Music Player Network

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681605 07/10/05 10:24 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2
R
Rigsby Offline
Member
Offline
Member
R
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2
It's not about fidelity though is it? It's about heart.

It's also about knowledge, the sort of knowledge that comes from experience and if the author of this thread is new to recording perhaps it's best to learn about mic technique and positioning and patterns and so on ..important stuff, and a simple recording medium allows you to do that, get that knowledge in, before you immerse yourself in ..other things.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681606 07/10/05 10:41 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
J
joeysimms Offline
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
I disagree with you completely, Bill. Just because there is technically more dynamic range available does not mean it sounds better. Not with my ears anyway. The guy can borrow a cd burner, whatever. Interesting point about buying something that will serve you well in the future, when computer systems turn over so fast these days that it is a sucker's game trying to keep up with the latest. Meanwhile, for ~$200, this guy can actually teach himself to record by listening, mic postioning, and arrangement, instead of learning how to cut n' paste, drag n' drop, and otherwise erase away bad bits of a digital represenation of a picture.

I just find your elitist bashing of cassette tape to be bad advice for someone just starting out.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681607 07/11/05 01:49 AM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1
D
dubold Offline
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1
well, the important question here is: what's the point? if your songs are good, that'll come across regardless of the format. There's a certain amount of forgiveness that's inherent in the computer format. As someone who went from four track to computert, I definitely think that the move to computer-based recording actually hurt me, artistically. there's a level of commitment inherent in cassette four-track recording, and an attention to mic technique that will be invaluable when you eventually move to computer.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681608 07/11/05 03:15 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,613
Bill@Welcome Home Studios Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,613
It's funny, because I have an old school attitude to recording, as I was raised with reel to reel tape and all that this implies in terms of recording. This often puts me at odds with the computer guys, because I think that they get too damned tweaky about things, and are too willing to replace recording/acoustical knowlege with digital trickery.

On the other hand, my embracing the advantages that digital can bring to the recording process often puts me at odds with the tape guys.

But honestly, what you are perceiving as bashing is just a statement of fact. You may not like it, but it is true.

"Meanwhile, for ~$200, this guy can actually teach himself to record by listening, mic postioning, and arrangement..."

And exactly what prevents this if they use a computer instead of a cassette deck? Nothing. Same $200 invested, possibly less.

"Interesting point about buying something that will serve you well in the future, when computer systems turn over so fast these days that it is a sucker's game trying to keep up with the latest."

Only if you are sucker enough to try. My custom built Chris Smith (realcomputerguy) studio box is a few years old now, but it runs both the latest veriosn of SAWStudio and Sequoia as well as I need them to be run. My RME Digiface is a couple of years old now. My Mytek converters are, too. I see no reason to change them any time soon, because I was able, over time, to bring the quality of my rig up to my particular quality/price/performance comfort point. But I started out with a 4 bit game card at a time when if you wanted an audio application,you either wrote it or got someone else to write it. I've been through the quality wars, I've carefully examined all of the media that has been available in my lifetime, and didn't jump on anything until it was superior to what I already had.

"As someone who went from four track to computert, I definitely think that the move to computer-based recording actually hurt me, artistically..."

Right. You learned one way, then had to try to adjust to another and unlearn a lot of stuff. That is EXACTLY my point. The computer is most likely the future media for most recordists. Learn it now, or waste your time learning something else, only to have to learn it later, with all of the frustrations that you describe. Had you learned on the computer to start with, you would not have hit that bump in the road. Unlearning and adjusting expectations is harder than learning.


Bill


"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

Steve Martin

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681609 07/11/05 04:04 AM
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 14,215
miroslav Offline
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Offline
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 14,215
Quote:
Originally posted by joeysimms:

I just find your elitist bashing of cassette tape to be bad advice for someone just starting out.
Dude...get a grip. \:\)

The ONLY reason one would use a 4-track cassette is if you could not afford anything better.

Back in the days before DAWs...yeah, even a 4-track open reel was not "cheap"...never mind 8-track or more...
...so, those on very tight budgets, used 4-track cassettes.
But please be clear...using 4-track cassettes had NOTHING to do with superior quality! \:D

And when you say "your songs must really suck"...boy, now THAT'S a very elitist view!

These days, if you really want to record to tape, “on-the-cheap”...why on earth would you waste a couple of hundred bucks on a 4-track cassette when for that same amount of money…you can get a real decent 1/2" 8-track analog tape deck that will sound about 10 times better than a cassette...???

It's not elitism...it's just common sense.


miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681610 07/11/05 04:25 AM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 25
younggunmn Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally posted by joeysimms:
And fuck all of you who think nothing good, soundwise, can come from a 4 track cassette. What a sillyass, myopic view.
Not that I'm really in a position to be making the rules around here, but I'm a member of several communities, online and otherwise, and I've learned at least this much. Having the second thing (post #2) you tell people contain 'fuck all of you' is not such a great way to introduce yourself. If you don't want myopia, it's best to try to encourage a friendly debate rather than a heated argument.

I personally agree that computers are the way to go, ESPECIALLY for a beginner. It's just too frustrating to deal with 4 tracks when you could have the freedom and 'security' a computer provides (see my post above). When you're learning something new, discouragement is your worst enemy.

As for not learning good mic technique, it's not as if it's any different with computers, really. You may be able to turn crap into dirt using a computer, but you'll never turn it into gold. You might waste some time early on trying to do this, but I think eventually you'll see it can't be done, and hopefully in the process you will have gained some post-production skills that will help you later.

Matt

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681611 07/11/05 08:18 AM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2
R
Rigsby Offline
Member
Offline
Member
R
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2
Quote: "The ONLY reason one would use a 4-track cassette is if you could not afford anything better."

How about likeing the sound? That's not a reason no?

Quote: "These days, if you really want to record to tape, “on-the-cheap”...why on earth would you waste a couple of hundred bucks on a 4-track cassette when for that same amount of money…you can get a real decent 1/2" 8-track analog tape deck that will sound about 10 times better than a cassette...???"

Yeah, and you can spend time learning all the maintenance and aligning etc while you'd be better off spending your time learning mic positioning et al, that's why four-tracks are so awesome, a very simple platform to learn and hone skills on.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681612 07/11/05 01:22 PM
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 14,215
miroslav Offline
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Offline
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 14,215
Quote:
Originally posted by Rigsby:
How about likeing the sound? That's not a reason no?
OK...since you want to go down this path...

Can you please explain in detail exactly WHAT it is that you like about the sound of a 4-track cassette mor than any other format...???

Don't just go on about it...tell us.


Quote:
Yeah, and you can spend time learning all the maintenance and aligning etc while you'd be better off spending your time learning mic positioning et al, that's why four-tracks are so awesome, a very simple platform to learn and hone skills on.
If you are under the assumption that a 4-track cassette needs no maintenance and will last a long time untouched...well, that explains your misguided arguments.
Have you ever removed the front cover and looked at the heads/transport of a 4-track cassette?
That teeny tiny pinch roller gets gummed up pretty quick...and the heads always need cleaning too...and you SHOULD be demagnetizing it just like any other tape device…are you???
Oh...and the entire head mechanism moves up/down in order to engage the tape...which means it can go out of whack a lot faster.

I've had my hands inside many a cassette recorder...and have also thrown out quite a few, because once they start to crap out...they are not worth repairing.

With a decent small-format open reel...once the initial mechanical/electronic alignment is done you only need to clean and demag the heads/rollers once in awhile (same thing you should be doing with a cassette)...and maybe check the alignment every so often.
Unless you are working the deck really hard...the heads guides are not going to go out that quick...and if you don't change tape formula.
Of course, the big format pro machines need more regular care...but then, the payoff in sound quality is worth it.

Look, you cassette lovers...no one is saying that you can't get a decent sound out of one...but it really can NOT compare to the sound you can get out of even a 4-track 1/4" tape...!!!...never mind as you move up further in format…analog and digital.

The real point here is that if you are going to buy something for $200-$300 dollars...THESE days...you CAN do a LOT better than a 4-track cassette tape rig.
Nice, used ¼” and ½” decks can be had…or go digital, if you already own a solid computer.
Believe me, I’m an analog tape guy…but, even a $200-$300 dollar digital I/O rig will sound about 20 times better than a 4-track cassette tape recorder.
Not to mention the fact, that you can do all kinds of editing/processing with a nice little DAW, that you can never even think about with a 4-track cassette rig.

But this IS such a silly debate! \:D
You go right ahead using you 4-track cassette tape…and enjoy the sound quality! ;\)

You know what a 4-track cassette recorder is killer for...???...
...using it as a "scratch pad" for when you are just working out stuff, and you don't want to fire up your large rig...the cassette recorder will let you get a few tracks down, just to see how the song is going.
And...they are quite portable…so if you are going away for a few days, you can bring your guitar and cassette recorder along, for some demo/scratch work!!!


miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681613 07/11/05 07:47 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
J
joeysimms Offline
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
This place is lame, you people are nuts. Good bye.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681614 07/12/05 12:17 AM
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 14,215
miroslav Offline
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Offline
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 14,215


miroslav - miroslavmusic.com

"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681615 07/12/05 12:19 AM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 25
younggunmn Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 25
Well, at least post #3 was more polite than #2 \:D

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681616 07/18/05 06:36 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
J
joeysimms Offline
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
quote=younggunmn: Well, at least post #3 was more polite than #2

Hey, go fuck yourself. You fuckwads tossing around utter bullshit statements such as "200-300 digital rig will sound 20 times better than casette 4 track.." are what really sucks. look, I've been home-recording for 15 years, i have used 4 tracks, 8 tracks, 1/4", 1/2", 1" and 2" inch, and, in MY VIEW, anyone who writes off 4 tracks as easily as you dorks do is clearly not listening very well. It pisses me off because there is no debate here, just 'porta-potty 4 track' bashing, and not a shred of evidence to support daws and digital recording equipment being better.. cuz there is no way to prove it! it's in the ear of the listener, don't go spouting freq. range response tables, that doesn't mean jack shit.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681617 07/18/05 06:52 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,613
Bill@Welcome Home Studios Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,613
Quote:
Originally posted by joeysimms:
.... cuz there is no way to prove it! it's in the ear of the listener, don't go spouting freq. range response tables, that doesn't mean jack shit.
ahh, in the face of science the ignorant invoke voodoo. rock on dude.


"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."

Steve Martin

Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681618 07/19/05 09:29 AM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 25
younggunmn Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 25
>>>Hey, go fuck yourself.
I thought you were supposed to be leaving? In any event, I find your use of the English language to be wonderfully playful and witty.

>>spouting freq. range response tables, that
>>doesn't mean jack shit.
Yeah who was that guy Hertz? Probably a fuckwad

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681619 07/20/05 01:21 PM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 177
A
Anderson Council Sound Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
A
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 177
I thought you said you were leaving, and not comming back?

Quote:
Originally posted by joeysimms:
This place is lame, you people are nuts. Good bye.
We won't miss you.

Re: Pointless thread, unless you want to answer a few digital reocrding Q's #1681620 07/20/05 03:51 PM
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 462
Sean Eldon Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 462
this thread gave me a baby. i am pregnant because of this thread.

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3