Can anyone help?

[Jimmy-Michaels]

Hey anyone out there,

I am looking for a late 1970's/early 1980's multi-track recorder. Another person off the forums and myself are wanting to write and record an original true disco track and want to make it as real as it can get. Right down to using the same equiptment that was avalable back in those days so it sounds right in the end. Can anyone direct me on where i might be able to find and buy a working one? If anyone can help i'd be very very greatful.

DJ Jimmy M

[BrunoRepublic]

This may surprise you, but most 24- or 32-track analog recorders are still in use today. I'm sure there are plenty available for sale, but you should really be aware that even a well-used one will cost *lots* of money. Even a crummy 16 or 8-track will go for a few hundred. And the tape isn't cheap either.

Also, you will need a corresponding desk mixer, and these still cost big bucks, even today. Analog tape also requires the use of loads of outboard gear (noise reduction, gates, etc.). And you will need effects, compressors, EQ, and so on...

To put it in perspective: Musique's "Keep On Jumpin'" was recorded with only 8 tracks and cost $16,000 to produce. This was considered a shoestring budget, and that's in 1979 dollars. It sounds much more impressive than that due to the brilliance of Patrick Adams' production skills.

Some of Costandinos' albums were done with 2 24-track or 36-track decks synced up with SMPTE. These cost a fortune to produce.

If you're still sure you want to do it this way, your best bet is to simply book a studio that already has all these toys. Keep in mind that it will cost a few hundred dollars per hour. Personally, I think there's very little advantage to going this route. A fast computer, a decent soundcard, and a program like Logic or Cubase, will give you all the functionality and much much much much more for the same cost as a few hours in a studio. And you won't need an army of engineers to operate and maintain it, either.


_________________
Or, as they say in the classics:
"Mommy... if you were in a German Scheiße video, ...you'd tell me, right?"



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Graham Start on 2002-06-27 09:00 ]</font>

[Jimmy-Michaels]

I didnt say anything about a remix. I was talking writing and recording an original disco track, producing, the whole shabang. Wanting to work with the old equiptment to get that classic sound. We dont want anything to sound like todays moronic music. We want to get that dry drum sound if you know what i mean, and have an orchestral arrangement with some synths. You know, like something that say Costandinos or Midney may have done. Is it possible to get that sound using new stuff? This is just the idea we came up with to make it sound as dated as possible to give the right effect and structure to it. Let me know if it still would make a difference or not to use late 1970's equiptment or the stuff now days to create the same effect.

DJ Jimmy M

[BrunoRepublic]

On 2002-06-27 08:59, DJ Jimmy M wrote:
I didnt say anything about a remix.

My bad, I have edited my response already.

I was talking writing and recording an original disco track, producing, the whole shabang. Wanting to work with the old equiptment to get that classic sound. We dont want anything to sound like todays moronic music. We want to get that dry drum sound if you know what i mean, and have an orchestral arrangement with some synths. You know, like something that say Costandinos or Midney may have done. Is it possible to get that sound using new stuff?

Yes, and it would be infinitely easier and cheaper, too.

This is just the idea we came up with to make it sound as dated as possible to give the right effect and structure to it. Let me know if it still would make a difference or not to use late 1970's equiptment or the stuff now days to create the same effect.

Using 1970s equipment will give you a little bit more hiss in the signal for an exponentially higher cost. Multi-track recorders are merely tools, it's what you do with them that determines how the music will sound. Yes, almost all the dance music made with Logic/Cubase is stupid and moronic, but that's not the fault of the programs, but the stupid morons using them. It's like a blank canvas -- you do whatever you want with it. Granted, making stupid moronic dance music is frighteningly easy with these programs...

Simply having an old analog deck will not get you the classic disco sound. One of the main differences between disco and today's dance music is... the people! Many of today's dance tracks are done in their entirety by a handful of individuals, using just samplers and synths. They fall into the traps that today's software has which makes it easy to take 4 bars and just loop them. Back then all the instruments were real. People had to play the entire song, not just a few bars. This is another area where the costs start to get scary. While the cost of effects and multitrack recording have plummeted in the last 15 years, good microphones and compressors still cost absurd amounts of money. Also, you will need people who can actually *play* these instruments, which you may or may not be able to get fairly cheaply. The orchestra is the probably the toughest part; in addition to the difficulty of miking it all up, most classical performers are unionized and do not do things on the cheap. Just look at the credits of any Costandinos album, and you'll quickly see that it took a small army of musicians and engineers to produce them. Using today's technology, some of this can be eliminated (no need for SMPTE, mixes can be automated, less equipment to maintain)... but it's the performance factor that still requires a live person.

I don't want to sound discouraging... I'm just trying to let you know what you're in for. The recording equipment is just the thing that reproduces whatever noises you put into it... it's the people that make the difference. It's a common misconception today that all you need is (insert magic device here) to create great music... but great music is created by people, not machines. Whether your track is created in a top-notch studio or on your home computer is practically irrelevant to how good it will sound. Tying this in with another thread... Patrick Adams produced "Keep On Jumpin'" in a project studio for $16,000. "The Ethel Merman Disco Album" was recorded at top-notch studios for at least 10 times that amount... which is the better album?

So what I'm getting at is... what you use to record your music is irrelevant. Today's music software brings the power of a recording studio to your home for a miniscule fraction of the cost of the original analog gear. Why would this be the first thing you reject? The important thing is to know what you're doing, how to make the most with what you've got, and how to make good music.

[Jimmy-Michaels]

Well thanx man,
This will defenatly reduce price of things and make it alot more simpler. I do know about the costs of getting people involved though, that can be a fortune but, if the equiptment can be reduced in price, great! Again, thanx for the info!

DJ Jimmy M