How Would You Describe the Sound of Tape?
- Thread starter caesar
- Start date
When listening to copies of master tapes using a standard mastering grade machine I would surely say closer to a top digital player than vinyl.
My current dream - getting a tape recorded with a Studer A80 or ATR102 connected to the dCS Varese of my reference digital recordings. Audiophiles are curious ...
Steve Williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
complete. really complete.
you think other formats are like a mic feed but they are not complete in direct comparison. then when you hear a great tape live to 2 track on a really great deck, in a mature system, with a really low noise floor and actually flat extended bass you realize how short of complete the other format was. nothing else is even close when all the stars align. you just grin and realize your eyes are tearing up. powerful.
checking all the above boxes is not trivial. but many tape set-ups get the essence/feeling right in degrees with the right tapes.
the Golden Age of recorded music is all based on tape. it's a big part of it. and the purity of the 2 and 3 track tape recording process.
then there is 30ips 1/2" work parts which are pretty crazy good. 1" 2 track even better but only heard it once.
you think other formats are like a mic feed but they are not complete in direct comparison. then when you hear a great tape live to 2 track on a really great deck, in a mature system, with a really low noise floor and actually flat extended bass you realize how short of complete the other format was. nothing else is even close when all the stars align. you just grin and realize your eyes are tearing up. powerful.
checking all the above boxes is not trivial. but many tape set-ups get the essence/feeling right in degrees with the right tapes.
the Golden Age of recorded music is all based on tape. it's a big part of it. and the purity of the 2 and 3 track tape recording process.
then there is 30ips 1/2" work parts which are pretty crazy good. 1" 2 track even better but only heard it once.
Last edited:
There is a relaxed, effortless quality to the best tape that helps achieve a greater suspension of disbelief. And the low frequencies are more convincing.
Since 99% of my albums are from analog tape masters, tape sounds like my albums. Better stated, my albums sound like tape albeit a few generations downstream.
Upon hearing -- no ... experiencing -- analogue tape in my system, I was enthralled.
Live-to-two track, analog recording of acoustic performances is the pinnacle for me.
Live-to-two track, analog recording of acoustic performances is the pinnacle for me.
It is easy to forget, anything that gets us closer to the first generation master is a revolution. Micro and macro dynamics, lower noise floor. There are members here who work in studios as I did briefly moons ago pre digital. Even a 2nd generation cassette copy of the 2 track master was amazing. All this to say “exactly” to your post.
One of the key attributes I hear in analog tape, especially in a direct copy right off the (newly recorded) original master (or even with a copy of that direct copy), is the natural space around the instrument and the connecting spaces between the instruments, close to what I hear in the studio or on location. So, as a result, between the tape's natural instrumental tonality and the space around the instrument(s), I hear the near illusion of the original sound I heard in the recording venue -- something I do not hear in another medium.
Tape is the closest to the original analogue signal, since recording it does not involve electro-mechanical transformation or digitization. It stays in the electromagnetic realm all the way through, from the microphones to the speakers. What we hear is a lack of artifacts introduced by the other media. Tape of course also introduces some artifacts, such as hiss, distortion and frequency/phase non-linearities, but these are minor in terms of audible impact. For those unfamiliar with this medium, I think you can imagine the sound of LPs without the compression, end of side distortion and surface noise. The titles for which I fail to find master tape copies, even the four track commercial tapes are often superior to any other commercial formats.
Although it is just anecdotal evidence carried by blind test listening of a piano being reported by Tony Faulkner when comparing a direct mic feed and the mic feed going through a tape loop or a digital loop , listeners found the digital loop to be closer to the direct mic feed, but preferred the sound of tape!
At some time people carrying mastering would process their recording using a tape loop. Current trend in going through an "analog processor" - you can even choose the type of machine being emulated - Studer, ATR or Nagra!
i have actual work parts of 30 ips, 1/2" and 30 ips, 1/4" tapes and also the same mic feed of dsd, 2xdsd, and 4xdsd of a solo piano.
easy to hear why tape is tape. and nothing else can do that. the broad shoulders of tape data density trumps other formats. undeniable.
loops are loops. but actual first gen media is the truth we fans of music reproduction are dealing with. not people getting paid to promote particular agendas.
Last edited:
I had a chat with Tony Faulkner at a hifi show once, asked him why his digital recordings sounded so much better on vinyl, he agreed and put it down to the vinyl mastering engineers talent.
Tape never sounds sharp/ digital edgy , has more natural decay and just blows a bigger sound bubble .
Dynamics are also more natural
But just because its ...Tape it doesnt mean it sounds good .
Its all about the Artist / Music / Recording / Mix.
If i really want to hear if changes that i make to a Ls make sense , i check it with Tape play
Dynamics are also more natural
But just because its ...Tape it doesnt mean it sounds good .
Its all about the Artist / Music / Recording / Mix.
If i really want to hear if changes that i make to a Ls make sense , i check it with Tape play
Last edited:
Mike, I’m probably one of the few people left alive who has heard a comparison of analog tape and a 3M 32 Track Digital Mastering System. The 3M system won every comparison I’ve heard about.
Thanks for a fun memory with long dead friends.
If you say so, I believe that in your particular system it is so - you and people being there prefer tape. Perhaps I would also have prefered.
In a very interesting interview I have referred in the past in WBF - sorry I do not remember now his name - a well known recording engineer referred that microphone position and choice for digital and analog are different and explained why.
Surely - they supply interesting information, nothing else.
I am unhappy with you reference to agendas - the best way to kill any debate in WBF. I also find the "we fans of music reproduction" regrettable. The "truth" ? LOL ...
I assume it was this interview:
Interview by Lawrence Schenbeck with Northstar’s Bert van der Wolf in
[Introduction: Bert van der Wolf is a Netherlands-based engineer/producer with over thirty years’ experience in developing and advancing high-resolution, multichannel classical recording. Recently he agreed to share his thoughts with us on a variety of topics.] You have an extraordinary wide...
spiritofturtle.com
He definitely prefers high-resolution digital to analog tape and explains why.
Similar threads
