digital into audio or vice versa

Hello,
 
I've been listening to old tapes all day and am overwhelmed by how much better the sound quality of tape is.
It's not subtle.  It's huge IMO.  I've got an old Vestax 6 track cassette deck and I want to use it.
I'm not sure what would give the optimum results>   Running my Sonar stereo master onto tape (easy way) or taping as much as possible and running those tracks into sonar for midi tracks (difficult way).
Also:  How can I get my audio tapes into a project?  Direct through soundcard? 
Is there a way to actually go into tape and live into sonar while taping?  Is this even desirable? 
 
Thank you.
 
 

I'm only sure that it sounded way better...fuller...warmer...rounder......on tape than digital.  I suppose the eq bias was there but it couldn't be all of it.   It is  crappy car speakers.   There is a lot of noise but I was hoping to take it out if i go analogue to digital.

I'm posting because I'm not sure 'what i want to do' as to whether going digital to audio is better than audio to digital.

I'm with MGH.
I can understand 2" tape sounding better, but CASSETTE?  It's an opinion, and thus equal to my own (opposite), but this is the first time I've ever heard of someone preferring cassette tape to digital recording.

There is nothing quite like tape.  It certainly has a tone - nice, fat, round.  A lot of stuff is still mixed to 2 track tape, even if it isn't tracked to it.  I'm not really hip for cassette, but who am I to discount another person's taste?  Just be forwarned, a lot of people have given up on tape and the tone sounds old fashioned.

Mixing down is probably the easiest way to give the vibe, but I wouldn't discount some tracking, either and bounce it to the computer.  You just have to try different ways.  Personally, I have an old 8 track reel to reel, and if I had a in perfect working order and was recording a band here at home, I track the rhythm section, bounce it down to computer in one go, then overdub on digital. That is a theory, tho.  LIke above it is easier (and cleaner) to just go straight for the digital main line.

@

Jon
not arguing with using reel to reel tape (as Slugbaby says, 2"), lotsa classic albums made on it, lotsa bands still wanna use it, especially running a mix thru it to impart some of that magical (and unexplainable) analogue warmth, but that's a very different thing to cassette tape, which is much narrower and runs much more slowly. but hey, there's no rules, right?

@, Mark, Herb,

I hear you on the 2".  I had a Teac 2340 and my legs are still black and blue from me kicking myself over selling it.
Now I've got an old 6 track cassette that does have a high speed setting (may help a bit) and was hoping to get some, if any, of that tape sound using it.
I'm wondering if i ran a stereo mix through it then back into Sonar I could use what was usable and hopefully soak the song in that analogue gel.  Yes, Herb, the compression that comes from the tape is not in your face and quite perfect.  Editing i was hoping to do in Sonar after i had captured some tracks on tape.

Jon,  I liked your singing!  
Thanks for the links.  I'm aquiring them pronto. 
I've been using other saturation plugs but they haven't risen to the occasion. 

Good stuff, thanks mucho to y'all

I'd describe the "tape sound" as being like a room ambience. It glues the sound into a full, solid package, which sounds very nice, but is not as true to reality as a "modern" digital recording.

I just noticed that I can tell the new remastered/mixed(?) versions of the Beatles' songs from the previous CD-versions even with a relatively low volume in my car with all the traffic noise disturbing.

They do not have that much of the "tape sound" left, anymore. I first thought they're cover versions! But surely you can hear the natural studio ambience and the room more clearly. So I'd say the sound is more natural, even though not necessarily nicer sounding.

I find it hard to believe that any cassette recording could match modern tech in quality. One may well prefer that sound, but that's another thing..

I've been listening to old tapes all day and am overwhelmed by how much better the sound quality of tape is.

You're not crazy, No How. It's the tape saturation you're hearing, and cassette tapes saturate very easily. I've heard of guys sending full digital mixes out to a cassette deck and then re-recording it back into the computer to get that fat sound.

Of course, you also get tape hiss, wow and flutter, reduced high-frequency response, channel crosstalk and dropouts. But it's amazing how such a low-grade medium works in your favor to make your mix sound better than it really is!

+1 to G_Hacker's thoughts and notions.

But, IIRC, your sibs only taunted us in your stem busses or master busses.  I may be wrong.

Those hissy stems may have included drums, instruments, guitars, and/or vox. 

But your independent tracks themselves have never been significantly hissy, IIRC.

Much of your hiss Jimmy and I repeatedly detected on several songs:
1) Too much treble ... 6 decibels too much EQ boost from 3K to 20Khz
2) Too little lower mids ... 3-6 decibels too much EQ reduction from 800Hz - 2Khz

Warming the lower mids (and mids) with a lot of tape/tube saturation usually sounds wonderful to my ears (at least in my psychedelia mixes).  That may be what's happening (as per Bit, above).

Also, rather than eliminate the upper sibs (5KHz+), they may be widened drastically (stereo-panned) toward the extreme LT and RT.

(Unfortunately, I know nothing of tape production but I'm glad you found a medium thats giving you inspiration.)

Cassette systems are often associated with lower quality and fidelity but there are some situations where they can sound amazing. I have worked with high end field recorders that used the cassette! Brands like Marantz and Nakamichi come to mind. I have one of these and they offer metal tape options and chrome settings. Some have super transports with dual capstan/flywheels for very low wow and flutter. The machine can be optimised for these tapes easily. Then DBX offers a doubling of the signal to noise ratio so a poor 45 db S/N becomes an amazing - 90 db. This means any tape hiss is now impossible to hear! These recorders can extend to and go well over 20 Khz. Now we are talking. Coupled with a nice stereo mike, some serious recordings can be made going from a whisper to a gut busting control room floor vibrating roar!. In fact I would put it up against any current portable digital device although I am a big fan of those too. A serious cassette machine set up this way in this environment is comparable to the digital recording medium. Metal tape sounds very impressive with lots of transients and no audible noise when used with DBX.

When transferring mixes at line level these cassette machines can also perform in a spectacular way too. They could add warmth to a mix, warm up the bottom end, ease any mid range issues and add glue to a mix quite effectively and not damage the mix too much in the process. There were some fine cassette decks such as Akai (glass head) and Sony as well as some European brands too.

It is good to transfer mixes at reel to reel level if you can, and the wider the track width becomes and the faster the tape travels, the punchier the mix sounds.  Two track masters can go up to 1" format. That is extreme but pretty good sounding. But the best tape machines have been simulated in digital hardware now with the results being impossible to tell apart. It is a bit costly right now though.  A software version of this at a very high level and affordable price must come in the future surely. Then we dispose of the tape machines forever! I have still have got 6 of em!