|
|
Post by jamiesego on Aug 25, 2020 10:29:43 GMT -6
I was out of town for a few days but I finally got to tackle this. I ran the tracks through Kramer Tape, J37, VTM, and the RND 542's. Kramer was 15 IPS with the input turned up a little. J37 was the "warm master" preset or something like that with the input turned up a little. VTM was 15 IPS and 456. The 542's were blend at 100%, input at unity, and saturation at 50% just pushing into the yellow on loud passages. I ran a pass on the 15 IPS and 30 IPS settings. drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xcyhS286HFWQ95US6-HJZZbuzUW3vO0I?usp=sharingI'll try to get to do the 3M M79 in the next few days but I have a couple mixes on the plate. |
|
|
|
Post by jamiesego on Aug 25, 2020 10:37:51 GMT -6
It was pretty interesting to compare the different emulations. Black Rooster is 70% off right now. I almost pulled the trigger just to add that one to the list. I've also heard from another studio owner that Hornet Tape is pretty cool. It's very inexpensive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Aug 26, 2020 7:31:44 GMT -6
Curious question. . . to those of us who grew up on tape and know what it imparts to sound, Which analog outboard compressors do you find impart the tonal influence of tape to the sound as it goes to disk? I have to be honest, it's hard to pick out but there are times when I listen to a track recorded with an old LA3a or the audioscape V-comp and it sounds as though it has passed through tape on the way in. I might be alone in that wondering, but I have to ask! Thanks for your time.
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Aug 26, 2020 10:11:14 GMT -6
Curious question. . . to those of us who grew up on tape and know what it imparts to sound, Which analog outboard compressors do you find impart the tonal influence of tape to the sound as it goes to disk? I have to be honest, it's hard to pick out but there are times when I listen to a track recorded with an old LA3a or the audioscape V-comp and it sounds as though it has passed through tape on the way in. I might be alone in that wondering, but I have to ask! Thanks for your time. I don't really think of it that way Ward. I'm sure some of the comps I have impart something akin to tape machine compression/saturation, but to restate the already stated, I was usually trying to get RID of the tape sound when tape was our only option.  It only became cool when we didn't have it anymore. In addition, the pre's, console, bounces, multiple trips thru analog gear, etc. added as much "mojo" as the tape did IMO. On my sessions, we tried to get the tone "right" before it even hit tape. Then, after it hit tape we were either "OK with the compromise" or "cool, it's even better now, let's move on...". But mostly we did not rely on the medium to make things right. We got it right before tape. |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Aug 26, 2020 11:08:16 GMT -6
Curious question. . . to those of us who grew up on tape and know what it imparts to sound, Which analog outboard compressors do you find impart the tonal influence of tape to the sound as it goes to disk? I have to be honest, it's hard to pick out but there are times when I listen to a track recorded with an old LA3a or the audioscape V-comp and it sounds as though it has passed through tape on the way in. I might be alone in that wondering, but I have to ask! Thanks for your time. I don't really think of it that way Ward. I'm sure some of the comps I have impart something akin to tape machine compression/saturation, but to restate the already stated, I was usually trying to get RID of the tape sound when tape was our only option. It only became cool when we didn't have it anymore. In addition, the pre's, console, bounces, multiple trips thru analog gear, etc. added as much "mojo" as the tape did IMO. On my sessions, we tried to get the tone "right" before it even hit tape. Then, after it hit tape we were either "OK with the compromise" or "cool, it's even better now, let's move on...". But mostly we did not rely on the medium to make things right. We got it right before tape. YEs, we're sharing the brain today, my friend. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Aug 26, 2020 15:20:07 GMT -6
I don't really think of it that way Ward. I'm sure some of the comps I have impart something akin to tape machine compression/saturation, but to restate the already stated, I was usually trying to get RID of the tape sound when tape was our only option. It only became cool when we didn't have it anymore. In addition, the pre's, console, bounces, multiple trips thru analog gear, etc. added as much "mojo" as the tape did IMO. On my sessions, we tried to get the tone "right" before it even hit tape. Then, after it hit tape we were either "OK with the compromise" or "cool, it's even better now, let's move on...". But mostly we did not rely on the medium to make things right. We got it right before tape. YEs, we're sharing the brain today, my friend. That scares me buddy..... |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Aug 26, 2020 17:13:38 GMT -6
YEs, we're sharing the brain today, my friend. That scares me buddy..... LOL! Justified |
|
|
|
Post by craigmorris74 on Aug 26, 2020 20:18:58 GMT -6
I was out of town for a few days but I finally got to tackle this. I ran the tracks through Kramer Tape, J37, VTM, and the RND 542's. Kramer was 15 IPS with the input turned up a little. J37 was the "warm master" preset or something like that with the input turned up a little. VTM was 15 IPS and 456. The 542's were blend at 100%, input at unity, and saturation at 50% just pushing into the yellow on loud passages. I ran a pass on the 15 IPS and 30 IPS settings. drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xcyhS286HFWQ95US6-HJZZbuzUW3vO0I?usp=sharingI'll try to get to do the 3M M79 in the next few days but I have a couple mixes on the plate. Thanks for taking the time to do this. I've downloaded the files and will do a comparison this weekend. Got a feeling I'm going to like the RND's! |
|
|
|
Post by craigmorris74 on Sept 17, 2020 18:23:55 GMT -6
I was out of town for a few days but I finally got to tackle this. I ran the tracks through Kramer Tape, J37, VTM, and the RND 542's. Kramer was 15 IPS with the input turned up a little. J37 was the "warm master" preset or something like that with the input turned up a little. VTM was 15 IPS and 456. The 542's were blend at 100%, input at unity, and saturation at 50% just pushing into the yellow on loud passages. I ran a pass on the 15 IPS and 30 IPS settings. drive.google.com/drive/folders/1xcyhS286HFWQ95US6-HJZZbuzUW3vO0I?usp=sharingI'll try to get to do the 3M M79 in the next few days but I have a couple mixes on the plate. I finally got the chance to really listen to all these files, and I'm really enjoying what the RND 542 brings to the tracks. VTM sounds pretty good as well, but the RND is amazing. My Soundskulptor files sounds pretty lifeless by comparison. I wonder if was hitting it to hard? I'll be testing out HRK's new saturator with tape setting soon. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 18, 2020 18:53:55 GMT -6
I think a shootout like this will be useful for helping to show which of the hardware tape sims get closest to real tape. That being said, I doubt any of these are going to prove to be some sort of holy grail. I'd be happy to be proven wrong on that though. Either way, considering that "tape" sound means a ton of different things to a ton of different people, in no small part based on the fact that even real tape machines can sound very different from one another depending on model and calibration, I'm just hoping to see which of these hardware tape sims provide saturation and instantaneous compression in the most tape-like fashion. Those are the two things that appeal to me about tape the most, so I'm most interested in figuring out which of them do those two things the best. I don't necessarily need it to be a 100% spot on recreation of tape, though that would be cool if any of them were. Considering that the future of tape production is dubious, at best, and that nobody makes the machines anymore, I've pretty much moved on from that "ideal" and just want a hardware sim that does similar saturation and instantaneous compression. I'll say this, I'm liking what I'm hearing so far from the Bereich Density. If you're going to do this kind of shootout/comparison you should include at least one (preferably 2 or 3) real tape machines. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 18, 2020 18:58:07 GMT -6
drbill For those who used a lot of tape is not every setup sounding different? Meaning: Even if the tape sims are close, they all can be very different? What tape sound is for person A it is not for Person B? Most of the people making these judgements online (not necessarily here) have little or no experience with actual tape machines. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 18, 2020 19:20:09 GMT -6
Bill makes a great point, but yeah I’ll admit there are things I miss about the sound of tape, just like if you made me go back to tape there are a hell of a lot of things I would miss about digital. This is the main problem with tape simulators, you can get the distortion of tape ( that’s really what they are all about) but you can’t get what tape did right and many find wrong with digital. Not saying these plugins and boxes are bad, distortion is what we are all about, just don’t call it the sound of tape. Of course go align and reset the cards on an MCI JH24 and tell me you miss tape😁
Another thing comes to my mind.
My mentor mixes his pop tunes -hybrid- without tape and it sounds 95% like his world hits in the 80s - with tape.
How "magical" was it? Maybe not magical at all?
Let's tell the truth ... he was one of the first owners of digital tape machines in town, and he was happy about it.
Another truth was he could rent his digital tape machines because a lot of people were sick using real tape.
I love it when he realigns the perspective of the so-called glory days.
Digital tape machine = the worst features of tape combined with the worst features of digital.
Meh.
One other thing - recording to tape is in no way the same as dumping a digital recording to tape. Digital does something that somehow sucks something out of the music that can't be replaced. What or why I don't know and neither does anyone I've discussed the subject with, but for a fair comparison you need to record the original tracks to both tape and digital simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Sept 18, 2020 19:25:35 GMT -6
Yup. If you gotta do it, best to hit tape first, transfer to digital second.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigmorris74 on Sept 18, 2020 22:08:15 GMT -6
drbill For those who used a lot of tape is not every setup sounding different? Meaning: Even if the tape sims are close, they all can be very different? What tape sound is for person A it is not for Person B? Most of the people making these judgements online (not necessarily here) have little or no experience with actual tape machines. I'm this case you're wrong. And I never want to mess with a tape machine ever again. I'm looking a these as effects devices that I can apply to sources when I want them, not as some BS magic cure-all, or even the assumption they sound like someone's definition of a "tape sound". |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 18, 2020 23:19:28 GMT -6
I think a shootout like this will be useful for helping to show which of the hardware tape sims get closest to real tape. That being said, I doubt any of these are going to prove to be some sort of holy grail. I'd be happy to be proven wrong on that though. Either way, considering that "tape" sound means a ton of different things to a ton of different people, in no small part based on the fact that even real tape machines can sound very different from one another depending on model and calibration, I'm just hoping to see which of these hardware tape sims provide saturation and instantaneous compression in the most tape-like fashion. Those are the two things that appeal to me about tape the most, so I'm most interested in figuring out which of them do those two things the best. I don't necessarily need it to be a 100% spot on recreation of tape, though that would be cool if any of them were. Considering that the future of tape production is dubious, at best, and that nobody makes the machines anymore, I've pretty much moved on from that "ideal" and just want a hardware sim that does similar saturation and instantaneous compression. I'll say this, I'm liking what I'm hearing so far from the Bereich Density. If you're going to do this kind of shootout/comparison you should include at least one (preferably 2 or 3) real tape machines. Dude. You’re killing me |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 18, 2020 23:21:13 GMT -6
Most of the people making these judgements online (not necessarily here) have little or no experience with actual tape machines. I'm this case you're wrong. And I never want to mess with a tape machine ever again. I'm looking a these as effects devices that I can apply to sources when I want them, not as some BS magic cure-all, or even the assumption they sound like someone's definition of a "tape sound". Yeah. To me, the “tape sound” we are wanting is an effect to be used like all other effects. To taste. |
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Sept 18, 2020 23:42:52 GMT -6
I think 'Tape sound' is many different things to many people.
If you're just trying to get a bit of saturation and compression, sure that can be accomplished.
There are digital (or analog) tape emulations out there.
But to me 'tape sound' means a highly complex process of variables between the electronics/calibration/tape formulation/noise reduction circuits/etc, which I have yet to really see in a plugin. Not to say I don't own and like the Studer and Oxide from UAD for their sound (and Satin is cool for the extra parameters you can tweak), but just that they are different from a real machine.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Sept 19, 2020 3:37:04 GMT -6
I think 'Tape sound' is many different things to many people. If you're just trying to get a bit of saturation and compression, sure that can be accomplished. There are digital (or analog) tape emulations out there. But to me 'tape sound' means a highly complex process of variables between the electronics/calibration/tape formulation/noise reduction circuits/etc, which I have yet to really see in a plugin. Not to say I don't own and like the Studer and Oxide from UAD for their sound (and Satin is cool for the extra parameters you can tweak), but just that they are different from a real machine.
I don't doubt this.
I owned a M15A a long time ago.... and I won't go back. Its so long ago that I can't remember the sound and the songs are lost in an HD drive crash.
I still have access to my old Telefunken M15A.
I may ask the new owner if he will pass one of my new songs, and then we compare it with VTM.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 19, 2020 5:19:23 GMT -6
My .02 cents worth, had always thought UA ampex my fav plug in, then I had my first album mastered to a real ampex 102.
What really struck me was how the real ampex completely glued the mix together and smoothed things out so cohesively and yet still musically.
I didn’t think the plug in sounded anything like the real ampex, although I still like the plug in a lot.
So, maybe it was the compression I was most hearing and not certain I have heard that same sound in a plug in.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Sept 19, 2020 6:17:03 GMT -6
My .02 cents worth, had always thought UA ampex my fav plug in, then I had my first album mastered to a real ampex 102. What really struck me was how the real ampex completely glued the mix together and smoothed things out so cohesively and yet still musically. I didn’t think the plug in sounded anything like the real ampex, although I still like the plug in a lot. So, maybe it was the compression I was most hearing and not certain I have heard that same sound in a plug in.
My talk use it for what it is good and don't think it's the same.
On the other hand I would love to see someone doing the exact same thing on the UAD plug in including calibration and on the original machine. Can I hear it in a blind AB or would I fall flat on my face?
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 19, 2020 6:27:07 GMT -6
Agreed, I liked both just was pleasantly surprised at how much glue the real ampex imparted and this was while I was also using 2 ssl g clone comps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 19, 2020 7:31:58 GMT -6
I also feel that the "sound of tape" could rightly be called the sound of analogue. When I went to tape, it was through a Trident board or an API or Neve board. The bass through a Trident board to a 2" 16 Tk was unbeatable.
So the "tape sound" most people speak of is more likely the combination of analogue factors. The only way to properly compare tape sims is to have the same tape machine calibrated perfectly, then to the plug-in with the calibration matched as well as can be. The UAD ATR-102 has never left my 2 bus. I could do an album with nothing but that on the 2 bus and still get a great sound. But.. my ears were only fooled once by a tape sim, and that was UAD's Oxide.
That was strange because I believe Oxide is jut a simplified version of one of their other tape sims. Even with Oxide, it never happened again. Listening back in a studio from a 24 tk machine to a recording done there on one of those boards was common then, but unforgettable now.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Sept 19, 2020 8:42:24 GMT -6
I also feel that the "sound of tape" could rightly be called the sound of analogue. When I went to tape, it was through a Trident board or an API or Neve board. The bass through a Trident board to a 2" 16 Tk was unbeatable. So the "tape sound" most people speak of is more likely the combination of analogue factors. The only way to properly compare tape sims is to have the same tape machine calibrated perfectly, then to the plug-in with the calibration matched as well as can be. The UAD ATR-102 has never left my 2 bus. I could do an album with nothing but that on the 2 bus and still get a great sound. But.. my ears were only fooled once by a tape sim, and that was UAD's Oxide. That was strange because I believe Oxide is jut a simplified version of one of their other tape sims. Even with Oxide, it never happened again. Listening back in a studio from a 24 tk machine to a recording done there on one of those boards was common then, but unforgettable now.
I understand doing some nostalgic gymnastics is good. But is not the goal to create something your ear likes in the end. I think its possible even pure ITB which is pain to do it this way....
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 19, 2020 11:54:26 GMT -6
It's just good to have a benchmark ingrained in your head. This way you can use plug-ins better than if you had no experience with the thing being emulated.
I use an outboard preamp, then ITB. I'd love to have a Dangerous Music 2 Bus + though.. it adds quite a bit of the big board vibe. The Silver Bullet does it well too.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 19, 2020 12:30:03 GMT -6
I'm this case you're wrong. And I never want to mess with a tape machine ever again. I'm looking a these as effects devices that I can apply to sources when I want them, not as some BS magic cure-all, or even the assumption they sound like someone's definition of a "tape sound". Yeah. To me, the “tape sound” we are wanting is an effect to be used like all other effects. To taste. I'm inclined to agree. And I'm not saying that such effects are not useful.
What I AM saying is that if it doesn't sound like tape it shouldn't be called a "tape sim". Because it doesn't "simulate tape". I get the same kind of crap at GS from people who believe that their amp sims sound like real amps, often from people who play types of music whose high amounts of (intentional) distortion totally obliterate the things that I (and many others who don't play high gain/distortion music) listen for.
(Note that I'm NOT saying that there are no amp sims that sound like real amps - after a quarter century of development we've finally reached the point where (a few) being there to the point that they do work for many, if not most, purposes.)
I also agree that the actual "sound of tape" is due to a complex number of components and varies with the machine (both type and condition), tape, and setup.
And I also agree that, generally speaking, dealing with a real tape machine is a big PITA. I'm quite aware of this, I own a Studer A800, which is a constant maintenance project.
What I don't understand is the degree of hostility I get from people when I try to make these points. I guess it's to be expected at a place like GS that has a large proportion of amateur/ "prosumer" users, but I'd expect a more enlightened and open minded attitude from people around here.
There's a guy over at PRW who has assembled a high quality 3 track studio, with period gear, lovingly restored at significant cost. I shudder to think of what his reception would be here. This guy is NOT a dilettante or hobbyist by any means. He is, in fact, a mid tier mastering engineer who has assembled this studio as a pet project.
|
|
It only became cool when we didn't have it anymore. 
