pucho812

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #20 on: November 05, 2020, 01:05:45 PM »
I prefer just using the pro tools. The tape machine had a good run. But we still keep it running so it can be used. Some guys can’t live without that sound. Some guys like me are fine without it. For me I can’t live without my desk. Couldn’t think of mixing in the box.  It’s just what I prefer.
You tell me whar a man gits his corn pone, en I'll tell you what his 'pinions is.


Notable

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #21 on: November 15, 2020, 09:15:40 PM »
I have a 24 channel Clasp for sale with the cables for a sony/MCI Jh24. If you are interested get in touch with me.
[email protected] know the right to spell that ending part.
best
Dan

rockinrob86

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #22 on: November 17, 2020, 06:58:47 PM »
I know it's not as fun of an answer, but why not test running stems out to tape and back?

I'm doing this on an Otari 8 track, sounds great to me and definitely picks up plenty of tape vibe!

pucho812

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #23 on: November 17, 2020, 07:38:42 PM »
I have a 24 channel Clasp for sale with the cables for a sony/MCI Jh24. If you are interested get in touch with me.
[email protected] know the right to spell that ending part.
best
Dan

Did clasp ever do aax?
You tell me whar a man gits his corn pone, en I'll tell you what his 'pinions is.

porkyc

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #24 on: January 08, 2021, 03:56:20 PM »
Going back to the original question.
As JR mentioned, SMPTE/EBU code on track 24, slave the JH24 with synchroniser from workstation. Workstation should be master. Downside of this whole setup is the time wasted; since you have a "code only" master, the slave will not know where it is until you play the master, and will now be in the wrong place and will chase back. You could output master code all the time, I suppose. Some sychronisers had the option to chase to stationary code and wait for it to start rolling and put the slave into play. (Because the master is not outputting transport tallies to the synchroniser).
I've used Fostex 4030 synchroniser quite happily, but you need a pro to do the hookup. Also, with the MCI there is no synchroniser port, so it might be easier to put one on. (As opposed to digging into the Jones/Beau connectors). I've done it using S29 transport convention from SSL so it's a extra 25D connector and a switch to steer the synchroniser's 19K2 capstan control into the transport.
The Zeta3 works well, but the best chase routines were the Lynx Timeline.
It all seems a bit of a pfaff, though. A studio I did recently just ran the live tracking through the 24-track straight onto PTools, so the tape "sound" was on PTools immediately. I appreciate that odubs become an adventure at this point.

Rocinante

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #25 on: February 25, 2021, 01:12:19 AM »
The Zeta3 works well, but the best chase routines were the Lynx Timeline.
It all seems a bit of a pfaff, though. A studio I did recently just ran the live tracking through the 24-track straight onto PTools, so the tape "sound" was on PTools immediately. I appreciate that odubs become an adventure at this point.
Yep. At th iij s point you have fo ask yourself; is it worth it?
The answer should be no but... I think you know that already.
We all chase dragons. It's just some are a little more worth chasing than others. And that is highly subjective. Personally I've done tape tracking from DAW before and said to myself: "Well, don't do that again."
But hell it's an experience. And you get to learn cool new sh*t. So....
If there's a harder way to do this, I haven't found it yet.

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #26 on: February 26, 2021, 12:47:53 AM »
Not easily...

Back in the 80s/90s I worked on machine synchronization. The classic method was to print SMPTE time code to one track of the recording tape (usually an outer track to not corrupt audio). Controlling the tape machine to follow a master SMPTE source is not trivial, involving knowing or learning the ballistics of the tape machine to reduce overshoot and hunting around.

A little easier is to print time code on the tape and let that be the master for your software to follow.

JR

Same thing I used to do. I used an MCI 2 inch and would always print SMPTE to track 24 and let the software follow it. Easiest way to do it hands down.

abbey road d enfer

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #27 on: February 26, 2021, 04:47:42 AM »
The Zeta3 works well, but the best chase routines were the Lynx Timeline.
The downside was that it used brute force, up to a point where the transport could suffer premature wear. Audio Kinetics, that I distributed at the time, made a point about it.
Who's right or wrong is irrelevant. What matters is what's right or wrong.
Star ground is for electricians.

porkyc

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #28 on: February 26, 2021, 12:21:57 PM »
Off subject slightly..............a long time in studios in London, I never saw an AK work!! Certainly not the 210/310 anyway. They did a later system though that was good.
We went with BTX being more versatile at the time, also I had seen those working at Videosonics in Camden Town.
I feel that having the WS chase the W&Fterring tape machine is a recipe for disaster.
In filmland, you would never have the WStation chasing the projector. Filmland has everything slaving to a master TC generator. (Motion system).

In the end, give up with tape; it's just not worth the bother. There was good reason why studios had tecchys back then. Spent their life pixxing around with flakey tape machines. Also, the tape these days seems very inconsistent.
Spend the money on good converters; a one-off purchase and no maintenance.

Gold

Re: Sync a MCI JH24 to Protools in 2020
« Reply #29 on: February 26, 2021, 12:59:35 PM »
Your average reel time  SRC was pretty terrible 20+ years ago. Having the DAW chase the tape machine sounded much worse than the other way around. With reel time SRC  much better these days it’s probably not as clear a choice.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
3261 Views
Last post June 10, 2004, 12:02:49 PM
by OldHouseScott
2 Replies
2568 Views
Last post April 04, 2010, 11:42:02 PM
by ELEKTRON
6 Replies
3549 Views
Last post October 27, 2010, 12:27:20 PM
by bpucekov
5 Replies
713 Views
Last post December 21, 2019, 05:22:58 PM
by jdurango