| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Recal for GP9 from 499 ??
I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't
re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) TIA, -- David Morgan (MAMS) http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com Morgan Audio Media Service Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901 _______________________________________ http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote:
I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. What do you mean by a bump? Yes, if you like running at very low levels, you can run GP9 at +5. It'll sound fine. You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) You need to do calibration whenever you get a new batch of tape. Even if it's the same type, the batch-to-batch variances are enough to make you want to rebias. Plus the azimuth drifts enough on those machines that you should check it at least monthly anyway. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote:
I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. What do you mean by a bump? Yes, if you like running at very low levels, you can run GP9 at +5. It'll sound fine. You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) You need to do calibration whenever you get a new batch of tape. Even if it's the same type, the batch-to-batch variances are enough to make you want to rebias. Plus the azimuth drifts enough on those machines that you should check it at least monthly anyway. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1096542664k@trad... In article %xN6d.9928$me5.5689@trnddc06 writes: I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. You should always check the bias and HF EQ when changing tape. It doesn't take very long. And putting on the calibration tape will give you an opportunity to check the playback response and touch that up if necessary (and see just how well the machine is performing). I hate to admit but after sleeping on it, I may have been looking for an easy way out. You're quite right... for my own benefit I should be more attentive to the machine's performance. We're in our 4th marathon day and getting two or three songs per reel on 499 at 30ips, and the local distributor may not have anything but GP9 in stock. I guess I'll suck it up and go in a couple of hours early and take care of things. (Been running 13 hour days and it's getting to me). I don't exactly understand what the 'bump' is that's inherent to GP9 though... I'm told that there's an extra dB or so on playback level. What's the scoop on that? Is it actually EQ? DM |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1096542664k@trad... In article %xN6d.9928$me5.5689@trnddc06 writes: I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. You should always check the bias and HF EQ when changing tape. It doesn't take very long. And putting on the calibration tape will give you an opportunity to check the playback response and touch that up if necessary (and see just how well the machine is performing). I hate to admit but after sleeping on it, I may have been looking for an easy way out. You're quite right... for my own benefit I should be more attentive to the machine's performance. We're in our 4th marathon day and getting two or three songs per reel on 499 at 30ips, and the local distributor may not have anything but GP9 in stock. I guess I'll suck it up and go in a couple of hours early and take care of things. (Been running 13 hour days and it's getting to me). I don't exactly understand what the 'bump' is that's inherent to GP9 though... I'm told that there's an extra dB or so on playback level. What's the scoop on that? Is it actually EQ? DM |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. What do you mean by a bump? The producer, who has grown used to digital tape or SlowTools, did mention that he thought that GP9 inherently recorded with an extra dB or so of level. When I was last on 2", there was no such thing as GP9. Yes, if you like running at very low levels, you can run GP9 at +5. It'll sound fine. Except for snare and guitars, most everything is idling (meter-wise) at just below or right at zero VU. You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. You have to realize that I haven't worked on anything but digital reels for the last 18 years or so. This is the first time that I've been on 2-inch since the late 80s. My memory tells me that 'bias' is strictly related to the erase head, unless you're in reference to EQ. Am I having a brain fart? Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) You need to do calibration whenever you get a new batch of tape. Even if it's the same type, the batch-to-batch variances are enough to make you want to rebias. Plus the azimuth drifts enough on those machines that you should check it at least monthly anyway. I'm working for a decent producer in a different room for a few more days. We tweaked the machine EQs, record and playback levels for the first batch of tape, and the second is arriving at noon today.... it may be GP9. Either way, GP9 or 499, I'll have another good look at the machine levels and EQ. Mechanically speaking, I haven't tweaked at all on the likes of azimuth, and after the producer ran a few minutes of erasure on a piece of pre-existing tape with good results, he decided to have me pass on erase bias and mechanical adjustments. I really don't have the gear on site to measure the mechanical stuff anyway. Playback results really sound a great deal better than I remember for analogue tape. Damn good AAMOF... The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. -- David Morgan (MAMS) http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com Morgan Audio Media Service Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901 _______________________________________ http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. What do you mean by a bump? The producer, who has grown used to digital tape or SlowTools, did mention that he thought that GP9 inherently recorded with an extra dB or so of level. When I was last on 2", there was no such thing as GP9. Yes, if you like running at very low levels, you can run GP9 at +5. It'll sound fine. Except for snare and guitars, most everything is idling (meter-wise) at just below or right at zero VU. You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. You have to realize that I haven't worked on anything but digital reels for the last 18 years or so. This is the first time that I've been on 2-inch since the late 80s. My memory tells me that 'bias' is strictly related to the erase head, unless you're in reference to EQ. Am I having a brain fart? Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) You need to do calibration whenever you get a new batch of tape. Even if it's the same type, the batch-to-batch variances are enough to make you want to rebias. Plus the azimuth drifts enough on those machines that you should check it at least monthly anyway. I'm working for a decent producer in a different room for a few more days. We tweaked the machine EQs, record and playback levels for the first batch of tape, and the second is arriving at noon today.... it may be GP9. Either way, GP9 or 499, I'll have another good look at the machine levels and EQ. Mechanically speaking, I haven't tweaked at all on the likes of azimuth, and after the producer ran a few minutes of erasure on a piece of pre-existing tape with good results, he decided to have me pass on erase bias and mechanical adjustments. I really don't have the gear on site to measure the mechanical stuff anyway. Playback results really sound a great deal better than I remember for analogue tape. Damn good AAMOF... The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. -- David Morgan (MAMS) http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com Morgan Audio Media Service Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901 _______________________________________ http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. What do you mean by a bump? The producer, who has grown used to digital tape or SlowTools, did mention that he thought that GP9 inherently recorded with an extra dB or so of level. When I was last on 2", there was no such thing as GP9. Well, yes, the playback level with a given record voltage will be higher. That's something that always varies from tape to tape, and it's the reason you set the record level for a given _playback_ bias. Yes, if you like running at very low levels, you can run GP9 at +5. It'll sound fine. Except for snare and guitars, most everything is idling (meter-wise) at just below or right at zero VU. If that is the case, maybe you might want to consider higher levels on GP9. Hell, you might like higher levels on 499. If you're running at these levels, why bother with any elevated level tapes at all? Why not just use 406? It costs less and doesn't get glassy on top. You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. You have to realize that I haven't worked on anything but digital reels for the last 18 years or so. This is the first time that I've been on 2-inch since the late 80s. My memory tells me that 'bias' is strictly related to the erase head, unless you're in reference to EQ. Am I having a brain fart? No, bias is the AC signal that is applied both to the erase and record heads. Umm... I am assuming that you aren't the person doing the weekly alignment on this machine, right? There is a brief discussion in the FAQ on how the tape system alignment is done, and while it's sort of incomplete, it's worth reading for a general overview. Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) You need to do calibration whenever you get a new batch of tape. Even if it's the same type, the batch-to-batch variances are enough to make you want to rebias. Plus the azimuth drifts enough on those machines that you should check it at least monthly anyway. I'm working for a decent producer in a different room for a few more days. We tweaked the machine EQs, record and playback levels for the first batch of tape, and the second is arriving at noon today.... it may be GP9. Either way, GP9 or 499, I'll have another good look at the machine levels and EQ. Is there a house engineer who normally sets the machine up? Is there a log on the machine that shows when it was last set up and what it was set up for? That's a service that the studio should be providing for you before beginning billable time, although I realize many today don't have the staff to do so. You should be able to call in and say "I want the machine set up for this tape I am sending over, I want this level and this amount of overbias" and have it all ready when you get there. Mechanically speaking, I haven't tweaked at all on the likes of azimuth, and after the producer ran a few minutes of erasure on a piece of pre-existing tape with good results, he decided to have me pass on erase bias and mechanical adjustments. I really don't have the gear on site to measure the mechanical stuff anyway. Playback results really sound a great deal better than I remember for analogue tape. Damn good AAMOF... If the studio has an analogue tape machine, and they don't have a scope and a reference tape in the cabinet beside it, something is terribly wrong. The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. That's not a bug, that's a feature to help you find your place! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. What do you mean by a bump? The producer, who has grown used to digital tape or SlowTools, did mention that he thought that GP9 inherently recorded with an extra dB or so of level. When I was last on 2", there was no such thing as GP9. Well, yes, the playback level with a given record voltage will be higher. That's something that always varies from tape to tape, and it's the reason you set the record level for a given _playback_ bias. Yes, if you like running at very low levels, you can run GP9 at +5. It'll sound fine. Except for snare and guitars, most everything is idling (meter-wise) at just below or right at zero VU. If that is the case, maybe you might want to consider higher levels on GP9. Hell, you might like higher levels on 499. If you're running at these levels, why bother with any elevated level tapes at all? Why not just use 406? It costs less and doesn't get glassy on top. You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. You have to realize that I haven't worked on anything but digital reels for the last 18 years or so. This is the first time that I've been on 2-inch since the late 80s. My memory tells me that 'bias' is strictly related to the erase head, unless you're in reference to EQ. Am I having a brain fart? No, bias is the AC signal that is applied both to the erase and record heads. Umm... I am assuming that you aren't the person doing the weekly alignment on this machine, right? There is a brief discussion in the FAQ on how the tape system alignment is done, and while it's sort of incomplete, it's worth reading for a general overview. Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) You need to do calibration whenever you get a new batch of tape. Even if it's the same type, the batch-to-batch variances are enough to make you want to rebias. Plus the azimuth drifts enough on those machines that you should check it at least monthly anyway. I'm working for a decent producer in a different room for a few more days. We tweaked the machine EQs, record and playback levels for the first batch of tape, and the second is arriving at noon today.... it may be GP9. Either way, GP9 or 499, I'll have another good look at the machine levels and EQ. Is there a house engineer who normally sets the machine up? Is there a log on the machine that shows when it was last set up and what it was set up for? That's a service that the studio should be providing for you before beginning billable time, although I realize many today don't have the staff to do so. You should be able to call in and say "I want the machine set up for this tape I am sending over, I want this level and this amount of overbias" and have it all ready when you get there. Mechanically speaking, I haven't tweaked at all on the likes of azimuth, and after the producer ran a few minutes of erasure on a piece of pre-existing tape with good results, he decided to have me pass on erase bias and mechanical adjustments. I really don't have the gear on site to measure the mechanical stuff anyway. Playback results really sound a great deal better than I remember for analogue tape. Damn good AAMOF... If the studio has an analogue tape machine, and they don't have a scope and a reference tape in the cabinet beside it, something is terribly wrong. The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. That's not a bug, that's a feature to help you find your place! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Scott Dorsey wrote: David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. What do you mean by a bump? The producer, who has grown used to digital tape or SlowTools, did mention that he thought that GP9 inherently recorded with an extra dB or so of level. When I was last on 2", there was no such thing as GP9. Well, yes, the playback level with a given record voltage will be higher. That's something that always varies from tape to tape, and it's the reason you set the record level for a given _playback_ bias. err... _playback_ level. Actually playback fluxivity, but who is counting. Sorry about that. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Scott Dorsey wrote: David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. What do you mean by a bump? The producer, who has grown used to digital tape or SlowTools, did mention that he thought that GP9 inherently recorded with an extra dB or so of level. When I was last on 2", there was no such thing as GP9. Well, yes, the playback level with a given record voltage will be higher. That's something that always varies from tape to tape, and it's the reason you set the record level for a given _playback_ bias. err... _playback_ level. Actually playback fluxivity, but who is counting. Sorry about that. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. That's my favorite part. -- -- John Noll Retromedia Sound Studios Red Bank, NJ http://www.retromedia.net |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. That's my favorite part. -- -- John Noll Retromedia Sound Studios Red Bank, NJ http://www.retromedia.net |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
"David Morgan \(MAMS\)" wrote in message news:%xN6d.9928$me5.5689@trnddc06...
I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) TIA, I think you always have to realign the machine for a different tape stock. At least rebias. |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
"David Morgan \(MAMS\)" wrote in message news:%xN6d.9928$me5.5689@trnddc06...
I hear GP9 has a bump that might be detrimental if I don't re-cal from my current +5 at 185nw for Ampex 499. Any truth to this, or can I expect decent results without a re-cal? (Sony MCI JH-24) TIA, I think you always have to realign the machine for a different tape stock. At least rebias. |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
You adjust the record
bias one of several ways, typically with bias increased past the point where the record level peaks (when recording a tone) and then drops by 3 dB below peak level. This is what's commonly called "3 dB overbias." But there are other ways of adjusting bias, and for the combination of GP9 tape and the MCI heads, the optimum "overbias" point may not be 3 dB. Remember that 3 db overbias (when recording a 10KHz tone) is only conventional at 15 IPS. For 30 it's generally half that, or 1.5 db. The exact amount varies from machine to machine though, and sometimes as well with different tape formulations. For example, Otari recommends 1.7 db over at 30 on my MX80 2" 24 track but I prefer to go +2 for sonic reasons (I think one of the reasons MX80s sometimes get criticized sonically is that they sound a bit bright and harsh if they're unwittingly biased "conventionally" at +1.5 at 30 IPS). Ted Spencer, NYC "No amount of classical training will ever teach you what's so cool about "Tighten Up" by Archie Bell And The Drells" -author unknown |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
You adjust the record
bias one of several ways, typically with bias increased past the point where the record level peaks (when recording a tone) and then drops by 3 dB below peak level. This is what's commonly called "3 dB overbias." But there are other ways of adjusting bias, and for the combination of GP9 tape and the MCI heads, the optimum "overbias" point may not be 3 dB. Remember that 3 db overbias (when recording a 10KHz tone) is only conventional at 15 IPS. For 30 it's generally half that, or 1.5 db. The exact amount varies from machine to machine though, and sometimes as well with different tape formulations. For example, Otari recommends 1.7 db over at 30 on my MX80 2" 24 track but I prefer to go +2 for sonic reasons (I think one of the reasons MX80s sometimes get criticized sonically is that they sound a bit bright and harsh if they're unwittingly biased "conventionally" at +1.5 at 30 IPS). Ted Spencer, NYC "No amount of classical training will ever teach you what's so cool about "Tighten Up" by Archie Bell And The Drells" -author unknown |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
I wouldn't trust myself to be able to set bias for a reading of
-1.7 dB on the VU meter. -- I'm really Mike Rivers It's easier than it sounds. But of course any analog machine's alignment is made much more challenging if the HF tone "windshield-wipes" (swings back and forth a db or so) while you're recording/playing it. It happens on my machine with the occasional reel. Some machines do it all the time. Ted Spencer, NYC "No amount of classical training will ever teach you what's so cool about "Tighten Up" by Archie Bell And The Drells" -author unknown |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
I wouldn't trust myself to be able to set bias for a reading of
-1.7 dB on the VU meter. -- I'm really Mike Rivers It's easier than it sounds. But of course any analog machine's alignment is made much more challenging if the HF tone "windshield-wipes" (swings back and forth a db or so) while you're recording/playing it. It happens on my machine with the occasional reel. Some machines do it all the time. Ted Spencer, NYC "No amount of classical training will ever teach you what's so cool about "Tighten Up" by Archie Bell And The Drells" -author unknown |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. You have to realize that I haven't worked on anything but digital reels for the last 18 years or so. This is the first time that I've been on 2-inch since the late 80s. My memory tells me that 'bias' is strictly related to the erase head, unless you're in reference to EQ. Am I having a brain fart? No, bias is the AC signal that is applied both to the erase and record heads. Umm... I am assuming that you aren't the person doing the weekly alignment on this machine, right? Are you kidding...? ;-) Since you usually require a little background.... It's a long story, but I'll try to make it interesting and short... I've been working with a dentist who desires a working studio to be in place in a space which he already owns, sometime around mid-summer of next year. We've been talking about this for a couple of years, and over that period of time I have been picking out and purchasing some gear on his behalf. Eventually, Russ Berger is going to do the control room, and we'll probably do the rest of the facility 'in-house'. Plans are to have a large number of formats and be able to provide a fairly massive transfer service. We already have 24 tracks of DAxx, 24 tracks of ADAT, 16 tracks of Mitsu, 32 tracks of Mitsu, 24 tracks of Paris, ProTools funding in the can, some UFCs, ISDN capability, some cool mics and outboard, etc., etc... A few months ago we purchased Joe Egan's Sony MCI JH-24 and last month we bought the personal DC-2000 from Soundcraft's US sales rep. Well... a friend of a friend of a friend (you know the story) happened to know someone at a record label that just signed someone local, and the dentist is friends with the executive producer. So... said money-man convinces the dentist that he should put his new gear to use and let the basic tracks be recorded in what was once his upstairs apartment and offices. About 20 days ago I find out that this may really happen, so walls start being demolished, the electricians come in, the HVAC people come in, and suddenly I am looking at about six days to have the 2" machine and the Soundcraft desk moved in from storage, up two flights of stairs and wired up well enough to function through tracking a session with a 40 year veteran producer/engineer. Unfortunately, the remaining walls still had to be shored up, glass installed, at least *some* absorption or diffusion put in place, windows to the outside of the building sealed and baffled, some special AC wiring run, florescent fixtures replaced with incandescents, and parts & wire ordered to interface the gear. Before I knew it, the dust was finally settling and I had just two days left to \ uncover the equipment and get it interfaced and checked out. To get back to the point.... the machine and console were fired up for the first time in a few months last Friday night, just 52 hours before the session was scheduled to begin. The temporary control room was set up on Saturday, and with one helper, the console, the tape machine, and minimal outboard gear was interfaced by Sunday afternoon. The producer flew in on Sunday and naturally stopped by to see the place and what he would be working with. At least three people were vacuuming and carrying out scrap wood, wall covering was being applied to the areas that still looked like a house, and I was wiring outboard gear while listening to the 24-track masters of the client's previous album. He shook his head in disbelief more than once, as did a few members of the band who had also dropped by the night before, when it was even more of a shambles. The producer and I met at 10:00 am on Monday to set up the machine as best we could. Both of us had to call technician acquaintances to assure ourselves that we were on the right track with the alignment. No specialty tools of any kind were there except my little Fluke 8600, an HP oscillator, an EDAC pin crimper and extractor. When he arrived, no real audio had been run through but 16 of the 32 channels on the desk, and nothing of significance had been recorded to the tape machine. (Needless to say, this man is an audio warrior, a positive thinker and very, very forgiving). So no.... I'm not the guy doing the ahem "weekly" alignment. g I'm working for a decent producer in a different room for a few more days. We tweaked the machine EQs, record and playback levels for the first batch of tape, and the second is arriving at noon today.... it may be GP9. Either way, GP9 or 499, I'll have another good look at the machine levels and EQ. The second batch of tape turned out to be 499 also. Is there a house engineer who normally sets the machine up? Is there a log on the machine that shows when it was last set up and what it was set up for? That's a service that the studio should be providing for you before beginning billable time, although I realize many today don't have the staff to do so. With part of your question answered, my advice to the dentist two weeks ago was to tell his (executive producer) friend to make other arrangements with the producer for another place to record so as not to embarrass himself, but he committed and I was silly enough to like the idea of a challenge, so I agreed to tackle it. You should be able to call in and say "I want the machine set up for this tape I am sending over, I want this level and this amount of overbias" and have it all ready when you get there. I remember those days... I just haven't seen them in 17 years. I'm not sure I like the idea of going that direction, but I will eventually be doing what ever is required for the machine and the test equipment *will* be in house. Mechanically speaking, I haven't tweaked at all on the likes of azimuth, and after the producer ran a few minutes of erasure on a piece of pre-existing tape with good results, he decided to have me pass on erase bias and mechanical adjustments. I really don't have the gear on site to measure the mechanical stuff anyway. Playback results really sound a great deal better than I remember for analogue tape. Damn good AAMOF... If the studio has an analogue tape machine, and they don't have a scope and a reference tape in the cabinet beside it, something is terribly wrong. A corner of the building we're calling the 'control room' is indeed, "wrong". g The astonishing thing is that when the band arrived we did have a functioning drum room, a vocal room, an amp room, and a control room that modestly told the better portion of the truth about what we were hearing. The sad part about this (other than the fact that this super-cool producer whom I thoroughly enjoyed my week with, has to leave this weekend) is that everything we've done has to be torn down in order for the _real_ construction to begin. Amazingly enough however, after a good bit of 'down-time' (2 or 3 hours) on the first day, not only have we gotten 97% of the rhythm tracks down, which was the single objective, but we have totally completed 4 of the 12 songs and are well into overdubs and vocals. The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. That's not a bug, that's a feature to help you find your place! Right. If that's what I wanted, I'd go press a finger down on the tape over the head stack. g Sorry about the dumb question to begin with... my head's been a flurry for too many days. I still ccn't believe we tried this and are actually pulling it off with a decent degree of success. -- David Morgan (MAMS) http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com Morgan Audio Media Service Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901 _______________________________________ http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. You have to realize that I haven't worked on anything but digital reels for the last 18 years or so. This is the first time that I've been on 2-inch since the late 80s. My memory tells me that 'bias' is strictly related to the erase head, unless you're in reference to EQ. Am I having a brain fart? No, bias is the AC signal that is applied both to the erase and record heads. Umm... I am assuming that you aren't the person doing the weekly alignment on this machine, right? Are you kidding...? ;-) Since you usually require a little background.... It's a long story, but I'll try to make it interesting and short... I've been working with a dentist who desires a working studio to be in place in a space which he already owns, sometime around mid-summer of next year. We've been talking about this for a couple of years, and over that period of time I have been picking out and purchasing some gear on his behalf. Eventually, Russ Berger is going to do the control room, and we'll probably do the rest of the facility 'in-house'. Plans are to have a large number of formats and be able to provide a fairly massive transfer service. We already have 24 tracks of DAxx, 24 tracks of ADAT, 16 tracks of Mitsu, 32 tracks of Mitsu, 24 tracks of Paris, ProTools funding in the can, some UFCs, ISDN capability, some cool mics and outboard, etc., etc... A few months ago we purchased Joe Egan's Sony MCI JH-24 and last month we bought the personal DC-2000 from Soundcraft's US sales rep. Well... a friend of a friend of a friend (you know the story) happened to know someone at a record label that just signed someone local, and the dentist is friends with the executive producer. So... said money-man convinces the dentist that he should put his new gear to use and let the basic tracks be recorded in what was once his upstairs apartment and offices. About 20 days ago I find out that this may really happen, so walls start being demolished, the electricians come in, the HVAC people come in, and suddenly I am looking at about six days to have the 2" machine and the Soundcraft desk moved in from storage, up two flights of stairs and wired up well enough to function through tracking a session with a 40 year veteran producer/engineer. Unfortunately, the remaining walls still had to be shored up, glass installed, at least *some* absorption or diffusion put in place, windows to the outside of the building sealed and baffled, some special AC wiring run, florescent fixtures replaced with incandescents, and parts & wire ordered to interface the gear. Before I knew it, the dust was finally settling and I had just two days left to \ uncover the equipment and get it interfaced and checked out. To get back to the point.... the machine and console were fired up for the first time in a few months last Friday night, just 52 hours before the session was scheduled to begin. The temporary control room was set up on Saturday, and with one helper, the console, the tape machine, and minimal outboard gear was interfaced by Sunday afternoon. The producer flew in on Sunday and naturally stopped by to see the place and what he would be working with. At least three people were vacuuming and carrying out scrap wood, wall covering was being applied to the areas that still looked like a house, and I was wiring outboard gear while listening to the 24-track masters of the client's previous album. He shook his head in disbelief more than once, as did a few members of the band who had also dropped by the night before, when it was even more of a shambles. The producer and I met at 10:00 am on Monday to set up the machine as best we could. Both of us had to call technician acquaintances to assure ourselves that we were on the right track with the alignment. No specialty tools of any kind were there except my little Fluke 8600, an HP oscillator, an EDAC pin crimper and extractor. When he arrived, no real audio had been run through but 16 of the 32 channels on the desk, and nothing of significance had been recorded to the tape machine. (Needless to say, this man is an audio warrior, a positive thinker and very, very forgiving). So no.... I'm not the guy doing the ahem "weekly" alignment. g I'm working for a decent producer in a different room for a few more days. We tweaked the machine EQs, record and playback levels for the first batch of tape, and the second is arriving at noon today.... it may be GP9. Either way, GP9 or 499, I'll have another good look at the machine levels and EQ. The second batch of tape turned out to be 499 also. Is there a house engineer who normally sets the machine up? Is there a log on the machine that shows when it was last set up and what it was set up for? That's a service that the studio should be providing for you before beginning billable time, although I realize many today don't have the staff to do so. With part of your question answered, my advice to the dentist two weeks ago was to tell his (executive producer) friend to make other arrangements with the producer for another place to record so as not to embarrass himself, but he committed and I was silly enough to like the idea of a challenge, so I agreed to tackle it. You should be able to call in and say "I want the machine set up for this tape I am sending over, I want this level and this amount of overbias" and have it all ready when you get there. I remember those days... I just haven't seen them in 17 years. I'm not sure I like the idea of going that direction, but I will eventually be doing what ever is required for the machine and the test equipment *will* be in house. Mechanically speaking, I haven't tweaked at all on the likes of azimuth, and after the producer ran a few minutes of erasure on a piece of pre-existing tape with good results, he decided to have me pass on erase bias and mechanical adjustments. I really don't have the gear on site to measure the mechanical stuff anyway. Playback results really sound a great deal better than I remember for analogue tape. Damn good AAMOF... If the studio has an analogue tape machine, and they don't have a scope and a reference tape in the cabinet beside it, something is terribly wrong. A corner of the building we're calling the 'control room' is indeed, "wrong". g The astonishing thing is that when the band arrived we did have a functioning drum room, a vocal room, an amp room, and a control room that modestly told the better portion of the truth about what we were hearing. The sad part about this (other than the fact that this super-cool producer whom I thoroughly enjoyed my week with, has to leave this weekend) is that everything we've done has to be torn down in order for the _real_ construction to begin. Amazingly enough however, after a good bit of 'down-time' (2 or 3 hours) on the first day, not only have we gotten 97% of the rhythm tracks down, which was the single objective, but we have totally completed 4 of the 12 songs and are well into overdubs and vocals. The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. That's not a bug, that's a feature to help you find your place! Right. If that's what I wanted, I'd go press a finger down on the tape over the head stack. g Sorry about the dumb question to begin with... my head's been a flurry for too many days. I still ccn't believe we tried this and are actually pulling it off with a decent degree of success. -- David Morgan (MAMS) http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com Morgan Audio Media Service Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901 _______________________________________ http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ted Spencer" wrote in message ... You adjust the record bias one of several ways, typically with bias increased past the point where the record level peaks (when recording a tone) and then drops by 3 dB below peak level. This is what's commonly called "3 dB overbias." But there are other ways of adjusting bias, and for the combination of GP9 tape and the MCI heads, the optimum "overbias" point may not be 3 dB. Remember that 3 db overbias (when recording a 10KHz tone) is only conventional at 15 IPS. For 30 it's generally half that, or 1.5 db. The exact amount varies from machine to machine though, and sometimes as well with different tape formulations. For example, Otari recommends 1.7 db over at 30 on my MX80 2" 24 track but I prefer to go +2 for sonic reasons (I think one of the reasons MX80s sometimes get criticized sonically is that they sound a bit bright and harsh if they're unwittingly biased "conventionally" at +1.5 at 30 IPS). Thanks for the conversation guys, and rattling my brain. I have much to re-learn. DM |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ted Spencer" wrote in message ... You adjust the record bias one of several ways, typically with bias increased past the point where the record level peaks (when recording a tone) and then drops by 3 dB below peak level. This is what's commonly called "3 dB overbias." But there are other ways of adjusting bias, and for the combination of GP9 tape and the MCI heads, the optimum "overbias" point may not be 3 dB. Remember that 3 db overbias (when recording a 10KHz tone) is only conventional at 15 IPS. For 30 it's generally half that, or 1.5 db. The exact amount varies from machine to machine though, and sometimes as well with different tape formulations. For example, Otari recommends 1.7 db over at 30 on my MX80 2" 24 track but I prefer to go +2 for sonic reasons (I think one of the reasons MX80s sometimes get criticized sonically is that they sound a bit bright and harsh if they're unwittingly biased "conventionally" at +1.5 at 30 IPS). Thanks for the conversation guys, and rattling my brain. I have much to re-learn. DM |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote:
If the studio has an analogue tape machine, and they don't have a scope and a reference tape in the cabinet beside it, something is terribly wrong. A corner of the building we're calling the 'control room' is indeed, "wrong". g The astonishing thing is that when the band arrived we did have a functioning drum room, a vocal room, an amp room, and a control room that modestly told the better portion of the truth about what we were hearing. Put tones down! Put a full tone ladder down, not just 1 KC and 10 KC. If the tones are there, your azimuth can be wrong and your EQ can be wrong and you can correct it when it comes time to mix (assuming you have a scope and good metering then). It may take some time to get the playback machine misaligned in the same way as the record machine, but as long as the bias is correct and you have plenty of time in mixdown, a full tone ladder will save you in this sort of improvised situation. If you can do sweep tones, do sweep tones too! Sorry about the dumb question to begin with... my head's been a flurry for too many days. I still ccn't believe we tried this and are actually pulling it off with a decent degree of success. Congratulations, it's always fun when things actually work out under circumstances that look disasterous. Hope you're recovered soon. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote:
If the studio has an analogue tape machine, and they don't have a scope and a reference tape in the cabinet beside it, something is terribly wrong. A corner of the building we're calling the 'control room' is indeed, "wrong". g The astonishing thing is that when the band arrived we did have a functioning drum room, a vocal room, an amp room, and a control room that modestly told the better portion of the truth about what we were hearing. Put tones down! Put a full tone ladder down, not just 1 KC and 10 KC. If the tones are there, your azimuth can be wrong and your EQ can be wrong and you can correct it when it comes time to mix (assuming you have a scope and good metering then). It may take some time to get the playback machine misaligned in the same way as the record machine, but as long as the bias is correct and you have plenty of time in mixdown, a full tone ladder will save you in this sort of improvised situation. If you can do sweep tones, do sweep tones too! Sorry about the dumb question to begin with... my head's been a flurry for too many days. I still ccn't believe we tried this and are actually pulling it off with a decent degree of success. Congratulations, it's always fun when things actually work out under circumstances that look disasterous. Hope you're recovered soon. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
What were you smoking and where can I get some?
I don't know how one can make the assumption that a tried and true 499 calibration would equate to GP9, even if it were a simple recalibration. 996, yes. I haven't had any real appreciable differences although I like 996 more for rock and 499 more for jazz, but GP9? Just the substrate itself is thick enough to cause problems without even worrying about biasing, and even if one biases the recorder correctly for GP9 one still has to worry that the heavier tape will cause enough fluctuations due to the transport mechanism that the calibration could/would go to hell. Seems to me that GP9 would involve a mechanical problem as much, if not more, than a recalibration problem. You said a JH-24? How long ago was it mechanically refurbed? Can you pass signal and measure the consistancy of playback or record? I kinda like Scott's suggestion that moving back to 406 might be a reasonable solution only in that it's a formulation/thickness/stiffness that the machine would be familiar with. But then, I only do political posts anymore, and usually I don't know what I'm talking about then, either. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote in message news:BKu7d.460$pw4.264@trnddc01... "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. You have to realize that I haven't worked on anything but digital reels for the last 18 years or so. This is the first time that I've been on 2-inch since the late 80s. My memory tells me that 'bias' is strictly related to the erase head, unless you're in reference to EQ. Am I having a brain fart? No, bias is the AC signal that is applied both to the erase and record heads. Umm... I am assuming that you aren't the person doing the weekly alignment on this machine, right? Are you kidding...? ;-) Since you usually require a little background.... It's a long story, but I'll try to make it interesting and short... I've been working with a dentist who desires a working studio to be in place in a space which he already owns, sometime around mid-summer of next year. We've been talking about this for a couple of years, and over that period of time I have been picking out and purchasing some gear on his behalf. Eventually, Russ Berger is going to do the control room, and we'll probably do the rest of the facility 'in-house'. Plans are to have a large number of formats and be able to provide a fairly massive transfer service. We already have 24 tracks of DAxx, 24 tracks of ADAT, 16 tracks of Mitsu, 32 tracks of Mitsu, 24 tracks of Paris, ProTools funding in the can, some UFCs, ISDN capability, some cool mics and outboard, etc., etc... A few months ago we purchased Joe Egan's Sony MCI JH-24 and last month we bought the personal DC-2000 from Soundcraft's US sales rep. Well... a friend of a friend of a friend (you know the story) happened to know someone at a record label that just signed someone local, and the dentist is friends with the executive producer. So... said money-man convinces the dentist that he should put his new gear to use and let the basic tracks be recorded in what was once his upstairs apartment and offices. About 20 days ago I find out that this may really happen, so walls start being demolished, the electricians come in, the HVAC people come in, and suddenly I am looking at about six days to have the 2" machine and the Soundcraft desk moved in from storage, up two flights of stairs and wired up well enough to function through tracking a session with a 40 year veteran producer/engineer. Unfortunately, the remaining walls still had to be shored up, glass installed, at least *some* absorption or diffusion put in place, windows to the outside of the building sealed and baffled, some special AC wiring run, florescent fixtures replaced with incandescents, and parts & wire ordered to interface the gear. Before I knew it, the dust was finally settling and I had just two days left to \ uncover the equipment and get it interfaced and checked out. To get back to the point.... the machine and console were fired up for the first time in a few months last Friday night, just 52 hours before the session was scheduled to begin. The temporary control room was set up on Saturday, and with one helper, the console, the tape machine, and minimal outboard gear was interfaced by Sunday afternoon. The producer flew in on Sunday and naturally stopped by to see the place and what he would be working with. At least three people were vacuuming and carrying out scrap wood, wall covering was being applied to the areas that still looked like a house, and I was wiring outboard gear while listening to the 24-track masters of the client's previous album. He shook his head in disbelief more than once, as did a few members of the band who had also dropped by the night before, when it was even more of a shambles. The producer and I met at 10:00 am on Monday to set up the machine as best we could. Both of us had to call technician acquaintances to assure ourselves that we were on the right track with the alignment. No specialty tools of any kind were there except my little Fluke 8600, an HP oscillator, an EDAC pin crimper and extractor. When he arrived, no real audio had been run through but 16 of the 32 channels on the desk, and nothing of significance had been recorded to the tape machine. (Needless to say, this man is an audio warrior, a positive thinker and very, very forgiving). So no.... I'm not the guy doing the ahem "weekly" alignment. g I'm working for a decent producer in a different room for a few more days. We tweaked the machine EQs, record and playback levels for the first batch of tape, and the second is arriving at noon today.... it may be GP9. Either way, GP9 or 499, I'll have another good look at the machine levels and EQ. The second batch of tape turned out to be 499 also. Is there a house engineer who normally sets the machine up? Is there a log on the machine that shows when it was last set up and what it was set up for? That's a service that the studio should be providing for you before beginning billable time, although I realize many today don't have the staff to do so. With part of your question answered, my advice to the dentist two weeks ago was to tell his (executive producer) friend to make other arrangements with the producer for another place to record so as not to embarrass himself, but he committed and I was silly enough to like the idea of a challenge, so I agreed to tackle it. You should be able to call in and say "I want the machine set up for this tape I am sending over, I want this level and this amount of overbias" and have it all ready when you get there. I remember those days... I just haven't seen them in 17 years. I'm not sure I like the idea of going that direction, but I will eventually be doing what ever is required for the machine and the test equipment *will* be in house. Mechanically speaking, I haven't tweaked at all on the likes of azimuth, and after the producer ran a few minutes of erasure on a piece of pre-existing tape with good results, he decided to have me pass on erase bias and mechanical adjustments. I really don't have the gear on site to measure the mechanical stuff anyway. Playback results really sound a great deal better than I remember for analogue tape. Damn good AAMOF... If the studio has an analogue tape machine, and they don't have a scope and a reference tape in the cabinet beside it, something is terribly wrong. A corner of the building we're calling the 'control room' is indeed, "wrong". g The astonishing thing is that when the band arrived we did have a functioning drum room, a vocal room, an amp room, and a control room that modestly told the better portion of the truth about what we were hearing. The sad part about this (other than the fact that this super-cool producer whom I thoroughly enjoyed my week with, has to leave this weekend) is that everything we've done has to be torn down in order for the _real_ construction to begin. Amazingly enough however, after a good bit of 'down-time' (2 or 3 hours) on the first day, not only have we gotten 97% of the rhythm tracks down, which was the single objective, but we have totally completed 4 of the 12 songs and are well into overdubs and vocals. The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. That's not a bug, that's a feature to help you find your place! Right. If that's what I wanted, I'd go press a finger down on the tape over the head stack. g Sorry about the dumb question to begin with... my head's been a flurry for too many days. I still ccn't believe we tried this and are actually pulling it off with a decent degree of success. -- David Morgan (MAMS) http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com Morgan Audio Media Service Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901 _______________________________________ http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
What were you smoking and where can I get some?
I don't know how one can make the assumption that a tried and true 499 calibration would equate to GP9, even if it were a simple recalibration. 996, yes. I haven't had any real appreciable differences although I like 996 more for rock and 499 more for jazz, but GP9? Just the substrate itself is thick enough to cause problems without even worrying about biasing, and even if one biases the recorder correctly for GP9 one still has to worry that the heavier tape will cause enough fluctuations due to the transport mechanism that the calibration could/would go to hell. Seems to me that GP9 would involve a mechanical problem as much, if not more, than a recalibration problem. You said a JH-24? How long ago was it mechanically refurbed? Can you pass signal and measure the consistancy of playback or record? I kinda like Scott's suggestion that moving back to 406 might be a reasonable solution only in that it's a formulation/thickness/stiffness that the machine would be familiar with. But then, I only do political posts anymore, and usually I don't know what I'm talking about then, either. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote in message news:BKu7d.460$pw4.264@trnddc01... "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... You will, of course, need to reset the bias for the new tape. You have to realize that I haven't worked on anything but digital reels for the last 18 years or so. This is the first time that I've been on 2-inch since the late 80s. My memory tells me that 'bias' is strictly related to the erase head, unless you're in reference to EQ. Am I having a brain fart? No, bias is the AC signal that is applied both to the erase and record heads. Umm... I am assuming that you aren't the person doing the weekly alignment on this machine, right? Are you kidding...? ;-) Since you usually require a little background.... It's a long story, but I'll try to make it interesting and short... I've been working with a dentist who desires a working studio to be in place in a space which he already owns, sometime around mid-summer of next year. We've been talking about this for a couple of years, and over that period of time I have been picking out and purchasing some gear on his behalf. Eventually, Russ Berger is going to do the control room, and we'll probably do the rest of the facility 'in-house'. Plans are to have a large number of formats and be able to provide a fairly massive transfer service. We already have 24 tracks of DAxx, 24 tracks of ADAT, 16 tracks of Mitsu, 32 tracks of Mitsu, 24 tracks of Paris, ProTools funding in the can, some UFCs, ISDN capability, some cool mics and outboard, etc., etc... A few months ago we purchased Joe Egan's Sony MCI JH-24 and last month we bought the personal DC-2000 from Soundcraft's US sales rep. Well... a friend of a friend of a friend (you know the story) happened to know someone at a record label that just signed someone local, and the dentist is friends with the executive producer. So... said money-man convinces the dentist that he should put his new gear to use and let the basic tracks be recorded in what was once his upstairs apartment and offices. About 20 days ago I find out that this may really happen, so walls start being demolished, the electricians come in, the HVAC people come in, and suddenly I am looking at about six days to have the 2" machine and the Soundcraft desk moved in from storage, up two flights of stairs and wired up well enough to function through tracking a session with a 40 year veteran producer/engineer. Unfortunately, the remaining walls still had to be shored up, glass installed, at least *some* absorption or diffusion put in place, windows to the outside of the building sealed and baffled, some special AC wiring run, florescent fixtures replaced with incandescents, and parts & wire ordered to interface the gear. Before I knew it, the dust was finally settling and I had just two days left to \ uncover the equipment and get it interfaced and checked out. To get back to the point.... the machine and console were fired up for the first time in a few months last Friday night, just 52 hours before the session was scheduled to begin. The temporary control room was set up on Saturday, and with one helper, the console, the tape machine, and minimal outboard gear was interfaced by Sunday afternoon. The producer flew in on Sunday and naturally stopped by to see the place and what he would be working with. At least three people were vacuuming and carrying out scrap wood, wall covering was being applied to the areas that still looked like a house, and I was wiring outboard gear while listening to the 24-track masters of the client's previous album. He shook his head in disbelief more than once, as did a few members of the band who had also dropped by the night before, when it was even more of a shambles. The producer and I met at 10:00 am on Monday to set up the machine as best we could. Both of us had to call technician acquaintances to assure ourselves that we were on the right track with the alignment. No specialty tools of any kind were there except my little Fluke 8600, an HP oscillator, an EDAC pin crimper and extractor. When he arrived, no real audio had been run through but 16 of the 32 channels on the desk, and nothing of significance had been recorded to the tape machine. (Needless to say, this man is an audio warrior, a positive thinker and very, very forgiving). So no.... I'm not the guy doing the ahem "weekly" alignment. g I'm working for a decent producer in a different room for a few more days. We tweaked the machine EQs, record and playback levels for the first batch of tape, and the second is arriving at noon today.... it may be GP9. Either way, GP9 or 499, I'll have another good look at the machine levels and EQ. The second batch of tape turned out to be 499 also. Is there a house engineer who normally sets the machine up? Is there a log on the machine that shows when it was last set up and what it was set up for? That's a service that the studio should be providing for you before beginning billable time, although I realize many today don't have the staff to do so. With part of your question answered, my advice to the dentist two weeks ago was to tell his (executive producer) friend to make other arrangements with the producer for another place to record so as not to embarrass himself, but he committed and I was silly enough to like the idea of a challenge, so I agreed to tackle it. You should be able to call in and say "I want the machine set up for this tape I am sending over, I want this level and this amount of overbias" and have it all ready when you get there. I remember those days... I just haven't seen them in 17 years. I'm not sure I like the idea of going that direction, but I will eventually be doing what ever is required for the machine and the test equipment *will* be in house. Mechanically speaking, I haven't tweaked at all on the likes of azimuth, and after the producer ran a few minutes of erasure on a piece of pre-existing tape with good results, he decided to have me pass on erase bias and mechanical adjustments. I really don't have the gear on site to measure the mechanical stuff anyway. Playback results really sound a great deal better than I remember for analogue tape. Damn good AAMOF... If the studio has an analogue tape machine, and they don't have a scope and a reference tape in the cabinet beside it, something is terribly wrong. A corner of the building we're calling the 'control room' is indeed, "wrong". g The astonishing thing is that when the band arrived we did have a functioning drum room, a vocal room, an amp room, and a control room that modestly told the better portion of the truth about what we were hearing. The sad part about this (other than the fact that this super-cool producer whom I thoroughly enjoyed my week with, has to leave this weekend) is that everything we've done has to be torn down in order for the _real_ construction to begin. Amazingly enough however, after a good bit of 'down-time' (2 or 3 hours) on the first day, not only have we gotten 97% of the rhythm tracks down, which was the single objective, but we have totally completed 4 of the 12 songs and are well into overdubs and vocals. The only annoyance is listening to the faint audio during rw and ff while in sync mode to do punches and od's. That's not a bug, that's a feature to help you find your place! Right. If that's what I wanted, I'd go press a finger down on the tape over the head stack. g Sorry about the dumb question to begin with... my head's been a flurry for too many days. I still ccn't believe we tried this and are actually pulling it off with a decent degree of success. -- David Morgan (MAMS) http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com Morgan Audio Media Service Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901 _______________________________________ http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message... Congratulations, it's always fun when things actually work out under circumstances that look disasterous. Hope you're recovered soon. --scott I just finished twelve 15-hour days. The moment I recover I'll post some before, after and during photo's. DM |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message... Congratulations, it's always fun when things actually work out under circumstances that look disasterous. Hope you're recovered soon. --scott I just finished twelve 15-hour days. The moment I recover I'll post some before, after and during photo's. DM |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message ... What were you smoking and where can I get some? I don't know how one can make the assumption that a tried and true 499 calibration would equate to GP9, even if it were a simple recalibration. 996, yes. I haven't had any real appreciable differences although I like 996 more for rock and 499 more for jazz, but GP9? Just the substrate itself is thick enough to cause problems without even worrying about biasing, and even if one biases the recorder correctly for GP9 one still has to worry that the heavier tape will cause enough fluctuations due to the transport mechanism that the calibration could/would go to hell. Seems to me that GP9 would involve a mechanical problem as much, if not more, than a recalibration problem. You said a JH-24? How long ago was it mechanically refurbed? Can you pass signal and measure the consistancy of playback or record? Holy batsh*t, Rogerman !! That's too many questions, but I'm sure you have some ideas as to the answers on a few. You may have just answered one of my new questions, though. Tonight I developed a transport tension problem. I kinda like Scott's suggestion that moving back to 406 might be a reasonable solution only in that it's a formulation/thickness/stiffness that the machine would be familiar with. Well... this won't in any way be the primary machine, and I'll have to get the tools and be prepared to be calibrating if the transfer business actually pick up. But I'll try learning what I can about the differences... anything you want to cough up will be appreciated. But then, I only do political posts anymore.... Sorry... I don't know what you're talking about. insert smiley DM |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message ... What were you smoking and where can I get some? I don't know how one can make the assumption that a tried and true 499 calibration would equate to GP9, even if it were a simple recalibration. 996, yes. I haven't had any real appreciable differences although I like 996 more for rock and 499 more for jazz, but GP9? Just the substrate itself is thick enough to cause problems without even worrying about biasing, and even if one biases the recorder correctly for GP9 one still has to worry that the heavier tape will cause enough fluctuations due to the transport mechanism that the calibration could/would go to hell. Seems to me that GP9 would involve a mechanical problem as much, if not more, than a recalibration problem. You said a JH-24? How long ago was it mechanically refurbed? Can you pass signal and measure the consistancy of playback or record? Holy batsh*t, Rogerman !! That's too many questions, but I'm sure you have some ideas as to the answers on a few. You may have just answered one of my new questions, though. Tonight I developed a transport tension problem. I kinda like Scott's suggestion that moving back to 406 might be a reasonable solution only in that it's a formulation/thickness/stiffness that the machine would be familiar with. Well... this won't in any way be the primary machine, and I'll have to get the tools and be prepared to be calibrating if the transfer business actually pick up. But I'll try learning what I can about the differences... anything you want to cough up will be appreciated. But then, I only do political posts anymore.... Sorry... I don't know what you're talking about. insert smiley DM |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message... Mr. Sadler is always a good person to keep in mind. Scott, Mike... Boucoup thanks, muchas gracias, etcetera.... Steve will be walking me through the tension adjustments by phone later this evening. -- David Morgan (MAMS) http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com Morgan Audio Media Service Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901 _______________________________________ http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Siemens Recal Sheet | Pro Audio | |||
| Siemens Recal Sheet | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
