Does anyone record without using computer based tech.?

Just curious...I have nothing against High tech, and I know State of the Art equipment is State of the Art for about 5 mins. these days, but sometimes find myself cranking out my old Akai reel to reel from the Viet Nam war era or even my old Tascam 8 track porta -studio cassette recorder, just plugging directly in to the dedicated guitar input or from a Musicman amp. Ping-ponging tracks, singing lead and all the harmony parts, thru old Shure mics,using the cheesy built in effects on my Fostex 16 track, a Zoom Rtyha-tak drum machine, quality Fender/Gibson/Ric/ guitars, cheap Rogue bass guitars, 3/$10 harmonicas or an Miami Vice era Casio keyboard to capture that old garage band sound...anyone with me or do I stand alone?

I don't miss buying 1/2" tape for $50 a reel (1/2 hour recording time), or tape hiss and drop-outs, or waiting for the tape to rewind and not being able to find the part on the tape I was looking for, or general editing limitations of linear recording. Then there's the size, weight, cost and maintenance of reel-to-reel recorders that I also don't miss.

It's funny how people become nostalgic for old technology, but they forget the problems. I use a MacBook Pro with Logic and I'd never consider going back.

I never forgot the problems of linear recording, it's just nice to know that I still have the old equipmen(as well as and the requisite recording acumen to take a trip down memory lane whenever I feel like it...some people can't because they are only versed in current recording techniques, from your post you seem like you are one of the chosen few that could go back if you want to...not bragging but my current studio is pretty impressive with lotsa new gadgetry, beaucoup ducats invested, and lucky to have a wife who plays and records and ergo supports my investing as well as a daughter 25 years old that fronts a "Heart " inspired band which is very popular locally and spends a good deal of time in my humble studio. I recently had old quadraphonic stereo sytem refurbished so I can listen to all my old vinyl, complete with pops scratches, hisses etc. I'm not looking for musical perfection, nor am I in it for the money, I just like old stuff, MacBook PRO/ w/logic is indeed a great way to go if you want high quality ease at a reasonable price, just don't look down on us old schoolers (and you WERE one) for our nostalgic indulgences... never say never... the bug might bite ya and you will be ready.

I miss it. I stopped using analog tape about 2 years ago because of the cost, my machine going "south", and the fact that the tapes are no longer made for my Akai MG1214.

I had some really old keyboards, a Korg DSS-1, and a couple of Kawai K3s. I was using them even though they were old because they had a cool sound. But no more. They melted when my garage went up in flames, along with some of my cheesy (and not so cheesy) footpedals.

Maybe I'll replace them, or get something else that's kinda fun. Who knows.

just checked out your website...very impressive, so many cool people on this site...next time i'm on the left coast visiting all my transplanted Jerseyites friends in SF, Petaluma, Marin, Woodacre, Salinas, San Diego etc. i'll try to visit. lateron

I still use analog tape at any possible opportunity. I don't have an analog deck myself these days but still work in studios that do, whenever possible. Ain't no substitute for that sound.

I don't use a computer to replace all the gear in my control room. I use a computer for editing, occaisonally for recording, and for really useful stuff around the studio like taking notes in a word processor, keeping track of time spent on a project, and making up the client's bill.

I do use stand-alone recorders that have the same components in them that computers have, and have software that makes them work, but I wouldn't call them computers - I call them recorders.

I still have analog recorders and players set up and ready to go if anyone wants to work that way, but the truth of the matter is that people have come to expect not to pay for media these days, and I haven't found a really inexpensive and indefinitely reusable 2" tape nowadays, so this is reserved for the clients who, for whatever reasons, want to use it and are willing to pay for it. I don't tell them it's better, I let them choose - and these days they always choose the digital media. So that's what I use.

I was never bothered by tape hiss or the need to do alignments periodically. It makes me feel like it's a more organic process (which music is, too). So don't look here for another "I don't miss . . . " comment. And I feel much more comfortable looking at an oscilloscope than I do looking at a cryptic computer error code and a list of Windows services some of which I might be able to turn off ot squeeze another plug-in out of the DAW.

I be using the compy and a anologue deck as an interface for a quarter inche jock ah yas. ahem.. .

I run the signal thru a four track equipped with DOLBY but not on tape.

Some folkeses says that TAPE warms the siggyna and then one runs that warmed signal into the compy .

I just go from the axe or keyboard to the deck, to the compy. here's why .

the tape machines runs fast and slow(dangitt) and wobbles and groans and just wastes too much of my time. the tapes use up too quickley and I just like the EASE of compy only recordings.

I have two decks (one is a back up)

I always have me one goode eye on the hunt for olde four track decks(with DOLBY) with quarter inche holios.

why not have five goode decks waiting in the wings?

thonk yew fer lettin me share.

O know, thee puleshure is all mine hafing sew amany nowlegible peeps shearing there imput wif me...like I said before, and this is from the heart... So many cool people on this site...I've made friend for life in the military but musicians in all facets of the industry are really God's chosen chillens.

If you're getting noticeable hiss from your deck, you or whoever is setting up the machine do not know what you're doing.

>

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that, unless noise reduction is being used...hiss/distortion/high frequency response is always a tradeoff with bias, and few people are willing to make the tradeoffs that reduce hiss so dramatically it doesn't seem to be there anymore.

I'm one of those people who used analog tape for years, and I could hardly wait to get rid of it. All tape, actually, including digital tape. I think analog tape is very well suited to certain genres of music as a signal processor, but for what I do, digital reproduces what I want to get across more accurately.

My only remaining use of analog is patch in a two-track as a processor. Tape echo is very cool, too, when the hiss starts feeding back it adds a texture that digital simply can't do.

But now, since you're all such nice people, here's a secret. One thing that has always bugged me about digital was playing guitar through digital processing into a digital recorder. I prefer dissimilarities -- I'd rather put a Minimoog into a digital recorder, and a DX7 into analog tape Anyway, with my guitar tracks, I now process them through Adobe Audition's click remover. It's like a transient processor that -- while it's not INTENDED for this application -- absorbs the transients very much like analog tape.

The resulting processed guitar sound is very sweet and smooth..like analog, but without the things I don't like about analog.

Originally posted by ronnie rawhide ...anyone with me or do I stand alone?

The last two albums my band has done have been recorded staight to 2" tape. Before that it was an Akai 12-track.

But, when we mix we dump it all into Pro Tools.

While improper setup might increase noise, it's far from the only reason. It could be lack of maintenance, using tape that's too different from what the recorder was set up for (this isn't a problem with setup, it's a problem with knowing what's what).

Or it could be, and this is the most common reason among today's novice recordists, it's just a crummy recorder. Your grandfather's Sony in the tweed case is going to hiss when compared to a modern digital system. It always did, it's just that in the day when it served grandpa well, expectations were far lower. Nobody who bought recorders like that knew what signal-to-noise ratio meant.

And often as not, hiss is due to a lack of experience or knowledge of gain structure. This is something that people who have been recording with computers all their life have never bothered to learn. And not even a digital system is immune to this user-induced fault.

Sure, give a holler when you're in town.

I did forget to mention that, technically, technically, I still use the Akai MG1214. I've since fixed it up one more time, but have been using it primarily for tape transfers. You'd be surprised at how many people are wanting to transfer their tapes to DAWs. With the Apogee converters, I'm able to do a really nice-sounding job.

I like the old machines -- the solid thunk of a well designed pinchroller thumping against the capstan, the mass of big reels of 1 or 2 inch tape turning smoothly on near silent bearing... great machines of their era.

But that doesn't mean I miss using them.

Over the years I owned at least 10 reel tape machines (and countless cassette machines). My last purchased machine, a 'vintage' TASCAM 1/2" 8 track cost me a couple grand (with a dbx NR rack). I gave it away. After a couple years trying to keep it running -- and literally getting less than an hour's worth of finished product during that time -- I broke down and bought my first ADAT. Within a month I'd put more finished work down than I had in the preceding two years.

I'd been mixing to DAT since around '90 and I made the "final switch" to hard drive based multitracking (though I was still mixing to DAT) in '96.

Moving to non-linear recording was a heavensent to me. It fit smack into my evolving "post-modern" work style. Editing/re-arranging became trivially easy and opened me to flexibilities I'd only dreamed of using tape and ADAT.

Over the years I've owned at least 10 reel machines (and countless cassettes). I'm down to one reel machine, an old TASCAM 40-4 -- and it's somewhere in the garage, ready to transcribe those old mix two tracks -- or the scores of 4 track masters from my starting out days (a period nearly as productive as that initially following my switch to non-linear).

honh? :confused:

sorry, I thought you understood "arellspencer speak"

I don't used computer based recording

granted, I don't do a lot of recording these days (music, for me, is still primarilly a live phenomenon), but when I do it can still even be to magtape (I do have a stand-alond HDD recorder, but I don't have a digital mastering deck)

Note on that, sincee I generally use any recording I do do (or in my case doo-doo ) is more 'performance archiving', I don't really have use for virtual MIDI tracking, advanced editting or other post facilities

I just love the wheels and gears,

This is my new baby

http://image30.webshots.com/30/1/7/22/2536107220046406112GWBKOE_ph.jpg

I still use my ADAT recorder for taping jams. It can't be beat for ease of use. But as soon as I use up my box of ADAT tapes I'll be going to all-computer for recording. Two reasons-it'll be cheaper and I can record at 24 bits.

I probably shouldn't have bought that last box of tape because at some point in the last few years hard drive space became cheaper than ADAT tape.

I also use computers because I don't have the money for analog but I'll tell you, I've been recording on my buddys Studer A827 and man it has a sound.

After using analog again I've come to the conclusion that digital can sound real good but it takes a hell of a lot more work to get there. And it is true that analog just gells the sound.

And I'm as big of a hitech geek as anybody else.

Hardware MIDI recorders, drum machines, and this:

(Computers are a fad) :D

Totally have to disagree that tape is just a "signal processor," which implies that digital always captures the sound more faithfully and analog is a coloration. That has just not been my experience even though the specs say so. I just don't think there currently are specs to measure what I'm talking about.

I miss my reel to reel analog machine. It really did have a great sound. I also miss my ADAT.

I really think that my next recorder is going to be a Tascam 488 MK II. Portability and ease of use. Cheap media. If I need CD's I'll get a standalone burner.

I don't know that an analog machine should be considered a signal processor any more than A/D converters should be considered one. They simply sound different. In some ways, analog still sounds more accurate, and in other ways, digital does to my ear (I usually prefer analog, btw).