What's up PLAYBOY?! - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- What's up PLAYBOY?!

Posted by atxbigballer1 on Feb-22-2015 20:34:

What's up PLAYBOY?!

Mixing down to a DAT machine?
Panasonic 3800
What do u think?

Posted by AlphaStarred on Feb-22-2015 22:19:

Waste of time and money (I tried this before and just ended up paying dough to fix it and messed up my track). Eventually I got a Tascam DP-004 digital 4-track recorder, which has been serving me quite well. Although, you can also just record everything onto the computer nowadays.

Posted by Looney4Clooney on Feb-23-2015 01:09:

Lol

You should bounce everything to a tascam portastudio.

Posted by tehlord on Feb-23-2015 09:30:

quote:
Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
Lol

You should bounce everything to a tascam portastudio.

Hipster chic

Posted by Mr.Mystery on Feb-23-2015 12:45:

Pfft.

Posted by Innocence Lost on Feb-24-2015 04:45:

Where you been man, just like Mr. history said tape is the way to go/

Posted by MSZ on Feb-24-2015 06:22:

reel 2 reel playboy.

Posted by DJ RANN on Feb-24-2015 21:28:

fukcing lol.

Tascam portastudio all the way. It's like NS10's: if you can get it to sound good on that, then clearly you're on too many drugs, or not enough.

Posted by Richard Butler on Feb-26-2015 14:51:

My mates old recordings from his Tascam portastudio were bloody lovely sounding.

Oddly enough he's recently started bouncing to a Tascam DA40 DAT and re-importing into Cubase and he reckons he's getting a very satisfying result.

Posted by AlphaStarred on Feb-26-2015 15:29:

I've always been recording everything into my Tascam DP-004, and I'm happy with the sound quality. The only reason I see for recording into the computer is if you want to individually EQ every channel, otherwise my Tascam serves me well for the oldschool analog sound. I'm sure there may be something better, but honestly the recordings from my Tascam sound virtually the same (if not the exact same) as when I'm listening to my equipment through my analog mixer.

Posted by Looney4Clooney on Feb-26-2015 15:40:

Bouncing to digital doesn't add anything but trucation and rounding errors. Unless you are using it as a bit reducing effect. I think that was my original point. It is silly.

Posted by AlphaStarred on Feb-26-2015 15:49:

Sure it doesn't add anything, but it's much less of a hassle than recording to DAT, nowadays. I'm guessing virtually everyone records to digital nowadays, no? When I bought a 606 from Joey Jupiter, I also bought his DAT player, upon which he gave me a confused look and asked me why I would even consider using the outdated DAT recording method, when digital is so much easier and just/nearly as good.

Posted by Mel David on Feb-26-2015 20:31:

Might as well mike up your monitor speakers during the mix down to get some air and magic space dust.

Posted by DJ RANN on Feb-27-2015 21:25:

quote:
Originally posted by Mel David
Might as well mike up your monitor speakers during the mix down to get some air and magic space dust.

You know, there is some magic to that. I've seen it done before and when nailed, the space dust is incredible.

One Classical engineer I know (not score, I mean big full on Orchestal recordings), actually does a smilar technique:

He sets up a couple of large full range speakers hidden in the Orchestra which are fed from the Orchestra mics. Basically he's adding the sound of the orchestra to the orchestra. It's subtle but fucking effective.

Please do not try this at home.