The real TAPE EMULATION circuit

[strangeandbouncy]

FWIW i run all my mixes through our Otari mtr12 whether I print to tape or not . . . . 5 years ago, I would never have even considered an Otari, being something of a Studer A80RC/ Ampex snob, but necessity being what it is ie, all we have is a shagged out MTR12 1/4", i started using it. i LOVE what it does even on input, kinda sounds like ringing iron to me . . . . better printing to GP9 tho' . . . .



Andy P

 

[Svart]

I have one of those fancy CD to tape player adaptors.. it is indeed a small record type head that is separaed by a thin piece of plastic. remove the plastic and allow them to touch and you get much better highs. Although i wouldn't call this close to tape emulation, it does add a bit of character to the sound. It's not *that* bad sounding either.

it's still rather like a gapped trafo though..

 

[kdawg]

Not to veer too far from the analog-ness of what it seems is trying to be accomplished here, but just out my curiosity - has anyone out there experimented with building some impulse responses of certain magnetic tape off of a Studer for example?

With all the new convolution digital reverbs, etc. out there right now it seems that it may be feasible to build a digital model of an analog tape response that would be at least something like recording on real tape (which saddens me is disappearing). I know many rack hardware devices have been made over the years to emulate "tape saturation", but with the incredible computing power we have now, I could definitely see the possibility of some models of different saturation levels being computed.

Oh boy... I hope this doesn't start the mega-thread! :shock:

-kdawg

 

[TomWaterman]

While possible I don't think the technology is really there yet. It would at the very least require dynamic convolution and perhaps some form of additional modelling.

The problem is, Sintefex have the dyn conv patented and no-one can get at the technology without getting into trouble with them. There was a plugin released about a month ago that did dyn conv, but it was taken off the www due to legal issues and the fact that it had a bug.

Even if the Sintefex dyn conv is used for a tape sim I doubt its possible to capture every nuance of tape as it would require a massive amount of memory and complex switching of samples. The Sintefex box has 44!! Sharc DSPs in it and must be far quicker at doing these kinds of calculations than a software plug due to the architecture of dedicated DSP, if they could do it, they already would have I'm sure.

FYI, the guys at TriTone digital are developing a tapetone plugin which will use convolution and pluggo.....their EQs are quite respected but I'm yet to try them out.

www.tritonedigital.com

Voxengo have a TapeBus plug as well that uses an impulse from a well-known tapemachine but again I've not compared it.

www.voxengo.com

I may have a go at sampling a Studer over the summer when school finishes and see what comes of that. I think something interesting could be cooked up in MaxMSP....

But I'm still interested in a analogue version more than a digital emulation.

BTW has anybody tried the Yamaha Tape plugin in V2 software for DM2000, 02R96? Apparently its component modelled....

Cheers Tom

 

[chrissugar]

I doubt that any digital simulator can or will simulate in the near future (maybe never) tape and transformers. All this sampling and convolution is in my opinion a wrong concept because it ads some static thing to the sound with a personality that has something in common with the simulated analog process.
Even mister GM said that the Sintefex is not the right answer.
The reason why I'm so intersted in this is because I lost my hope that there is any chance to duplicate this thing in digital.

By the way, yesterday I made a test with two sound engineer/musician friends to see how a hardware analog processor and it's digital DSP (hardware DSP) simulation compares.
You could identify that the simulation was duplicating the way the hardware behaves, I mean you could recognise the personality of the analog processor in the plugin but that was all. The sound of the analog process was organic and had dimension while the plugin sound was uninteresting, thin and without dimension.

Analog hardware and its DSP simulation is like the difference between heaven and a bidimensional Polaroid picture of heaven.

chrissugar

 

[scott_humphrey]

Chris,
Just for fun, you might want to try AIPL's Warm Tone software:

http://www.aipl.com/warmtone.html

O.K., just a minute...let me put this on [dons flame-proof suit] .... :wink:

I like this software a lot. Sure, it's not the real analog deal, but it is very useful real-world tool to "warm up" digital recordings. Download the trial version and give it a spin. The cost of the "pro" version is less than the price of one good transformer.
-Scott

 

[chrissugar]

Scott,

There are tons of all kind of simulators and some can produce usable sound or interesting effects but none sounds like the real thing. Even the HEDD192 is just a nice fx box. And it is probably the best tape simulator. And it is also expensive.

chrissugar

 

[scott_humphrey]

[quote author="chrissugar"]Scott,

There are tons of all kind of simulators and some can produce usable sound or interesting effects but none sounds like the real thing. Even the HEDD192 is just a nice fx box. And it is probably the best tape simulator. And it is also expensive.

chrissugar[/quote]

Sure. O.K.

I've tried several software programs that I didn't like, but I think this one is pretty good. Have you tried it?

 

[Guest]

Back to the original question...

Do you think it would be a reasonable first step to try a two head (record/playback) approach with some tape medium between the heads or a single record/playback head run in series?

You may get a bit more complexity from the two heads since the alignment would be a significant factor.

Would you propose this device to be single channel or multi-track?

 

[chrissugar]

Thomas

For the begining I think we should concentrate on a one channel solution because if we can do some working device, later we can develop it further.
At this moment I would like to experiment and hear ideas.
I'm a bit sad because I expected to hear some arguments from PRR, SSLtech, BoHansen, who know the theory and who have a vast experience with tape machines.
Come on guys, I would like to hear your ideas.

chrissugar

 

[aronaut]

how's the idea going?
tried anything yet?

 

[bradb]

Just was having a discussion on this idea tonight. Thinking of putting the heads together on a jh110 and seeing what happens... any more info on all of this?

 

[pucho812]

only tape simulation I got is my a-80 1/2" 2 track :twisted:
The rupert neve portico is good. and relatively cheap only 1500.00(us)

 

[sismofyt]

i use tapemachines for emulating that sound. works pretty well. i've thought about making an infinite loop a' la tapedelays, and other more radical stuff, but i don't see the point in hacking up a good tapemachine to make a box that'll emulate that sound.

tapemachines have many uses and can be found cheaply. i finally got hear that HEDD thingy, what a fukkin' joke. nice converters though.

dunno 'bout that Portico (are Mackie building the stuff for Rupert? looks like it) thingy, but come on man, you can get a KILLER tapemachine for 1500 bucks

i don't get it this whole emulating biz

 

[pucho812]

me studer went as a pair (2 machines) 1 was mine the 1/2" and the other was a 1/4" both from the same mastering house with 1 original owner. both machines were part of a larger deal to the same mastering house for buying some atr 102's. I got both machines for 500.00(us) sold the 1/4" to my buddy for 500.00 so I basicly got the 1/2" for free. Both machines are working well and needed minor TLC like LEDs etc,etc,etc.

 

[bradb]

I own a tape machine... an MCI JH110.

I'm looking to do tape emulation, by using the machine I already have.

why?

I won't have to align the machine, I won't have to re-lap heads, I won't have to demag, I won't have to maintain motors that are my age, I won't have to buy expensive tape that I'm not using for storage. The fact is that tape is now an effect. it is not a storage medium anymore (of course there are some die hards out there that are using tape for storage, good for them) I don't use tape to store. If I can just put the heads together on my JH110 and be done with it then I'll be happy.

cool?

so if anyone has any input on this idea... lets have it.

 

[smallbutfine]

SP*L did a digital unit that was quite expensive a while ago just for this purpose.
However since now i only invested 15 Euros in a fully discrete Philips N2537 tapedeck in 19" at a local 2nd hand shop :grin:
(just wanted to cannibalize the VU's, but the inner live looked very beautiful) just checked the headphone out and it was nice, and it has a line out knob...i can even get a new head for it after all the years :shock:

 

[sismofyt]

if you don't wan't to do those things, then a device that actually uses heads and tape will be out of the question. but it's only those components that will deliver the sound. so we're back to tapemachines again

fancy DSP and/or analog compression/disortion/phase fuck up wont cut it,
only tapemachines wil

so while i too would like to build a gizmo that'll do the tape thing i know it's not gonna happen. besides tapemachines are beatifull, computers not

 

[bradb]

I don't think the DIY'ers here are talking about using DSP to deliver the effects of tape. I, for one am not. I'm trying to extend Chris Sugar's interest in putting head magnetics together and removing the magnetic tape or using transformers, etc.

If we eliminate the tape from the equation and just put the heads together, then we eliminate head wear, demag, alignment, motor maintenence, etc etc etc. two heads together seems pretty maintenence free, to me.

in fact, sismofyt, Rupret Neve has just released a tape emulator that uses the "heads together" concept.... its in a 1u x ~9" little case. So it can be done. Please see: http://www.rupertneve.com/portico5042.html And that is why we are here talking and asking "does anyone have any ideas on how to get this to work in the DIY realm"

I think the board understands now that you feel that DSP is not going to cut it and that tape machines (running magnetic tape) are the only ways to go. Thank you. I would still like to continue the conversation about how we can eliminate magnetic tape and retain much of that tape sound.

 

[sismofyt]

i know about that Rupert thing, i do live on the same planet as the rest of you. i just don't understand how the 'tape sound' can be had without tape. i don't think using just heads is enough, when you're overloading a tapemacine you're overloaded the tape, not the heads (unless it's a semi pro)

so by all means go ahead, i just do not think it's possible. why do you?