make (or not make) but it's just anecdotal until you experience it for yourself. It's just a suggestion from someone who is trying to help you.. -Bill
Yes, and Bill and I are trying to educate you and let you know what you're getting into. I am doing mostly digital, unless it's something very specialized or archival work. You need to sit down and A and B compare the two like Bill said. Make the comparison for yourself.
Interesting website with a lot of negative attitude.. According to this article of theirs, I should not be doing what I am trying to do: Let's Build another bedroom studio !!
He's giving you reality. Look at what parts cost for some of those machines (and unless you know how to repair and align it, add service engineer labor to that tab). Can you get enough work and use out of that machine to justify the expenses incurred in keeping one maintained and running? It adds up really fast. Take a look at his bad head section, and also the prices of replacing those bad heads won't be cheap either, as in thousand or more dollars expensive, just for the head.
What a fun thread! I used to run a Fostex E-16 before I closed my studio, which for those that don't know was a 1/2" 16 track recorder for people that couldn't afford to go to a standard 24 track. I started with a four track, but I don't recall the brand; I think it was Tascam. Was amazing what you could squeeze out of one of those! I got out right about when digital into desktops was taking off, so I would have quickly become a dinosaur in the industry as I doubt I would have changed over. Fun times though!
Fostex and Tascam made great eight track reel to reel units, with good support hardware like remote control units for punching in, etc. They also had decent mastering two track mix down decks...I had both from Fostex before I made the jump to 16 track. I don't think those are all that much when I see them. Keep an eye on eBay!! There is a ton of vintage recorders over there, at least last time I looked, for fun.
That's the first thing I thought of, analog tape saturation. Can't get it with digital, well, there are plug-ins that claim to emulate it. So basically I would agree, with analog you can get that great (for rock) tape saturation, and with digital you get sparkling clean and no tape hiss. Have to decide on priorities. Perhaps the OP should check Craigslist in his area (NYC) for a well maintained Tascam R-to-R unit. Or, give in to the darkside and get an AVID M-Box with Pro Tools. (That's what I did.)
In any service business, having a niche is really important. I think his wanting to specialize in analogue will really give him a jump on others that don't want to mess around with analogue. He could get into digital later if business warrants, but I think it's really smart in business to focus on one thing and be the best at it. It's easy to find a studio that does digital, and of course most can just do it on their own. Few would even know how to use an analogue deck in the first place, so I think this is a very smart business move. However, I have absolutely no idea if he could drive business into his studio with it now that I've been away from it a long time, but if I were going to start again that's certainly what I would do! And if I were going to record an album, I would definitely prefer analogue, though a few years ago I could have been talked into digital.
Keep in mind what McLover is saying about costs!! You are probably going to cater to clients that just don't have a lot to spend, and unless you have an awful lot of good gear and great rooms to record in, that's the clientiele you will attract. Tape costs could really eat you alive. As I said before, see if you can get a 1/4" 8 track machine. I think if this works out for you, you'll have to get something with more tracks anyway. Fostex, by the way, made a really nice four track (assuming that's what you end up with) that had a built in board as well. Those were out around 1986ish. I can't imagine those would be all that expensive. All this reading is making me sick for the old prices...like you did with your four track years ago, people were nearly giving all this stuff away. I think I only got $1000 for a low hour Fostex E-16. Sick! And I'm sure I threw in the auto locator unit.
They're cheaper because they were cheaper when new, cheaper parts, cheaper mechanically. And virtually zero parts support. There's 100 Tascams to a Fostex, and in some cases even today you can still get Tascam parts. The odds are not in our poster's favor to keep a Fostex in use short of luck and knowledge, and prayer that it doesn't fail and the part unobtainable. Also, if you go 8 track narrow gauge, go 1/2" 8 track. Better sound, better signal to noise ratio, and much more reliable.
While I still have my original 1985 Tascam Portastudio - in it's original box (with manuals etc) - I still would not bother with it if I were recording local bands. Any recording - regardless of quality will always need to have some editing done, some tops/tails work and other bits before I would consider it release ready. If I truly wanted that "analog" feel - it's more efficient in 2018 to capture the gig via 24 track digital using Studio One and then run the whole thing thru some tasty tape sim plugins from say - Universal Audio - by the end of the mix - anyone would be hard pressed to know whether it was digital or AAA. And- it would sound about a 1000x better than the output of a raw 4 track tape machine. Bottom line - for me perssonally - would not be to uphold the AAA torch - it would be to deliver the best finished product. The better product I deliver - logically more bands would want to use my services - which is really what I would be in it for anyway. Your mileage may vary - but unless you are really good at maintaining this gear, have deep pockets and have the technical aptitude to keep that gear maintained (and running) - you may want to rethink the AAA vibe. Cheers, VP
if you have a analog tape recorder/player you should know how to adjust it and have test tapes and audio analyzer. i think will be better rent it from a professional house or buy a digital machine
I obsessed over reel to reel home recording for about ten years starting in 1995. I made some nice sounding recordings but here's the reality that I finally embraced: you'd have to spend tens of thousands of dollars in analog gear to compete with what's possible with a computer and Apogee (just one of many others) interface. You'd also need vastly more time and knowledge.
Four track cassette does sound good indeed when using hi bias tape or metal. There's more to it than just having four tracks, and a 1st gen sounding good. One very critical point in recording is azimuth drift. It's so essential to imaging and stability of your recording. A 4 track reel to reel does a better job, a better transport, and more stable azimuth. There's no guarantee of azimuth stability, (at affordable price points) but your chances of making a better sounding recording will be with open reel. Reel to reel offers 15 ips, and also the option to bounce a track with minimal loss, almost inaudible loss. If need be, open reel allows for tape editing, but also this is an acquired skill. The drawback of reel to reel is its size and weight, and cost. Blank reels are expensive. The perks of reel first of all, is its impressive appearance. Not only does it sound impressive, but the gear will impress your clients. Open reel is serviceable. If/ when the heads wear, they can be sent out to JRF magnetics for a relap. Maintenance is easy too, simple demag and head cleaning a snap. You'll not require unreliable noise reduction (although Teac offers a DBX unit, but it's a cranky unit) .. very nice 30- 22,000 Hz with a S/N of about 60 dB.. and beautiful soft compression at higher than normal peaks. Most of all, azimuth stability will be your best friend. Azimuth error and drift can not be mastered out... you're stuck with it. A well aligned reel to reel at 15 ips will outperform any cassette (3.75 ips) in this universe and in any parallel universe.
I would be doing this as a hobby. I do not want to use any EQ or effects. Basically a poor man's direct-to-tape recording. There are lots of bands that play in Farmer's markets. I would approach one I like to see if they are interested in doing an all analog direct-to-tape session. Once I record them on the portastudio or reel-to-reel, I would take this machine to get LP's pressed. So I would avoid creating a mixdown master tape. My equipment would plug straight into the cutting lathe.. This is just my vision... No idea how practical it is. I just see a lot of interest in AAA vinyl and this would be low cost way of achieving that.
My first home studio consisted of a Tascam (I think it was 464) 4 track cassette recorder. It ran at both 1 7/8 and 3 3/4. I always used good (Maxxell XLIIS or TDK chrome) cassettes. I always recorded at 3 3/4 ips; the sound was pretty good. (I still have boxes of cassettes with my 4 track recordings on them. Upgraded to a Tascam DA38 digital tape machine (8track) in late 1999 and a Mackie (1604, I think, mixer).sounded better. The Mackie mixer was bulletproof, however the DA38 developed reliability problems after years of use. Parted out most of the studio around 2012, but kept my trusty Sony PCM R500 Dat (2 track mastering deck) which still serves as the "tape deck" in my main system. If I had to do it all over again, I would definitely go digital work station w/ 24 tracks, probably Tascam.
I have a Fostex R8 out in the garage. Got it to record garage jams with a buddy. We had more money than sense. Or talent. Keep meaning to dig it out and try to resurrect and "remaster" some of the tapes. Only have two surviving originals, mixed to cassette and dubbed from that.
You quoted my post, but it sounds like you are addressing the original poster. We are not the same people.
What I was describing is certainly not "lo fi." If that were the case, most of the music that people like on this forum would be considered "lo fi".
