Topic: Analog set up

[ButchAlmberg]

Back story... I got into taping fairly recently and never had the opportunity to record a show with analog equipment. I'm intrigued by the gear that you guys used 'back in the day' and sometimes feel like I never earned that merit badge. That said, I know there is old analog equipment floating around out there and I've been inclined as of late to buy something in order to tape a few shows... just to say I did.

So, I'm looking into different decks. I've considered the Sony D-5 and the Marantz PMD430, but... that tape flip  I guess the question is, if you had to record in analog today, what deck would you dust off?

[heathen]

If I had to record analog today my first concern would be obtaining quality tape.  I haven't looked into it, but my understanding is that quality cassette tapes are kinda' pricey these days.  I imagine reel-to-reel even moreso.  If it's just for a few shows, though, it might not be that big a deal.

As to decks, I'd look for a Sony D5 or the Marantz deck that was popular among tapers (I can't remember the model number).  The Sony D6 is pretty good and even more portable, and is what I had/have, but the metering is very crude and it can't pass a signal while doing a tape flip.  There is probably other functionality it lacks compared to the D5 or Marantz, but I never used either of those so I can't say for sure.

There is a thread on here where someone recreated a '70s cassette rig...I believe with a big Nakamichi deck.  That project is pretty awesome, so you may want to dig up the thread.

[jefflester]

There is a thread on here where someone recreated a '70s cassette rig...I believe with a big Nakamichi deck.  That project is pretty awesome, so you may want to dig up the thread.

Yep.
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=186430.0;all

[ycoop]

Hope I’m not high jacking the thread too much, but I’m unclear on the mechanics of the tape flip and subsequent patching from other sources. Could someone explain to me how that would work?

[jefflester]

Hope I’m not high jacking the thread too much, but I’m unclear on the mechanics of the tape flip and subsequent patching from other sources. Could someone explain to me how that would work?

There are all sorts of factors in deciding when to perform a tape flip. Biggest factor is who the band is - how long are their songs and how much time do they take in between them, if any. And how long of sets they play. When you get close to end of Side A and a song ends, you do a quick flip. If there is time you can rewind Side B to the start to save tape. If they only play 60-75 min sets though, you don't need to worry so much about using up most of Side A or rewinding back to start of Side B (for standard C90). But if the band starts up quick while you're flipping or rewinding, yeah you lose a few seconds. To patch it, you load both sources into a multi track DAW, align them, match levels, and switch over to the alt source to cover the gap in the first one.

[daspyknows]

Hope I’m not high jacking the thread too much, but I’m unclear on the mechanics of the tape flip and subsequent patching from other sources. Could someone explain to me how that would work?

There are all sorts of factors in deciding when to perform a tape flip. Biggest factor is who the band is - how long are their songs and how much time do they take in between them, if any. And how long of sets they play. When you get close to end of Side A and a song ends, you do a quick flip. If there is time you can rewind Side B to the start to save tape. If they only play 60-75 min sets though, you don't need to worry so much about using up most of Side A or rewinding back to start of Side B (for standard C90). But if the band starts up quick while you're flipping or rewinding, yeah you lose a few seconds. To patch it, you load both sources into a multi track DAW, align them, match levels, and switch over to the alt source to cover the gap in the first one.

How I remember the days of running 6 D-5's and having to do the flip/rewind thing.  I was so glad to go digital with the PCM F-1/SL2000 with 2 hour tapes.

[ycoop]

Hope I’m not high jacking the thread too much, but I’m unclear on the mechanics of the tape flip and subsequent patching from other sources. Could someone explain to me how that would work?

There are all sorts of factors in deciding when to perform a tape flip. Biggest factor is who the band is - how long are their songs and how much time do they take in between them, if any. And how long of sets they play. When you get close to end of Side A and a song ends, you do a quick flip. If there is time you can rewind Side B to the start to save tape. If they only play 60-75 min sets though, you don't need to worry so much about using up most of Side A or rewinding back to start of Side B (for standard C90). But if the band starts up quick while you're flipping or rewinding, yeah you lose a few seconds. To patch it, you load both sources into a multi track DAW, align them, match levels, and switch over to the alt source to cover the gap in the first one.

Thanks. I imagine there were some tricky moments if there were long, unexpected jams.

Surely one didn’t patch in this way when taping was all analog.

[jefflester]

Thanks. I imagine there were some tricky moments if there were long, unexpected jams.

Yeah. Usually with a Dead show set two Side A would take you into drums and you wouldn't care so much about losing a few seconds on the flip. But sometimes pre-drums would run long and you might have a cut while they were still in a song or doing some interesting jamming.

Surely one didn’t patch in this way when taping was all analog.

Ah, is that what you were asking? Yeah, nobody bothered patching from other sources back in the tape days. You'd just live with the cut.

For the few cases of splicing/patching, it would have been done on reels rather than cassettes. IIRC, someone put together a splice job of 11/08/70, since the best quality source (Ken and Judy Lee) had lots of cuts from starting/stopping the deck.

[lerond]

Hah! I got acquainted with tapers soon after becoming a deadhead in the early 80's ... but I waited for DAT to show up to become a taper, in large part because I didn't want to have to deal with analog tape flips.
Been very happy with the progress in taping technology ... these are the good old days!

[datbrad]

I recall plenty of Dead shows in the '80s when I counted up to 12 decks running out of my rig, D5s first, with a few D6s at the end. When flip time came, it was usually a crowd of dudes that looked like they were giving somebody CPR from a distance, lol. Holding down the record button with the right thumb, you flipped the tapes with left hand to keep signal from cutting the next decks. Between that and riding levels, taping in the cassette days was not a "set it and forget it" proposition. One of the biggest benefits DAT delivered was to eliminate flips.

[ButchAlmberg]

Were portable reel to reels ever a thing?

[lsd2525]

 

FOB no less

[heathen]

Were portable reel to reels ever a thing?

Absolutely.  Lots of great audience recordings came from portable reel-to-reel recorders. 

Edit: Check out this discussion https://archive.org/post/344701/reel-to-reel-question

[ButchAlmberg]

Isd2525 that guy's doing the mic stand block before there were mic stands  Great pic!

[ButchAlmberg]

Heathen, cool information in that link. Thank you. That Ampex mm1000 weighed in at only 650 lbs

[johnmuge]

My buddies were all running Sony D5's and they were solid machines.  I got a Sony D3 in the late 80's and I loved that recorder, great little stealth deck.  I still have it but I would never us it again. It got put in retirement when i switched over to DAT in 93 and it sure was nice not to worry about flipping tapes.  I would go with a D5 if you really want to play around with analog in the field.

[IMPigpen]

My buddies were all running Sony D5's and they were solid machines.  I got a Sony D3 in the late 80's and I loved that recorder, great little stealth deck.  I still have it but I would never us it again. It got put in retirement when i switched over to DAT in 93 and it sure was nice not to worry about flipping tapes.  I would go with a D5 if you really want to play around with analog in the field.

I got started with a Sony D3 too.  The only thing I hated about it was that sometimes the tape jammed at the flip.  I upgraded to a D6 and don't remember having that problem.  I usually used XLII or XLIIS 100min tapes for mastering since you could actually get 52-53 minutes per side.  Of course then I upgraded to a Tascam DA-P1 and DAT!

[heathen]

I still have my D6, but there's something wrong with it and I don't see much point in getting it fixed.  I also have a tough time parting with it because of the sentimental value.   

[IMPigpen]

I still have my D6, but there's something wrong with it and I don't see much point in getting it fixed.  I also have a tough time parting with it because of the sentimental value.   

Funny story, I ended up selling my D6 back in early 2000 to a guy I knew who wanted to get into taping since I had gone digital.   It was Ben Collette, who's now an audio engineer who manages Phish's studio, the Barn, in VT and his own studio in Burlington, VT.

[jefflester]

I still have my D6. I had a D5 for only a year or so before going DAT, so didn't have too much heartache moving it along. I threw away my TCD-D3 (DAT) because it came down with a serious case of sticky rubber-itis. In hindsight I suppose I should have seen if anybody wanted it for parts or something before chucking it.

[DSatz]

The TCD-D5 series had a better transport, with audibly lower flutter than the WM-D6 or -D3, particularly if a tape cassette had higher than normal friction. On the other hand, the later version of the -D6 offered Dolby "C" noise reduction. I never understood why Sony didn't add that to the D5.

When interruptions are expected, patching for multiple recorders needs to be done on a "star" basis--splitting the signal at the source rather than passing it through one recorder into another.

From about 1973 to maybe 1981 I recorded concerts with a Nagra IV-SD + QGB large reel adapter. Even at 3-3/4 ips that deck sounded good. But when the PCM-F1 came out, I bought one from Laox in Tokyo and never looked back. I think that the experience of analog tape recording can be instructive for people who've never done it, but it doesn't offer any overall sonic advantage over digital recording, unless one happens to like a particular type of distortion in a particular situation.

[ButchAlmberg]

DSatz does the Nagra record 2 channel?

[heath]

There are full track (mono) as well as half track (stereo) versions of the Nagra--I've got 5 Nagras here for various transfer purposes and I'm attempting purchase my unicorn--the Nagra T.  Would round out the collection nicely!

https://www.nagraaudio.com/product/nagra-t-audio/

Someone asked earlier if reliable open reel tape is available and the answer is a resounding YES!!!  ATR Magnetics here in PA is pumping out some very high quality tape, so if anyone wants to dust off their decks, have at it!!  They are making all sizes--1/4", 1/2", 1", 2" and also are able to supply most accessories needed for geeks like us--splicing tape, leader, hold down tape, takeup reels, etc.  Last I heard, they started slitting 1/8" cassette tape as well

https://www.atrtape.com/

[ts]

I still have my D6, but there's something wrong with it and I don't see much point in getting it fixed.  I also have a tough time parting with it because of the sentimental value.   

Same here. Still have my D5. Hasn’t worked in years. I have the case, original AC adapter, box and service manual. Strap got lost somewhere along the road. I’ll never part with it. Not that it’s worth anything. Too many memories.

But to get back on topic. Definitely look for a D5.

[darby]

I still have my D6, but there's something wrong with it and I don't see much point in getting it fixed.  I also have a tough time parting with it because of the sentimental value.   

Same here. Still have my D5. Hasn’t worked in years. I have the case, original AC adapter, box and service manual. Strap got lost somewhere along the road. I’ll never part with it. Not that it’s worth anything. Too many memories.

But to get back on topic. Definitely look for a D5.

still have one of my D5s left... but it hasn't ran in years

[Life In Rewind]

If I had to do it all over again - I would have used Type I normal bias tapes w/NR - (preferably Dolby C) and hammered the levels.

Later day experiments taught me - we were doing it all wrong!

Much like the sea of shotguns we used to see at shows - slick and fancy looking - but ultimately the wrong choice!

Once we had the internet - a lot of this got cleared up!

[seethreepo]

If I had to do it all over again - I would have used Type I normal bias tapes w/NR - (preferably Dolby C) and hammered the levels.

Later day experiments taught me - we were doing it all wrong!

Much like the sea of shotguns we used to see at shows - slick and fancy looking - but ultimately the wrong choice!

Once we had the internet - a lot of this got cleared up!

I get the levels comment and the shotguns one but not the type 1  arent metal cassettes better? I know there were even some with ceramic cases  certainly they held to stricter quality guidelines  no?

[billydee]

I just pulled my D5 out of mothballs to see if it would work. It plays back just fine but the record head doesn't engage when pressing down on the control.
Weird....I need to figure this out so I can make a couple analog recordings for old times sake!

[sdc]

I get the levels comment and the shotguns one but not the type 1  arent metal cassettes better? I know there were even some with ceramic cases  certainly they held to stricter quality guidelines  no?
[/quote]


I gotta say that my metal tapes, almost all from Maxell, have not held up as well as my XLII and XLII-S. 

[morst]

Type I tape has a characteristic distortion which is often sought-after in order to recreate a "classic" sound. Note that most studio recordings on analog tape were done with (professional quality, wide) Type I tape.


Essentially, Type I tape distortion on peaks sounds euphonic, and you can use it effectively as a limiter in recording situations.


Chrome and Metal tape don't sound good when they distort, but they do provide substantially higher dynamic range. It can, and often is, argued that Rock & Roll and other forms of loud music can be recorded just fine with the level of peak distortion Type I provides. Type II and IV are quieter, but may not sound as rockin' when you hammer the levels.

[Life In Rewind]

Type I tape has a characteristic distortion which is often sought-after in order to recreate a "classic" sound. Note that most studio recordings on analog tape were done with (professional quality, wide) Type I tape.


Essentially, Type I tape distortion on peaks sounds euphonic, and you can use it effectively as a limiter in recording situations.


Chrome and Metal tape don't sound good when they distort, but they do provide substantially higher dynamic range. It can, and often is, argued that Rock & Roll and other forms of loud music can be recorded just fine with the level of peak distortion Type I provides. Type II and IV are quieter, but may not sound as rockin' when you hammer the levels.

Yes - and I would argue that PA rock has a rather limited dynamic range - and can benefit from the "smash" at the top.

As for the quiet - that's what the DOLBY C is for - it really works well, especially with copious amounts of gain.

I did an experimental comparison a few years ago, that was posted here - but I had to move the files.  If I can find the files, I'll put them back on my server.

I'm not going to say it was impossible to spot the digital sourced recording - but it wasn't a blowout!

I did one with cassette, normal tape and Dolby C and another with an old AKAI reel to reel.

I also tend to think the D5s VU+Peak metering led to, generally, too conservative level settings.

[MakersMarc]

I started with a D3 and cut a few sets during the flip. I’m. On to a d8. Wish I’d kept the D3.