tapeop.com "Work of the Devil?"

[PeeTee]

While browsing the net for info about the Ampex MM1200, I came across this article:

http://www.tinytelephone.com/html/tapeop.html

Hmmm...

[blake eat world]

i wonder if the latency plug-in problem occurs with a host-based system (001)?

[Frank S]

As an aside, Tape Op is my favorite recording magazine and its FREE if you sign up on the web.

Sure there's a little bit of an anti everything PT/digital /Plugin/high tech stance, but thats to be expected IMHO - I mean its called TAPE op. (They do frequently recommend the digi001 to readers asking for advice on getting an entry level HD recording setup, so I guess they're in the 'get it cheap and bang for the buck camp'. )

The magazine is a throwback to my DIY/4 track days for sure, but it constantly pushes the envelope of CREATIVE recording, and features lots of great interviews and tips from cool engineers and producers - those making cool and important music that doesn't always make it to the charts. I always learn something, and usually walk away from reading it thinking - gee I really don't need all those plug ins ( I know, actually I do...).

If you don't get it, sign up to get it for free at their website.

[Jules]

You can either bitch about PT vs Tape or learn how to use it to your advantage.

I find PT demands a higher level of engineering from me.

I like both Pro Tools & Tape Op!

http://duc.digidesign.com/ubb/images/icons/smile.gif

Jules

[blake eat world]

I'm really curious, are there latency issues when using plug-ins on a 001?

[flytrap]

Blake,

Yup! But not enough to really screw anything up.
It's hard just getting the right amount of plug ins without blowing all of my host DSP.

------------------
flytrap
The Acid House
Somerville, NJ

[blake eat world]

thanks flytrap, figured there was but didn't know if bypassing the use of a TDM chip would change anything.

[rickyshand]

What a polemic! And I *like* Tape-Op! Phasing problems due to plug in latency can easily be allowed for. In fact, hardware digital processors *also* induce latency, and it's a lot harder to compensate for that (a delay line for every track? And those 20 odd delay lines probably aren't going to all be 24/96!) Of course outboard digital FX may be frowned on in Vanderslice's studio too, he doesn't say.

I think for Vanderslice it's really a question of deciding what type of an engineer you want to be. If you want to run a boutique analog tracking studio for those discerning bands who desire that methodology, great!

If you want to work with the widest variety of people and the widest variety of projects then knowing how to work with the idiosyncrasies of newer systems like ProTools is as important as knowing how to work with the idiosyncrasies of the 'soul filled' analog gear currently so vaunted by the cognoscenti.

And the prediction about our future shame of contemporary PT productions and the 'grim reminder' of the early '80s is pure rhetoric. All music is continually reevaluated and rereceived. Canonization = Sterility. Know what you like and why you like it but try not to ram your tastes down everybody else's throat (that's the Record Company's job, remember?)

---from the Tape Op (Op Ed) piece---

"What self-respecting musician would use cheeseball amp modelers like Amp Farm instead of their own amplifier? Well, you’d be surprised. Musicians who scoff at an ART multi-effects unit will gladly load up a mix with crappy sounding TDMs. And once the mix is heavy with Plug-Ins, you will have latency and phasing problems to deal with. Latency is caused by the time it takes a signal to be routed through a TDM and back into the mix. It may be only a few milliseconds delay, but additional Plug-Ins will increase this time and possibly create serious phasing issues."

[komodo]

It doesn't even take a millisecond of latency to screw up a sound. I can here a difference in my drums if the toms or snare or whatever are delayed by as much as 20 samples. No, I can't hear it the way you normally hear the effects of processing tracks. But it can reduce the impact and clarity. After carefully micking my kit, I don't want to get thru my mix and realoze that the drums were more powerful in my first days rough mix.

[Felix]

latency is mainly a problem with doing underlying drum or maybe gtr busses with plugs on them. this is a bitch, but can still be solved with enough mixer dsp to create an extra aux for the original signal. fixing latency otherwise is pretty simple, and only recquired sometimes for drums or stereo mic tracks. there are also several nice plug-in phase-checking meters that help in resolving such phase issues.

all that article in tape op (and others like it) tell me is that some people out there are really full of **** .

i'll always cherish tape-op magazine, but it would nice to have a similar magazine focused more on DAW based studios. call it Mouse Op. http://duc.digidesign.com/ubb/images/icons/wink.gif

[Marc Edwards]

"Latency is caused by the time it takes a signal to be routed through a TDM and back into the mix"

What a tosser. Any engineer who's been in the industry a while will be able realise the strengths and weaknesses of different gear and techniques. I love the sound of tape, but you can keep your razor blades, I prefer my mouse.

The winging purists can record a stereo pair to acetate. ... Just my opinion, but I prefer our approach.

[C SMITH]

I am a contributing author to Tape Op and a close friend to owner/editor Larry Crane. I know that Larry is not anti Pro Tools or anti digital. It really baffles him that people view his magazine that way. Various people who write for Tape Op have strong opinions about Pro Tools and they are not censored. I think that is great. I answer a lot of Pro Tools questions that come in to the mag via e-mail. I even brought my PT rig into Jackpot! last month and used it to record a band. Larry thought it sounded fine.

Regarding the latency issues with plug ins, there is an etire section in the PT manual that describes the problem and how to deal with it. If you are just finding out about this problem from Tape Op you need to study digital audio processing and how it works a little bit more. I don't see how John or Tape Op could be doing the work of the devil when all they are doing is reporting what the manual itself says. Perhaps John needs to read the secion on how tho deal with DSP induced delays as well. This problem is for real and is one of the primary weaknesses of mixing on a DAW.

[Marc Edwards]

C Smith : Great reply. I'm sorry if my post seemed a bit full-on, i'm just sick of people arguing about this.

[blake eat world]

yeah, I just decided to go through a lot of the manual taking heed in what you said. A lot of the delays in mixing part confused me. Is it possible for digi to have the delay fixing integrated in the software so it does it automatically for us not so bright, and lazy folk? BTW Tape Op is still good in my book, whenever they have something bad to say about Pro Tools it's educated and for the most part true

[Felix]

if you do a search for latency / phase / ...
you'll see several rounds of posts on this heated topic. many from me and even more from Cory. we, and others, have been asking for dsp delay compensation for quite a while now. since v.4.3 or perhaps even earlier. other DAWs do it. but they just won't do it. perhaps for a good reason, who knows.

[C SMITH]

Delay compensation is really the only good answer. I still prefer to mix analog because many of the mix techniques I have learned rely on parallel signal processing via an aux or sub group. These tricks just don't work in Pro Tools. Maybe if we continue to bring it up, Digi will finally give us what we want.

The other half of the solution is to develop new mix techniques. This group is an exellent source of new information for me. I want to be educated and professional on whatever is the current standard recording format. That is why I still work on 24 track and that is why I learned to work in PT. I am just thankful to Digi that they finally killed the ADAT. I haven't had to do an ADAT recording in over a year. http://duc.digidesign.com/ubb/images/icons/smile.gif

[felixstone]

yes thank god i NEVER have to work on another adat again. BTW all this talk about latency when useing a plug-in....if your mixing on a analog console and plug a analog compressor across the insert u will also get some latency.

[Felix]

Originally posted by C SMITH:
Delay compensation is really the only good answer. I still prefer to mix analog because many of the mix techniques I have learned rely on parallel signal processing via an aux or sub group. These tricks just don't work in Pro Tools. Maybe if we continue to bring it up, Digi will finally give us what we want.

The other half of the solution is to develop new mix techniques. This group is an exellent source of new information for me. I want to be educated and professional on whatever is the current standard recording format. That is why I still work on 24 track and that is why I learned to work in PT. I am just thankful to Digi that they finally killed the ADAT. I haven't had to do an ADAT recording in over a year. http://duc.digidesign.com/ubb/images/icons/smile.gif


i also rely on sub-mix techniques. have you tried the method of having 2 sends for 2 aux. channels? (1= compressed, or whatever effect, and 2= original unaffected signal plus a sample delay plug-in which compensates for the plug-in delays of the underlying affected signal.) it works for me. even after matching the delays indicated in the volume display, i usually double-check with a phase plug-in. (and of course use my ears for a final approval.) http://duc.digidesign.com/ubb/images/icons/wink.gif
also, this method is detailed countless times in the archive threads. however, i still think it should be fixed in the software. i wish i could just click a phase adjust button on any track or aux. channel for such essential fine tuning. even though i suppose this would suck up even more dsp power on an already inefficient mixer plug-in, it takes extra mixer dsp to compensate with sends and aux. channels as it is.

[Conscious Structure]

ADATs are good for one thing: Live backing tracks!
Btw, someone has purchased Alesis' patents. I think it's actually Technics. But I am not certain. So we may continue to see ADATs if they decide to pursue the techonology. Sorry if that was off the subject, I just thought I'd bring it up.

------------------
Dave Belazis
Conscious Productions
Conscious Studios

[ppine]

Numark purchased Alesis on May 24th.

[tnie]

Propaganda!!!
"And the fact that every artist in the last five years has had the "analog is better"
propaganda shoved down their throat by people with a huge, industry wide vested interest in analog recording, big consoles and high overhead facilities."

What's spewing out of your mouth about digital?

Have used both Pro-tools and a A80mkIV 2"16 on the same drummer and the analog always has more depth then Pro-tools system.

[C SMITH]

Felix
Thanks for the advice. I have tried many different ways of dealing with the latency problems when processing tracks on a sub-group. The best way to do it is to send the audio out to a really good console and sub-mix it there. Of course I always match levels and reverse polarity to see if there is any phase trouble. Electricity is very fast so there is usually no problem. This method works well for me since I still mix to 1/2" analog anyway.

[john a]

Here's a thought- all of this talk about how shocking it is to switch from 2" to PTs
revolves around scenarios in which sounds are optimazed foe recording to analog, and then crammed into PTs as an afterthought. I started to get happy with PT only when I stopped dong that. It's dumb. You should monitor and get your sounds through the converters you're going to use, then you will be using your front end tools (eq, comp, etc) to get the sound you want. ( I always got my sounds on analog with the machine in repro) I personally found being able to record a kick with no tape compression to be revelatory. I realized that I didn't like having to balance all my level decisions against tape hiss- and then deal with whatever amount of tape compresson that gave me- that can take ALL the guts right out of a kick drum. If George Massenberg realized he hadn't heard a real hi hat since digital, I realized I hadn't really heard all of a kick drum before.
(Not, of course, that I'm putting myself in his category).
The other day I had to transfer a bunch of tracks from 2" to PT s for a client - he was crowing about how much better drums sound if you go to 2" before PTs- I get so tired of that line. His drums were nice, but the fact is they weren't GREAT- they wre just okay, not that well recorded in fact- bad bleed as opposed to good bleed, hard to tell the hihat track from the snare track just by listening. I put up something of mine- great kit tracked with a great player through some great mics and pres in a really nice room- right into PTs. Big as a house. He said-"wow that sounds great". Not, "I can hear the absence of analog". Part of it was that the original sounds- not the mics or pres, but the drums and room- were better. As Tony V said in the above referenced article- it's technique, not gear.
But I digress. I'm just so tired of this whole
boring, nothing new, snoooooooooze of a topic.
And the fact that every artist in the last five years has had the "analog is better" propaganda shoved down their throat by people with a huge, industry wide vested interest in analog recording, big consoles and high overhead facilities.

Ah, never mind, I'm as boring as they are....

Later on..

[blake eat world]

poor A/D conversion is to blame, digital is in its infant stage, and I'd still take it over analog in its infant stage. Digital recording has a huge future, and I totally agree this topic is boring. Someday in the not so distant future it will seem rediculous to record to the fuzz machine.

[C SMITH]

John A

If you would take the time to read with more precision you would see that we are discussing the advantages and disadvantages of mixing in Pro tools rather than tracking to Pro Tools. To many who are participating here, this is providing valuable new information so that they can improve their PT mixing skills. Personaly, I like to combine the use of older and newer technologies creatively in order to get the results I like. That is why I was advocating the pursuit of new mix techniques for PT in one of my previous posts. I choose to use analog when it is superior to digital. Never forget that this is a mixture of art and science. That is what keeps it interesting for me.