5 Nov
2013
5 Nov
'13
9:27 p.m.
On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 13:57:16 -0500
Joe Hartley <jh(a)brainiac.com> wrote:
On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 09:55:49 -0800
Ken Restivo <ken(a)restivo.org> wrote:
Reading his comments I get the strong feeling he will say whatever gets him the
most money. I've worked with 30ips machines. They are a total nightmare, and
while a wide tape width improves noise, it actually detracts from frequency
response (it would take an entire article to explain why).
People usually use tape these days to add 2nd order harmonic distortion (warmth)
and saturation distortion (compression). If you really want that, both can be
had more reliably by alternative means.
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
I saw a mastering video with a guy who charges
US$1k/song or something, and his "secret weapon" was a 2-track 1/4" deck.
He'd dump the master mix from ProTools to the 1/4" deck at like 30ips, resample
it back, and that got him the sweet lucrative loving he wanted from his customers.
Because mmmmm, tape compression. You can fake it in digital, but it's not
the same.
I thought, wow. You take a medium in which even
cheap consumer crap has effectively perfect resolution, and dump it to a medium with
basically 12-bits resolution (analog tape), and then A/D it back, and that's "the
sound" they wanted.
Bob Katz begs to differ: