Re: How woud you do this 1000+ tape archiving job?

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Will Peterson <> wrote:

> I'm leaning toward an eight channel input system with four playback
> decks. What I haven't found is software that allows the naming of
> tracks as they are input, much like Protools. I'd rather not spend the
> $$$ on a PT system just for this job. Just because of storage issues
> and compatibility with the client, I'd rather go with a IDE PC system.

How about: play from a four track machine; feed the two rightly oriented
("forward") tracks through good conversion into a standalone burner.
Feed the other pair through another unit of the same convertor to a DAW
where you can flip the tracks, and then burn a CD from those, too.

But if quality is more important than time here, maybe the idea of a
good convertor into a standalone burner makes the most sense, and can be
run as a sidebar to everyday work without inducing dangerous confusion.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[Danny Taddei]

I couldn't see the original post because i switched computers and they
fell off.... sorry if I go redundant on you - Cubase allows you to
input stereo tracks and you can name them on the main page so that when
they show up in your hard drive folder they have the correct name. You
can track more stereo tracks then any computer can handle so if you
wanted to input several decks at once (or what ever it is you have) you
can save oodles of time. Cubase will record in 16, 24 and 32 bit. You
can get watered down cubase programs for cheap and you might even be
able to get a fully functioning demo version of Cubase 4.x for free to
use for a month or something like that. You can use any asio driver
sound card with it.

LeBaron & Alrich wrote:

> Will Peterson <> wrote:
>
>
>>I'm leaning toward an eight channel input system with four playback
>>decks. What I haven't found is software that allows the naming of
>>tracks as they are input, much like Protools. I'd rather not spend the
>>$$$ on a PT system just for this job. Just because of storage issues
>>and compatibility with the client, I'd rather go with a IDE PC system.
>
>
> How about: play from a four track machine; feed the two rightly oriented
> ("forward") tracks through good conversion into a standalone burner.
> Feed the other pair through another unit of the same convertor to a DAW
> where you can flip the tracks, and then burn a CD from those, too.
>
> But if quality is more important than time here, maybe the idea of a
> good convertor into a standalone burner makes the most sense, and can be
> run as a sidebar to everyday work without inducing dangerous confusion.
>
> --
> hank alrich * secret mountain
> audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
> "If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

--
Danny Taddei
e-mail me at (remove no-worms-in-a-)
There's a horizon on every side. Let your soul inside be the guide and
lead the way.
http://members.cox.net/sandycove/index.html