magerogue Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 I don't know if this is the right section for this question, but seemed to be the best one since it's for questions about Led Zeppelin, so here it goes... I'm trying to find out what machine was used by Jimmy/Led Zeppelin to multitrack live shows. I know they recorded on Reel To Reel and I even recall a photo of them playing with a reel to reel recorder in the background behind Jimmy, next to Bonzo. I think it was from the RAH show. I want to multi track some of my bands shows, but I'm really sick of the digital crap quality that I get when I record on computers. Basically I want to know how many tracks where used on the tape recorder, if it was a 4 Channel recorder or an 8 channel recorder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecongo Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 RAH live show if I'm not mistaken recorded on a 6 track! Zep I, II were recorded on 8 track reel to reel machines Zep III, IV and HOTH, and maybe even PG were recorded on 16 track. Presence I don't know but ITTOD was done on 24 track. HTWWW may have been 24 track, if not it was a 16 track reel to reel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magerogue Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 HTWWW may have been 24 track, if not it was a 16 track reel to reel. I'm guessing it would have rather been an 8 track or a 16 track, I don't think that 24 tracks existed back in '72. Anyway, thanks for all the info! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock Historian Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 RAH live show if I'm not mistaken recorded on a 6 track! Zep I, II were recorded on 8 track reel to reel machines Zep III, IV and HOTH, and maybe even PG were recorded on 16 track. Presence I don't know but ITTOD was done on 24 track. HTWWW may have been 24 track, if not it was a 16 track reel to reel. Maybe I'm wrong, but I believe PG (the tracks recorded in 74') was the first album recorded on a 16 track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magerogue Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 Maybe I'm wrong, but I believe PG (the tracks recorded in 74') was the first album recorded on a 16 track. Weren't they recorded in the Rolling Stones mobile studios? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woz70 Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 I want to multi track some of my bands shows, but I'm really sick of the digital crap quality that I get when I record on computers. Are you saying you want to take a multitrack tape recorder to a gig situation and record? And you think because it's tape it'll sound better than digital? Multitrack tape recorders are delicate and temperamental beasts at the best of times. Taking them to a gig and expecting them to work well is really not practical nowadays. Dude.... if you think it sounds crap on digital don't think recording it onto tape will make the slightest bit of difference!! If you spend time setting up your inputs and levels properly you will get similar results on both - but on a digital format you're more likely to get it all down without glitches, or the tape running out, or finding out that the tape heads are dirty, or haven't been biased properly, or some dirt got into the mechanism etc. etc. etc. In a live recording situation digital is your friend. Really! Don't think for a second that you can just bring up the levels on a mixer on any recording and it will sound great - that's REALLY not how it works. I've spent time mixing stuff from gigs, and even the very best recordings (and they are rare, because everyone seems to think that you need to record it as loud as possible, and digital distortion is nasty) take a lot of post production and skill to make them sound reasonably good. A shit recording is a shit recording - don't blame the medium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magerogue Posted November 14, 2012 Author Share Posted November 14, 2012 Are you saying you want to take a multitrack tape recorder to a gig situation and record? And you think because it's tape it'll sound better than digital? Multitrack tape recorders are delicate and temperamental beasts at the best of times. Taking them to a gig and expecting them to work well is really not practical nowadays. Dude.... if you think it sounds crap on digital don't think recording it onto tape will make the slightest bit of difference!! If you spend time setting up your inputs and levels properly you will get similar results on both - but on a digital format you're more likely to get it all down without glitches, or the tape running out, or finding out that the tape heads are dirty, or haven't been biased properly, or some dirt got into the mechanism etc. etc. etc. In a live recording situation digital is your friend. Really! Don't think for a second that you can just bring up the levels on a mixer on any recording and it will sound great - that's REALLY not how it works. I've spent time mixing stuff from gigs, and even the very best recordings (and they are rare, because everyone seems to think that you need to record it as loud as possible, and digital distortion is nasty) take a lot of post production and skill to make them sound reasonably good. A shit recording is a shit recording - don't blame the medium. I know how it works mate, and I've used tape with bands and it generally sounds ALOT better than any digital recording I have done. Example: I've been to the best recording studio in my country that has whole lot of digital recording equipment, Pro tools, Plug ins (Oh I just loath those...), and all of that voodoo shit that people think that needs to be on the recording but isn't necessary, and still didn't get the sound I wanted. I'm gonna put it very simple: I know how to use these machines, and do have the tapes to run through them, but I want to buy the right one instead of spending alot of money on a crappy tape recorder. As far as the mixing goes, I would do it directly from the master reels into a mixing table, all analog. The recording's bad because I don't dig the flacid and pale sound I get from it. I recorded in DAT and it gave a whole new feel to the music and the performance. And I don't crank the volumes as you said alot of people do. That's why you have an expirienced guy mixing the gig or the recording, just want the right equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woz70 Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 I know how it works mate, and I've used tape with bands and it generally sounds ALOT better than any digital recording I have done. Example: I've been to the best recording studio in my country that has whole lot of digital recording equipment, Pro tools, Plug ins (Oh I just loath those...), and all of that voodoo shit that people think that needs to be on the recording but isn't necessary, and still didn't get the sound I wanted. I'm gonna put it very simple: I know how to use these machines, and do have the tapes to run through them, but I want to buy the right one instead of spending alot of money on a crappy tape recorder. As far as the mixing goes, I would do it directly from the master reels into a mixing table, all analog. The recording's bad because I don't dig the flacid and pale sound I get from it. I recorded in DAT and it gave a whole new feel to the music and the performance. And I don't crank the volumes as you said alot of people do. That's why you have an expirienced guy mixing the gig or the recording, just want the right equipment. Good luck with that. Please post back here and let us know how you get on. I'd love to hear your recordings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magerogue Posted November 15, 2012 Author Share Posted November 15, 2012 Good luck with that. Please post back here and let us know how you get on. I'd love to hear your recordings. I will gladly do that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woz70 Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 No luck yet?http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Studer-A80-1in-8-Track-Professional-Reel-To-Reel-Tape-Recorder-Player-/261238259212 Is this the kind of thing you're after? It's a good price, and they've got tape to sell with it too. Decent tape is hard to come by nowadays. Studers were pretty much industry standard - Abbey Road had a few of these back in the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magerogue Posted July 19, 2013 Author Share Posted July 19, 2013 No luck yet?http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Studer-A80-1in-8-Track-Professional-Reel-To-Reel-Tape-Recorder-Player-/261238259212 Is this the kind of thing you're after? It's a good price, and they've got tape to sell with it too. Decent tape is hard to come by nowadays. Studers were pretty much industry standard - Abbey Road had a few of these back in the day. No... unfortunately in my country nobody gave a damn about music back then so there's really no place for me to get those inside of Europe, you know.. free of taxes and shipping costs, etc.. It's just to expensive for me to get one of those right now, but you got it spot on I just bought a new guitar so I'm gonna save up so I can buy one of those things... Thanks for remembering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woz70 Posted July 19, 2013 Share Posted July 19, 2013 Do you think you can handle a little challenge? Here are two tracks that I recorded with my old band few years ago - I'm responsible for the recording and the mixing on both tracks. One was recorded in analog onto 8 track tape, one was recorded digitally. Both were recorded as 'live' takes (we all played together in the same room), with a couple of overdubs. If you accept my challenge, all you have to do is tell me which one is analog and which one is digital (I realise you might not dig the musical style, but hey it's only a bit of fun!). Easy eh ? http://www.reverbnation.com/thedronerebels/song/15268231-controlhttp://www.reverbnation.com/thedronerebels/song/6819124-burn-parliament Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woz70 Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 Not going to even try? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woz70 Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 It seems that, sadly, you have declined to take my challenge. Can't say I'm surprised. Anyway - it would appear that the Albert Hall concert was recorded with the PYE mobile studio:http://www.philsbook.com/pye-mobile.html This is a bit vague on detail, but as we think that the concert was recorded onto 8-track tape the machine in question was probably a 3M-M56. It seems unlikely that you'll find one in working order nowadays (or even spares for one that doesn't work), but here's some info from a guy who knows about them:http://www.analogrules.com/3Mindex.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babysquid Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 Oh can I have a go? Is 'Control' the analog track? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woz70 Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 Oh can I have a go? Is 'Control' the analog track? Tell me why you think that... Give me a bit of reasoning and I'll give you the answer in a pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babysquid Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Tell me why you think that... Give me a bit of reasoning and I'll give you the answer in a pm. Okay. I'll be honest it's a bit of a guess but I hope an educated one. My first impressions when I listened on my ipad speakers was that "Parliment" was the analog track but when I listened the next day (on headphones) I wasn't so sure. I find in the louder sections of "Control" everything sounds a bit more compressed and this could be down to tape saturation, so that's why I've gone with that one. Of course it could easily be down to out board compression, mastering, etc. The thing I don't think a lot of people get and this includes musicians is how many other mitigating factors there are in recording sound that all influence in their small way the finished take, these include mics, pres, desk, plugins, fx, studio monitoring. And then there's all the stuff it goes through at the consumer end, vinyl, cd, blu ray, mp3, quality of playback system, how well stereo is set up etc. At the end of the day digital doesn't suck soul out of music just as tape doesn't add it. If it's really there in the first place and it's recorded properly it'll be there in the end. If it's not there at the start running it through every vintage tube device on the planet ain't going to make it magically appear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woz70 Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 At the end of the day digital doesn't suck soul out of music just as tape doesn't add it. If it's really there in the first place and it's recorded properly it'll be there in the end. If it's not there at the start running it through every vintage tube device on the planet ain't going to make it magically appear. Pretty much a perfect answer, and the point I was trying to make! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.