Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Post-Processing, Computer / Streaming / Internet Devices & Related Activity => Topic started by: Jhurlbs81 on October 15, 2015, 12:11:20 PM
-
Hey All-
I am about to transfer a bunch of really old DATs and want to do this once, the right way. Just looking for some confirmation on my plan and recommendations on any details I might be missing.
-I have found a TS'er who will let me borrow their Sony R300 DAT deck with optical output. (I may need to find a cleaning DAT tape?)
-I will connect the R300 to my Mac Mini using a toslink to 3.5mm optical plug
(What will I need to do in System Preferences for the mac to recognize the input/I assume I'll need to set the R300 to SPDIF/Optical- I will check the manual for this)
-I'll record into Sound Studio on the Mac mini (my understanding is it IS bit perfect?)
-Archive the 16/44.8 master to HDD (Should I resample to 44.1 before distributing? Not many will burn to CD I am thinking...not sure what is best here. I will at the least keep the original, bit perfect file)
-I am wondering what the best way is to present these back to the owner. He's not much of a torrent, LMA guy, so I am thinking about buying a 10 pk of USB thumb drives and putting them on them by year..
What else could I screw up here?! ;)
-
The deck is a good start. Definitely need a component deck like that to do it right.
I don't know about the Mac part at all but a few experiences:
Make sure you fast forward and rewind each tape at least once prior to playback. If any were stored not rewound I'd fast forward from the point the tape is at, rewind, then do a full fast forward and rewind.
The transit/alignment is the biggest issue with DAT's, other than sometimes the tapes themselves. The ff/rew cycle at least should get them somewhat adjusted to the playback machine. It does make a difference. The error correction in those component Sonys is good but I'd still give anything important a decent listen. Sometimes there are issues that may improve on a second pass. Serious tape flaws may not be recoverable though.
I'm agnostic on the cleaning tape. I think they may be somewhat abrasive so I wouldn't go overboard with them. That said if the tapes are shedding a cleaner tape or cleaning is likely to be needed.
As far as what you run into just make sure it's all optical/digital. You should be getting the digital signal directly off the tape without any intermediation. I used the optical inputs of my R-44 with nice results. One trick there was that the input sample rate had to be set on the R-44 to match the original sample rate of each tape (the last batch of tapes I did varied). If not the R-44 wouldn't pick up the signal (though other devices may automatically adjust the rate by reading that in the incoming signal?).
There's not much point in 16/48 {EDIT: in terms of maintaining 16/48 for distribution after editing}. As long as you convert in a good program it seems OK to convert to a more widely used rate. Depends on the audience I guess.
Good luck.
-
There's not much point in 16/48. As long as you convert in a good program it seems OK to convert. Depends on the audience I guess.
I would suggest Transferring each at the correct rate 44 vs 48... You can always go to 44k, but you can never go back to 48k...
Terry
-
There's not much point in 16/48. As long as you convert in a good program it seems OK to convert. Depends on the audience I guess.
I would suggest Transferring each at the correct rate 44 vs 48... You can always go to 44k, but you can never go back to 48k...
I was referring to editing for distribution there (as the OP also was as far as I interpreted that element of the questions).
You have to transfer each at the original rate to do it properly. It's not a "clone" if you're resampling on the fly. So a correct approach is going to give you the same bit rate as the original (though an incorrect one could also do that).
That said I don't think it makes much difference how you distribute them afterward as long as any resampling is done well (i.e. one shouldn't use Audacity).
-
There's not much point in 16/48. As long as you convert in a good program it seems OK to convert. Depends on the audience I guess.
I would suggest Transferring each at the correct rate 44 vs 48... You can always go to 44k, but you can never go back to 48k...
Terry
Agree - transfer and archive at their native sample rate...
-
There's not much point in 16/48. As long as you convert in a good program it seems OK to convert. Depends on the audience I guess.
I would suggest Transferring each at the correct rate 44 vs 48... You can always go to 44k, but you can never go back to 48k...
I was referring to editing there (as the OP also was as far as I interpreted that element of the questions).
You have to transfer each at the original rate to do it properly. It's not a "clone" if you're resampling on the fly. So a correct approach is going to give you the same bit rate as the original (though an incorrect one could also do that).
That said I don't think it makes much difference how you distribute them afterward as long as any resampling is done well (i.e. one shouldn't use Audacity).
Oh, my bad... I guess I mistook what you wrote...
Terry
-
Here is the first box we pulled from storage.
(http://s16.postimg.org/ecfli11np/image1.jpg)
(http://s29.postimg.org/5vl0baj0n/image2.jpg)
-
Don't break the deck :P Quite a range in there.
-
when I have done xfers I only do the following:
- RIP the DAT
- FLAC the ripped files
- document the tape and xfer process
- take pictures of the tape, J cards, and case
- place all in a folder using semi etree naming
I do not:
- track the shows
- seed the shows
- perform ANY processing on the files other then FLAC - no resampling, no combining, no adjustments in levels, etc
- I return the tapes with the files to the sender
IMO - you should really look for an PCM-R500/R700, PCM-2600/2800 and record to a dedicated recorder like a Tascam HD-P2, DR-680, Microtrack, etc
-
Don't break the deck :P Quite a range in there.
I know. I should get my own DAT player to do this. There are way more tapes than I thought. This was box one of 4 or 5. He also has these slightly larger digital tapes. Looked like 8 tracks from the notes in the tapes.. he recorded those from a van I believe. No idea what format or how those could be transferred.
Richard, thanks for commenting. I guess I don't understand the importance of a very high quality deck if it's a digital transfer. Aren't I just transferring 1's and 0's over fiber? I'm also curious on your recommendation of using a dedicated recorder.
You're a expert eBay watcher :) - what would one of those higher quality decks cost.
Thanks all,
Jesse
-
I've done hundreds at this point, and I think you are on the right track. I actually used a simple app (Audio Recorder) that just recorded straight from the optical input, which you can control from the Audio MIDI setup app in the Utilities folder. There you can set to use the source clock (DAT check) or the internal clock. You'll want external unless you run into 32khz tapes. Some older Macs could handle the 32khz, but not the 12bit variety.
I'd also take a good hard look at the tapes an make sure you aren't duplicating work. Clearly that Legion o fMary 1975 tape is not a master. I've helped others transfer their tapes, but I pretty much refuse to do non-masters, unless the masters are known to be lost. So many tapes I found in a box given to me were available on tree, archive.org, etc.
Curious about the larger tapes. Are they beta tapes? Can you share a picture?
Hope that helps.
-
Jesse - If you want I can lone you an external 13.1 firmware SGI DDS-3 drive, cables and DAT2WAV if you can round up a PCI SCSI card and a Windows XP box (if you have a laptop with PCMCIA I can lone you a Adaptec 1460c card as well).
This is always my first step in xfers - it's equivalent using EAC and xfers the audio at 2x speed plus outputs error files.
Doesn't work well with tapes w/o A-TIME though - can work but not as well.
-
Don't break the deck :P Quite a range in there.
Richard, thanks for commenting. I guess I don't understand the importance of a very high quality deck if it's a digital transfer. Aren't I just transferring 1's and 0's over fiber? I'm also curious on your recommendation of using a dedicated recorder.
You're a expert eBay watcher :) - what would one of those higher quality decks cost.
Thanks all,
Jesse
Not all DAT decks are equal - the decks I suggested are 4 motor decks where as the R300 is not - the transports are more rugged and less susceptible to going out of alignment, jamming, eating tapes, etc
The best decks use DDS based transports such as the PCM-7040 (7040 will not read 32Khz tapes) - and have built in dry head cleaning (the decks I mentioned above have head cleaning as well) - regardless they still need a cleaning tape every once in a while though
prices of R500 can go anywhere from $75 to $400 - they never sold above $125 about 3 years ago though
PCM 2600 ~ $50-125
I currently own a 7040, R700 and SV-4100 - and a boat load of Audio capable DDS drives 1 x DDS1; 2 x DDS2; 7-8 DDS3
I do DDS drive > SCSI > Win XP Laptop first then :
- 44.1 or 48khz tape > 7040 > hs-p82
- 32 Khz > R700 > JB3
Using a known trusted audio recorder takes audio software issues, sound card issues, possible resampling out of the equation and frees up your computer as well - simplifies setup as well
-
Hello,
I know H₂O's right for the job.
I'am lucky, I know he will try his best for me !
Yours sincerely.
Robert
-
I transferred my first two tapes this morning, and so far so good. Derek Trucks 2/10/2000 and Bela Fleck 2/18/1998. I'm glad I read the comment above and checked db.etree.org before transferring. I've already found a few that are already circulating, I'm thinking some of his are clones. It is exciting though when you find a tape of something that is not yet out there.
Transfers went well, Error reader on the r300 showed no errors, though I did get a "thin tape" warning when I put the bela tape in. the waveforms look good and I took a listen to a few sections and they sound good. I like the idea of taking photos of the dats and cards and including those with the flacs.
Keytohwy- I'm not sure of the format of the 8 tracks, but when I get the next batch of tapes I will ask and snap a few pics. They looked just a bit bigger than a normal dds tape.
Jesse
-
Don't break the deck :P Quite a range in there.
I know. I should get my own DAT player to do this. There are way more tapes than I thought. This was box one of 4 or 5. He also has these slightly larger digital tapes. Looked like 8 tracks from the notes in the tapes.. he recorded those from a van I believe. No idea what format or how those could be transferred.
Jesse, those are more than likely ADAT tapes. They used to be used for "professional" Multi-track DAT recording if the company/band didn't wish to use (afford) multi-track Reels via a digital PCM unit.
I wasn't the recordist (Dave Swanson was), but I was the microphone "consultant" for the official release Blues Traveler Live from the Fall which used 32 channels of ADAT for their entire fall West Coast tour. The Trick is/was that each ADAT tape only held 8 tracks, so to do 32 tracks it took 4 machines synced and timecoded together.
The bigger trick was in the transfer/editing because it was such a biatch to do with the 4 machines, especially when your crew had some issues taking notes during the recordings!
I'm following your thread because I don't have a working DAT deck anymore and am watching what folks say about the best DAT decks for playback. I have about 4-600 untransferred DAT's from the mid-late 90's, but many of them are Panic, Mule or PnF which already exist somewhere else. There is that Derek Trucks with Gregg Allman Band Ft. Worth TX 1994 when Derek was 15 I'd love to have transferred......... 8)
-
There is that Derek Trucks with Gregg Allman Band Ft. Worth TX 1994 when Derek was 15 I'd love to have transferred......... 8)
I can do that for you...
Terry
-
Don't break the deck :P Quite a range in there.
I know. I should get my own DAT player to do this. There are way more tapes than I thought. This was box one of 4 or 5. He also has these slightly larger digital tapes. Looked like 8 tracks from the notes in the tapes.. he recorded those from a van I believe. No idea what format or how those could be transferred.
Jesse, those are more than likely ADAT tapes. They used to be used for "professional" Multi-track DAT recording if the company/band didn't wish to use (afford) multi-track Reels via a digital PCM unit.
I wasn't the recordist (Dave Swanson was), but I was the microphone "consultant" for the official release Blues Traveler Live from the Fall which used 32 channels of ADAT for their entire fall West Coast tour. The Trick is/was that each ADAT tape only held 8 tracks, so to do 32 tracks it took 4 machines synced and timecoded together.
The bigger trick was in the transfer/editing because it was such a biatch to do with the 4 machines, especially when your crew had some issues taking notes during the recordings!
I'm following your thread because I don't have a working DAT deck anymore and am watching what folks say about the best DAT decks for playback. I have about 4-600 untransferred DAT's from the mid-late 90's, but many of them are Panic, Mule or PnF which already exist somewhere else. There is that Derek Trucks with Gregg Allman Band Ft. Worth TX 1994 when Derek was 15 I'd love to have transferred......... 8)
Don't ADAT's look like VHS tapes? These were literally just a touch bigger than a dat tape. I had a double take when I first saw them, they looked like dat tape.
-
Don't break the deck :P Quite a range in there.
I know. I should get my own DAT player to do this. There are way more tapes than I thought. This was box one of 4 or 5. He also has these slightly larger digital tapes. Looked like 8 tracks from the notes in the tapes.. he recorded those from a van I believe. No idea what format or how those could be transferred.
Jesse, those are more than likely ADAT tapes. They used to be used for "professional" Multi-track DAT recording if the company/band didn't wish to use (afford) multi-track Reels via a digital PCM unit.
I wasn't the recordist (Dave Swanson was), but I was the microphone "consultant" for the official release Blues Traveler Live from the Fall which used 32 channels of ADAT for their entire fall West Coast tour. The Trick is/was that each ADAT tape only held 8 tracks, so to do 32 tracks it took 4 machines synced and timecoded together.
The bigger trick was in the transfer/editing because it was such a biatch to do with the 4 machines, especially when your crew had some issues taking notes during the recordings!
I'm following your thread because I don't have a working DAT deck anymore and am watching what folks say about the best DAT decks for playback. I have about 4-600 untransferred DAT's from the mid-late 90's, but many of them are Panic, Mule or PnF which already exist somewhere else. There is that Derek Trucks with Gregg Allman Band Ft. Worth TX 1994 when Derek was 15 I'd love to have transferred......... 8)
Don't ADAT's look like VHS tapes? These were literally just a touch bigger than a dat tape. I had a double take when I first saw them, they looked like dat tape.
Maybe DA-88 recordings. Like ADAT, but to a Hi-8 (8mm) video cassette instead of SVHS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DA-88
(http://medias.audiofanzine.com/images/normal/tascam-da-88-396226.jpg)
(http://media2.ph.88db.com/DB88UploadFiles_med2/2015/03/11/DC1B9472-14FF-48DA-8DA0-766AE37F9237.jpg)
-
Yup, that looks like the type.
-
Ahso. Sorry for misinformation guys. Without a picture I didn't know the size. Of course I forgot about Hi8. ahhh, the memories of the digital "stone age"! 8) :laugh:
thanks Jeff!
-
Well, I guess I should have listened to H20. I popped in a Bela Fleck tape, uncirculated show from 8/8/1998, and the deck displayed a "CAUTION" warning. I looked it up in the manual, and it says there could be moisture in the deck. I know that is not the issue. The tape will not eject. Ouch. :facepalm:
What are the chances I could pop the top off and get the tape out intact?
-
Well, I guess I should have listened to H20. I popped in a Bela Fleck tape, uncirculated show from 8/8/1998, and the deck displayed a "CAUTION" warning. I looked it up in the manual, and it says there could be moisture in the deck. I know that is not the issue. The tape will not eject. Ouch. :facepalm:
What are the chances I could pop the top off and get the tape out intact?
Pretty good - but you have to be very careful - may want to look up on Internet to see if there is a suggested method - I have manually loaded and unloaded mech's a number of times on a few decks but never the R300
Make sure the tape isn't caught on anything first or over tight (over tension)
usually you can hand crank the gears (carefully and make sure you apply only very slight pressure in the correct direction - start by only very slightly cracking in each direction to see if the tape is unloading or not) - you may have to hand feed extra tape out of the deck if the tape has spun off into the transport (under tension)
-
Richard-
Can you elaborate a bit on your two step process?
I do DDS drive > SCSI > Win XP Laptop first then :
- 44.1 or 48khz tape > 7040 > hs-p82
- 32 Khz > R700 > JB3
Is the first pass through your DDS drive just to check for errors or is that the actual transfer? I'm assuming not since step two is run the tape through your 7040. Just trying to understand a bit better. How would you know if a tape supports A-Time?
Thanks as always for your insights..
-
Richard-
Can you elaborate a bit on your two step process?
I do DDS drive > SCSI > Win XP Laptop first then :
- 44.1 or 48khz tape > 7040 > hs-p82
- 32 Khz > R700 > JB3
Is the first pass through your DDS drive just to check for errors or is that the actual transfer? I'm assuming not since step two is run the tape through your 7040. Just trying to understand a bit better. How would you know if a tape supports A-Time?
Thanks as always for your insights..
DDS pass is for the xfer as well - it reads the audio right off the tape and converts to a WAV file - similar to how EAC reads a CD
-
Why do you run it through your DAT deck after the DDS drive? Are the DDS drives more reliable and less likely to eat/jam a tape? If the DDS option is more reliable and can transfer at 2x speed maybe I should hunt down a Win XP laptop with a PCMCIA slot. Does the DAT2WAV work the same over PCMCIA? Also curious about the A-TIME you mentioned and how you'd know if a tape supported it, and what the downsides are if it does not. Thanks for your help!
-
DDS transfer is much faster (twice as fast as normal playback) and very reliable (the DDS3 Sony's are better then the older DDS1 Archive's and DDS2 Archive/Conner/Seagate models)
Plus you get a file showing you where ever there are errors on the tape
Also IMO the transfer is more pure since you are effectively reading the data right off the tape versus reading it, retiming the information, and then sending it out onto a digital cable.
A-TIME = Absolute Time and is the Base Timing used on DAT tapes -> DAT2WAV tracks the A-TIME and although you can have DAT2WAV read the entire tape it works best if the A-TIME is consistent across the tape - this is a limitation of the DAT2WAV software
A-TIME is written when the tape is recorded to - but it is not transferred between tapes - anyway back in the days of DAT recording it was quite easy (especially on the Sony portables) to record without A-TIME as you could mess it up when you keep rewinding and restarting the recording (common back in the day when you where always trying to conserve tape and didn't know exactly when the band was coming out)
-
I'm pretty sure most of Toni's masters were recorded to either a DAP1 or HHB. I may take you up on your offer if I can track down an XP box with either SCSI OR PCMCIA. Which connector type is your SCSI cable looking for?
-
Cool video that shows DDS drives being used to transfer DAT tapes and various DAT ripping software like DAT2WAV, wavDAT, and one other. Pretty cool stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faUh4v2VMqI
-
^^^^
Great link- Thanks! ;D