![]() |
Visit Gearwire.com for video demos, interviews, NAMM and AES coverage, the Gearwire Crosstalk podcast, and much, much more. |
|
|||||||
| Studio talkback Tracking, mixing, mastering, microphones, preamps, DAWs, converters, plug-ins, consoles/mixers, HD recorders, comps, 'verbs, FX, monitors, 'phones, power conditioners, wiring, patch bays, studio acoustics, studio vibe. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is it really worth the work, recording digital for high definition, transfering to analog tape for that rich - fat sound for the mix-down, then mastering digitally using scrubing software ??
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
I would say that it is much cooler going the other way around. Recording to tape and then going digital to edit. Then mixing down to 1/4" or 1/2" tape to send to mastering. I would say this is worth it.
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
I found something NOT to try. This past weekend, as an experiment in fattening up drum sounds, I bounced a drum submix from Protools to my old Sony Reel to Reel, then re-recorded the track back into protools from tape. Of course, the tape player does NOT play at the exact same speed every time. So the re-recorded track lagged behind for a while, then sped up. By the end of the song the re-recorded track was a whole beat or two ahead of the original Protools track. So what did I do? I spent a good two hours slicing up the re-recorded track to line the hits up with the original. Was it worth it? Uh, no.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|