Anderton
brconflict
CakeAlexS
Test tones, azimuth, cotton buds and alcohol. And striping time code... Yey.... But please don't make me do it again...
One other advantage to tape: If you like your mix, you can very quickly apply any changes to ALL the songs on tape by simply playing them all through the mixer at once.
I think that would be true only if all instruments are assigned to the same tracks in all songs, otherwise you have to repatch. You could do the same thing in a DAW if all instruments are assigned to the same tracks in all songs by loading all songs sequentially into a single project.
In many situations this might just be the case. I checked my PM's and you should have seen a screencast I made regarding PSG's. It's a bit long-winded, but if I had a really good way to detail how this could work, I think it would be quite useful, and in fact, complimentary to something.
To address the problem of mis-matched tracks between these Projects. That could be solved by either inserting blank tracks manually (the trashy way), the PSG could automatically insert a PSG dummy tracks for proper track-numbering, or simply this collection may not work well with PSG's. Some don't. I find that, in a single album, especially in Rock or Punk, the drums, for example don't ever change, or, if I add something to one project, not appearing in other projects, I can either remove that
different project from the PSG, or simply move those extra tracks to the highest track #'s possible.
However, many times, we might edit a buss fader or EQ setting, which may totally be duplicated across all Projects, for example.
btw, the screencast isn't clear on a couple of aspects: You can sync as little or as much as you want between projects, and any one of the open projects can be Master of the current changes, so long as that's the one you click the PSG button in. There are many different situations people find themselves in, but if your workflow would adapt to this thinking, the PSG might be a real time-saver.