Reel To Reel recording

[Spanner93]

Hi, I'm an 18 year old student with an interest for vintage musical gear, and I would like to start recording using a Reel-to-Reel recorder. Partially because I like that vintage sound and old analogue gear and also because I am a broke student who doesn't have the funds to get a modern equivalent.

Sadly, I'm a bit out of my depth regarding what to look for in a recorder and the precise technology behind recording. To put it simply, I have no idea where to start and I am completely out of my depth.

What I would like the recorder to be capable of: Recording several different instruments (not necessarily simultaneously) and playback of that recording, either through the unit or through external speakers.

Instrument wise, I would like to be able to hook up a 6-string, a bass guitar and possibly a microphone (not simultaneously).

Please help

[Radio Wrangler]

Ah, "not simultaneously" is the key phrase. Does it mean that you want to add one track at a time and then later mix the individual recordings to a final stereo version on a second machine?

This implies that you need a machine with one track for each instrument. TEAC (TASCAM) did some lowish cost 4 track machines, the next step takes you to 8 then 16 then 28 etc studio recorders with wide tape, and you could google machines by Studer Otari Soundcraft. All of these will be either expensive or old enough to need some TLC to get them going, which means you'll have to get a bit technical with them.

It actually takes a lot of recorder to do what you can easily do with a computer, a soundcard and a bit of software, but it doesn't have the feel of magnetic tape.

Most serious tape machines lack amplifiers and speakers, and assume that those things are taken care of elsewhere.

Cheers
David

[paulsherwin]

It is much more expensive to do what you want with old analogue kit. If you want to multitrack you will need professional equipment as David says. Even using a simple mixer and a standard semipro stereo recorder you are talking big bucks - even the tape will be expensive (think how much tape is used when it's whizzing past the tape heads at more than a foot a second).

If you have a modern PC, a (free) copy of Audacity and a decent USB multichannel soundcard, you can achieve results that engineers in the 1960s would have dreamed of.

There's a good reason why studio time in the 70s cost hundreds of pounds an hour (at 70s prices), and why these studios (largely) no longer exist.

[soundhog]

If you do want to do it 'analogue' on a budget, then there are plenty of four track (or eight track in some cases) cassette 'portastudios' sitting around doing nothing these days. You should be able to pick one up for very little money, and with careful use and decent cassettes the results can sound quite respectable, depending on how much you like tape hiss.

However, even an analogue fanatic such as myself would have to admit you can get much better results with less work (and compared to R2R gear, a lot less money) by using a modest PC/Mac sound card and cheap/free recording software.

I think a cheap Portastudio would be worth getting hold of though, even if it's just to play around with, as you can learn an awful lot about the recording and mixing processes using one. Be quick though, as prices are seemingly starting to rise, for some reason... It must be a "lo-fi" fashion thing. I'm not throwing either of mine away just yet.

[TIMTAPE]

I concur with Paul. You would probably be better off with a modern digital setup using a PC and a USB interface. Or a small digital portastudio.

Also the "vintage sound" term can be misleading. It's true you can get a pleasingly distorted sound out of an overdriven valve amp or a tape machine for certain electric guitar or drum effects, but back in the day, they usually avoided such distortion except where it was needed for a particular effect.

So back then, what some people now call "that vintage sound" they called "distortion" and mostly tried to avoid it!

Listen to a classic 60's track like Hendrix's "All along the Watchtower". True, Hendrix's electric guitar has been deliberately distorted by overdriving the valve amp he played through, but the other instruments in the track are mostly clean and undistorted. If they had recorded it today with today's recording gear it probably would have sounded about the same!

Good luck

[brenellic2000]

Radio Wrangler and Soundhog are offering very valuable support, but if you want to go digital like all those others above say is 'the only way', then go digital ... but this is after all a V-I-N-T-A-G-E forum!! I savour oak matured vintage cider (listening to the music) and find modern fizzy pop saccharin-laced apple juice leaves an unpleasant after-taste (from the new technology).

If you to want to be traditional, then open reel is still viable and many small recording studios are going back to 'analogue' recording (and vinyl playback)... and there is now a secure supply of analogue tape. But your deciding factor is money and access to a good audio engineer who knows the foibles of old equipment and can keep your kit in working order - make no mistake, even the 'best' Studer/Revox, TEAC/Tascam or Ferrograph Logic 7 is not and never was 100% reliable... but Ferrographs and Revoxes are 99% repairable.

Choice of machine? - I suggest to learn to walk before you run. Buy a decent Revox B77 1/2 track from a reputable dealer (£600+) - this will give you near-studio quality recording - and you can mix, track to track transfer and superimpose to build up an orchestral piece. If you don't like it, you'll easily get your money back - don't waste you money on an e-Bay bargain - as it won't be!

Then if you're hooked, go to 4-track 1/4" (Teac/Tascam) or far better, 8-track 1" (Studer) or industry standard 16/24 track 2" (Studer)... but prices and cost of tape will rise exponentially! Avoid half-inch, as no one uses it!

Experiment and enjoy. We all did - once.

Now for the savage attacks from the 'Vintage' digital brigade... !

Barry

[Radio Wrangler]

Hi Barry,

I wasn't sure how many tracks he wanted, he said to record instruments, several of them, and individually, which could mean shuttling from track to track while mixing in each new instrument, ot it could mean he's in the market for an 8-track machine. He did say reel-to-reel, so i kept the Tascam cassette jobs out of it.

If he wants to use some vintage technology, good for him, but he's been warned that it will cost him real money, and he'll have to learn how to repair and maintain his own gear in all probability, whereas the PC soundcard route is almost free and he probably already has the gear if he wants to add only one or two instruments at a time tubular bells style.

The advice to avoid 1/2 inch tape is very good. Most of what you see is either a video formulation or high hysteresis computer stuff. An idiosyncratic sound is guaranteed!

Cheers
David (An A77 man at heart)

[soundhog]

Originally Posted by brenellic2000

Now for the savage attacks from the 'Vintage' digital brigade... !

None from me. I have a Teac 3440 for four tracking, make loops etc. up on a Series Six and mix onto an A80. I love them to bits, but I also am well aware of the downsides the approach brings, not least the cost. A 'broke student' may have problems with this. I'm just trying to offer some realistic advice from my perspective/experience, and certainly not saying digital is 'the only way'. I'm not sure where you got that idea from, actually.

[TIMTAPE]

Neither am I saying digital is "the only way".

The thing is, after working for forty years with what is now called "vintage" recording gear, I still dont know what "that vintage sound" is!
Yet it seems common among some young folk to speak about "it" as if everybody knows exactly what it is.

Perhaps it would help if Spanner 93 could narrow it down to a particular recording which he likes and we could discuss why it sounds like it does.

Cheers Tim

[paulsherwin]

Barry has actually made the essential point well, which is that serious analogue recording requires a lot of commitment and money. I don't think the OP would be wise to pursue it given his circumstances. It would be better to learn about the technology, and then experiment with a cheap domestic recorder or an old cassette deck if he's still interested.

[Spanner93]

Sorry if I was being a little unclear

Regarding the "not simultaneous" thing: I meant that I want the recorder to be capable of recording each instrument individually (by itself) and then leave it at that (no editing). I am looking at this as there is a local recording studio using all old analogue gear and me and my band would like to record there. The only issue being that it is hellishly expensive per hour and therefore we would like to perfect our individual instrument tracks on the same platform before we shell out and record at the studio (and get a bit of experience using the gear). The reel to reel would therefore be for practice and musical doodlings only.

Sound wise, I really love the Bill Haley recordings of the 50's, lots of 50-60 blues and classic rock. Really anything of the rock/blues genre of the 50-60's including modern soundalikes such as the Black Keys and the White Stripes. 2 particular recordings that I love are Sympathy for the Devil (Rolling stones 1968) and Sweet 16 pt1 (BB King 1960).

After looking at the used market here in the Netherlands and my budget, I have seen a few models that look OK. Such as the Revox A77, Philips N-series (Being in the Netherlands, these are truly cheap) and the Akai GX-Series.

Thanks for all the advice so far.

[Nickthedentist]

I was lent a Sony TC-377 for a while, and it was great fun to play around with and made excellent recordings. ISTR that it was possible to record in stereo, or record on one channel while playing the other. It was also a three-head machine, so you could monitor what was actually on the tape as you recorded.

I think this would be a good introduction to reel-to-reels without spending a fortune.

They also seem plentiful and reliable (as far as I know).

Nick.

[paulsherwin]

All the recorders that you mention are capable of making simple good quality stereo recordings. Japanese manufacturers like Sony and Akai made a range of reel to reel recorders in the 1970s intended for domestic hifi use and any of these would be suitable.

Don't ignore the possibility of using a cassette deck. A good quality deck with well matched cassettes can make recordings which are almost as good as a domestic reel to reel machine running at twice or even four times the tape speed. They can be bought for almost nothing and are small and convenient.

Remember that this equipment will be 30 or 40 years old, so may need some repair and restoration. You should assume that new belts will be needed as a minimum, though it's possible that a previous owner will have changed these.

[brenellic2000]

Having been 'savaged' in a most polite and gentlemanly manor (evening all!), and having read Spanners93's response, I still feel the best approach is get a Revox B77 - or as David says the A77 (still a stunning recorder - I have two: must get a stereo one, one day!).

With this you can experiment with recording instruments and effects and with a basic 8 channel mixer bring it all down to 2-channel stereo and, with the Revox, produce a top quality stereo demo-master tape to present to the recording studio. That will give you the expertise and knowledge which hiring a studio at great expense, simply can't!

AND! You'll be doing exactly what the Beatles, Queen, Pink Floyd and many others did (using Brenells!!) creating the home-studio which brought us the high grade tape decks we all love and use.

You could of couse go digital... now, where's my Stylophone?!

Barry

[jamesperrett]

I'd be another one to suggest a Revox A77 or B77. I tried using all kinds of reel to reels to record mine and my friends' musical works when I was younger - including a Brennel MkV, Philips N4515, Tandberg 6400 and various Akais before I ended up with a Revox. The Revox just seemed to work so much better than the others.

There are two ways of working with the Revox - you can either set it up to record the whole band live with all the instrument and vocal mics going through a mixing desk or you can record one thing at a time. The only thing with recording one part at a time is that you have to mix the new and old parts as you go and the end product will be mono. However, I found this method of working to be creatively more fulfilling than working on a 4 track as there are fewer choices to divert you from the business of recording music.

I would strongly suggest that you buy a mixing desk to go with your reel to reel - I used an old MM 12 into 2 desk with the Revox and it worked well. There are plenty of newer desks with more facilities that would also work.

It may also be worth thinking about where you want to end up. I always knew that I'd want to expand the studio so, when I did, the Revox became the master recorder and it is still in use today (as is the MM mixer for occasional live gigs). I added an 8 track recorder and then later a 16 track recorder together with a Studiomaster mixing desk for the later studio.

Nowadays I'm normally computer based but there is something about those big reels of tape spinning around - especially when they're 14" reels on a big Otari MTR90.

James.

[ppppenguin]

There are many people here who are enthusaists for old recording kit and that's good. If you decide to go that route I'm sure they will encourage you but:

• You need to be an enthusiast. Vintage kit needs careful maintenance and skilled operation to get good results. Modern kit should just work. Obviously if the mics are badly chosen or in the wrong places nothing will sound good.
• It's not cheap. Tape is expensive too. PC based recording is cheap. If you go the vintage route it's for love, not money.
• Vintage sound is an elusive thing. I doubt if any 2 people will agree on what it is. If you want to get the sound of analogue tape being overloaded slightly then you might be able to get a suitable digital effect. The next level is to get a single 3 head RR machine and use it as an outboard processor. At least you won't be using lots of reels of expensive tape.

[Spanner93]

Would I be able to use a modern mixer such as: http://www.thomann.de/gb/behringer_xenyx_802.htm in combination with a reel to reel, or do I require a specific type that is from a similar era?

Also, on the actual reel to reel front is this a good deal (sorry the ad's in dutch, but the pics should say enough)

http://audio-tv-foto.marktplaats.nl/...revox-a77.html

Thanks for all the advice so far, you've all been really helpful

[Radio Wrangler]

To use an analogy, Spanner99, you've done the equivalent of popping up on a vintage car forum and said that you and your friends would like to travel to Paris, and have decided that you would like to travel in a vintage car.

We've been pointing out that one that was in good enough condition (carefully restored) would be very expensive.

One that was a lot cheaper would need you to acquire the knowledge to rebuild something that had been discarded as almost worthless.

Either would need you to acquire enough skills to keep it going and fix it en-route.

And finally, someone who rented a little hatch-back at 35 Euros/day could go screaming past you and be confident of not having to get dirty.

All that said, you can have more fun and do it in more style. It just costs in money blood (mostly from slipped spanners) sweat and tears.

If you still fancy the difficult route, all the help and encouragement you'll need is here. It would be unfair to lead you into this without your eyes fully open.

Cheers
David

[ppppenguin]

No problem using a modern mixer with older recorders, assuming it has normal stereo analogue outputs.

At EUR25 for a Revox A77 you can't go too far wrong. Any mistakes you make won't have cost much money. You might be unlucky and get a complete wreck or one of the very low speed versions which are not useful for your purposes. Or one of the 4 track models which again are not veryuseful to you. That's not 4 tracks simulataneously, you turn the tape over and record another pair of stereo tracks going the other way. Saves tape cost at the expense of quality and making physical edits impossible.

FWIW, I have a Revox B77 II, high speed, sitting in my loft in its original box. Low hours, virtually as new, just one broken switch toggle. Exactly the sort of machine that the OP would probably love to have. One day I'll sell it for a few hundred ££ when the market reaches that level. It's not worth my while digging it out for the perhaps £100 or so I'd get for it now.

[brenellic2000]

I agree with Ppppenguin,

Nearly all mixers will work fine - 8 into 2 (stereo output) is fine - you'll need a full set of leads and more importantly, decent microphones ... but buy only what you immediately need!

As to the Revox A77 - these are brilliant machines but it is obvious from the photo that this 25Euro example has not been looked after as it should, and will undoubtedly have a fault or two requiring a full service... which will put you off straight away, and cost more than buying a properly serviced machine from a good dealer in the first place. Ask around in Holland.

It may cost more at first, but you will get more pleasure and inspiration to take it seriously!

Much as l love the A77, the B77 is a better choice - if its been properly serviced.

Go for it - and forget all this 'digital nonsence' !

Barry