Integrating a Reel-To-Reel in my Digital Setup

Hello all,

I am building a hybrid Analog/Digital setup in my existing studio. I have recently made the leap in my mixing chain to the Dangerous 2 Bus, and am liking what I am hearing so far!

In addition, I just picked up a Fostex G-16, a 16 track 1/2" tape setup that I plan on using to record with from time to time, things like drums and bass, and then re-record these tracks into the computer.
 


I have 16 tracks of XLR into my 2 Saffire Pro 40's (well actually 14 because I am using two of the channels as my stereo return back into DAW so I can record my mixes in real time through the 2 bus); but anyway - I guess I would need some sort of interface to go from my channel inputs into both my Audio Interface and the Tape machine concurrently. I would rather have things hard wired permanently, so I don't have to move cables around all the time.

the Fostex has 16 channel I/O that are 1/4" inch unbalanced. I have XLR coming to my control room from my snake, that is currently plugged into my Pro 40's.

Obviously, an old school way would be to route everything through a mixer - but I would like to try and avoid something like that due to the size of it.

I am considering picking up 2 more Saffire Pro 40's, and just daisy-chaining them all together, and leaving the 16 new channels permanently hooked into the new units.  What I'm not getting my head around or am uncertain about is, whether I will have to move my XLR inputs (16 of them) around into the new units.  I just want to have everything hooked up and leave it that way.
 
Anyone else doing this sort of thing (besides Eric Valentine?) 

Thank you in advance. I hope that I have explained things clearly.

I just re read you post and will add that the mixer will allow you to permanently plug your snake into it and use the mixer to direct your inputs to either your audio interface or the Fostex.
A patch bay would be the best way to rig this up. Otherwise you'll be swapping the direct out put cables.   

I can't understand how you are patching things.  You have 16 XLR signals coming to the Saffires.  You want to dump digital sound to the fostex 16 track - 16 channels at a time or what?  And then dump that analog signal back to digital?  I can only say why?  The fostex isn't (wasn't) known as a high quality tape recorder there is so little tape to lay sound to.  My old Tascam 38 at twice the width per track was usable but fostex was considered a step below.  I could see experimenting laying tracks down directly to tape and trying to get tape compression for that old time sound, but then you would have to get a mixer for preamps or use the saffire and conversion.  If you are planning on laying digital tracks to analog for tape compression, you are still going to need some kind of mixer to get the signals hot enough to saturate.  All in all it sounds like a long way 'round to a solution to a non-problem.  Tape sounds great, but there are a lot of problems associated with it - and expense.  Just keeping the gosh-darn things running and aligned and in decent shape is either time consuming or expensive, which is why my 38 and revox just sit there.  I may pick up a stereo otari to bounce to, but that is a 1/4 inch 1/2 track.
 
For a while it was tubes are the answer, now it is tape.  The easiest way is to put your money in the front end - mics for the job, transformer preamps and analog comps and EQs to get that analog goodness into the digital realm. 
 
It seems you have a good idea, but I don't see it panning out without a lot of work or some expense.  Perhaps if you gave us a better idea of exactly what you wanted to do.  
 
@
 
 

But how are you planning in getting the signal from the Saffire into the tape deck? I looked at the specs and it does not have inserts or direct outputs. So like I was saying, that will require your signal to pass through A/D then D/A conversion to get to the tape defeating the purpose of recording to analog tape.
In other words it does have pre amps, but once the signal passes through them it becomes digital. The only analog outputs are the headphone jacks. The Saffire is not the correct interface for this. I do believe there are interfaces with analog insert points. 
 
The point is, I believe there is some excellent attributes to recording all analog to achieve a desired sound. And using good quality analog gear is worth the effort if you can afford it. 
But the minute you plug a mike into a digital audio interface, you have lost that attribute completely. The sound you'll get will now be the sound of the audio interfaces pre amps and all processing done afterwards is really better done in the digital domain.  It is not the best idea to run audio back and forth through converters.  
 
 
 

Ha ha seems like we are all typing at the same time, I didn't see AT's post until I posted, And so I will add I agree with all he say's too. I didn't want to talk you out of analog tape as that's another topic. 
 

LOL, yeah, I'm not interested in being talked out of it.  Just how to make my idea work.

If you are really serious you need this but it is not cheap:
 
http://www.endlessanalog.com/tag/clasp-analog-tape-recording-pro-tools-daw-integration
 
I have been there and done that and in the end I found there are other ways of getting that sound using tape simulators and also working with Harrison Mixbus.
 
Not sure what the situation is like in the US but the tape is very expensive here in Australia now.  There is also a fair bit of maintenance involved with tape machines.
 
Sorry to be on the negative side.  I admire you for wanting to do it though. I love tape machines too and still have 5 or more at home in storage. 

Couldn't I just use a mixer with stock preamps? I am not looking to win a Grammy. :)

Allen and heath is a good one and perfect for such use.  You can probably find a smaller unit - Mackie or such.  This soundcraft has inserts for the mic inputs:
 
 http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/EFX8
 
Using a desk tho is the optimum method - you can bring in a softer signal and pump it up out to tape and let it do its thing.  Even without saturation that can work well for rhythm sections stuff - bass and drums and rhythm guitar.  It rounds it out and off, rolls off some of the highs so the rhythm instruments all jell together and the lead stuff pops out straight to digital.
 
If size is a problem, there are preamp only units, but they tend to be expensive.  Yamaha makes a nice 8 preamp unit for under a grand in $s.  Presonus has/had one:
 
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/DigiMaxD8
 
I don't know what one of their older units would go for but probably cheaper.
 
If you picked up the deck cheap you could get some mileage out of it.  Just remember you need a demagnetizer.  The demagnetizer needs to be a pro unit not a toy.  And cleaning fluid, denatured alcohol.  And a tech - even if you only have to pay him to teach you to align etc. He probably won't want to do it, paraphrasing an old Bible parable.  "Teach a man to align, you get paid once.  Align a tape deck for a man, and you'll get paid forever."
 
mostly have fun.
 
@

OK, listen to this, I just picked up 2 of those Presonus units for $370! It is also reassuring that they are Class A preamps.
 
Looks like I can even sync these with my Saffire Pro 40's through ADAT too if I want.

Yes, I figured this was what I will have to do, and that is OK.  It is not something I will be recording with on a daily basis.  Only for special projects - so this is something that I will do when necessary.  It will probably only take me 10 minutes to get everything hooked up and back each time anyway.  Not a huge big deal, and the back is very easily accessible.
 
I may see if I can get creative with patch bays to permanently plug everything into, so to prevent unplugging all of the time, and to make connections that way, when I fire up the old beast.
 
Thank you all for your help on this!!!

Yeah, I was planning on just recording the raw tracks with the Reel and then importing into the DAW.  I will then record remaining tracks and to do all mixing/processing/production.  So that means I am on target with this setup!  I do have some HW compression available I can run through if need be that I will set up via patch bay with these Presonus units, so no worries there.  I'll use them if I have to.  But who knows, there may be that occasional time I just want it to be nasty. ;)

The Dangerous 2 Bus is a summing mixer, and not a pre amp, so is on my back end.  It does all of the summing for me, so I don't use my master bus.  I send my submixes to it (which are routed in a special way through it - but that is the subject for another thread), and then record my finished mix in real time back in the box. I can also patch in some of my vintage hardware processors to the signal which is a lot of fun as well.  It is incredible how much my mixes have improved using the unit; like an Audible difference.  I got the idea from Mixerman and was skeptical, but now I am a convinced convert.
 
As far as the track width worries, it is what it is.  Back in the early 1990's, I recorded at a pretty busy and popular recording studio in Palo Alto CA - known for recording many MANY of the upcoming indy bands and punk bands throughout the 1980's in the SF bay area.  They used a 1/2" 16 track tape machine (Fostex B-16 reel-to-reel through a 20 -track Tascam M-520 soundboard), in fact, I still have a couple of the tapes from my sessions.  I plan on running them through this machine to hear me and my friends playing in 1991.  Like a time capsule.  They have been stored well and are in great shape - I am well aware of the "sticky tape" scenario and may even consider baking them prior, but I just don't know if it will be necessary.  But anyway, the sound quality was really good, and frankly, that's what I'm looking for here.  A little bit of vintage sound as a recording option - I'm sure it will never be me primary, but WHO KNOWS?!  Options are nice.

Here's the story on that studio from back in the day:  http://houseoffaithrecording.com/story_metro.htm

Well, the inputs on the preamps have volume control, just like using any fader for volume control.

I believe there is more than 1 way to skin a cat, and as long as I can get good clean analog signal into the tape machine, I will try a few different ways of "skinning".  It is certainly a hybrid setup, which is my intent, and also taking up a small footprint, rather than having a traditional studio setup with a big desk.  I bet those Presonus preamps sound better than some desks used in some studios back in the day.  I'm not worried about EQ as I'll be able to adjust that in my DAW after recording.  A different workflow, and an obvious advantage to the old days.  Remember, I'll be turning this analog recording into a digital recording by recording what is on tape into my DAW, but hopefully, I'll get a good representation and character of that Analog and Tape flavor into these recordings.
 
I know it is a different way of thinking about the whole process, but I enjoy that. Most importantly, customers these days are REALLY digging analog gear and recording, and if I can incorporate that successfully into my little Project Studio (which I am now calling a Boutique Recording Studio), that will be nothing but good for business - especially if the results I produce are stellar; which is of utmost importance.

Exactly AT.  Just can't see adding a simulator when you can have the real thing.  Remember, the 2 bus is NOT a recording unit, but a SUMMING unit.  So all of my monitoring is through it, and that thru signal will also be recorded in the DAW for the final print as well.  Yes, it is EXTREMELY tasty.  I have better width, depth, warmth, fatness than ever before!

I hear you.  Well, I'm looking for a good stereo compressor for that final "mix bus" print (suggestions under $1k?).  I am running HW comps and EQ / verb on individual tracks if need be, but am still using VST's in the box of course.  It's just fun using hardware, and I actually have fun tweaking - and seem to achieve really good results using them.  I usually end up printing the individual tracks (bouncing with fx) once I get them sounding where I want them (before mixdown) - because it would be just about impossible to reproduce that if a remix was necessary.  LOL.