syncing tape machines

[euphoria_rising]

All right i have a little problem and need some help. Currentley i am running sonar 3 producerand i have an 8 track fostex tape machine. I would very much like to sync them so i can edit individual tracks in digital, but something isnt working right. I have a sync box that i am pretty sure writes in MTC. I think the problem is that i need a midi controller but im not sure. I am using the m-audio firewire 410 andi do not have a seperate sound card for my computer.
Can the 410 be used as a midi controller so i can sync my machines? Or do i need to get a seperate midi controller?
Is the midi controller even the issue?

Any help will be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

-Sean

[djui5]

If the fostex syncs to MTC then you need to hook a midi cable from the output of your midi interface (or whatever you use to send midi out of your computer) to the midi input on the Fostex......then make sure Sonar is generating MTC out whatever port you have that cable hooked to....and make sure the fostex is "online"....they usually are all the time....so it should play when you hit play on Sonar...but check the Fostex manual to be sure.

[gcjammin1]

Will your Fostex work as a slave? Usually tape machines have to be the master and Sonar syncs to it. You would have to stripe track 8 on the Fostex with SMPTE or midi time code and set up Sonar to receive one or the other. When you push play on Sonar it should say that it is waiting for sync. Start the tape player and when Sonar receives the sync it should start. You will probably need some type of midi interface that will take the SMPTE or MTC and convert it so Sonar can read it.

I used a Tascam TSR-8 tape machine along with 2 DA-88's and Cakewalk. The tape machine was the master. I ran it into a MOTU Midi Express XT along with my computer. The DA-88's were run into a MOTU Digital Timepiece. I hit play in cakewalk and it synced the DA-88's up. When I started the tape machine, it started everything else.

I don't know anything about the M-Audio 410. Hope this helps some.

Gcjammin1

[euphoria_rising]

Originally posted by gcjammin1
Will your Fostex work as a slave? Usually tape machines have to be the master and Sonar syncs to it. You would have to stripe track 8 on the Fostex with SMPTE or midi time code and set up Sonar to receive one or the other. When you push play on Sonar it should say that it is waiting for sync. Start the tape player and when Sonar receives the sync it should start. You will probably need some type of midi interface that will take the SMPTE or MTC and convert it so Sonar can read it.

Gcjammin1

Yeah i can stipe the last track with the time code but i cant get sonar to reconize that it is there. I guess i need to know if the m-audio 410 will act as a midi interface because if it wont than i need to get something that will. Thanks for the info.

[Raw-Tracks]

Which sync box are you using? I would suggest the JL Cooper PPS-2.
http://www.jlcooper.com/pages/pps2.html

This will allow you to stripe SMPTE on a tape track. You'll then send the SMPTE into the PPS-2. The PPS-2 will then convert that SMPTE into MTC and send it out the MIDI out on the PPS-2. You will plug that into the Firewire410's MIDI-In. Then you need to tell your software to sync to incoming MTC.

[djui5]

I have a question.....

you guy's are talking about synching the computer to the Fostex.......but why wouldn't you just use the computer to control the Fostex?...seems easier....don't have to stripe SMPTE and use a much needed track..

Am I missing something?

[Raw-Tracks]

Originally posted by djui5
I have a question.....

you guy's are talking about synching the computer to the Fostex.......but why wouldn't you just use the computer to control the Fostex?...seems easier....don't have to stripe SMPTE and use a much needed track..

Am I missing something?
I never really got into the small format tape machines. I do believe some of them had synchronizers available to take external timecode and control the transport. I know in a pro situation, you can get synchronizer like the Zeta-III to control your Studer or Otari machine from external time code. Maybe you can do something similiar with some of the small format tape decks as well.

However, even if it is possible to slave the tape machine to the computer, I think it is best to slave the computer to tape. Here's why: If you slave the tape to the computer, when you hit play on the computer, your computer tracks will begin immediately. Your tape machine will be shuttling around trying to lock up. This may take quite a while if it has to rewind or fast forward. If your computer is following the tape machine, you will locate to where you want to be on the tape and hit play. Within a fraction of a second, your computer will lock to the tape tracks. Your system will operate much smoother.

[djui5]

Originally posted by Raw-Tracks

However, even if it is possible to slave the tape machine to the computer, I think it is best to slave the computer to tape. Here's why: If you slave the tape to the computer, when you hit play on the computer, your computer tracks will begin immediately. Your tape machine will be shuttling around trying to lock up. This may take quite a while if it has to rewind or fast forward. If your computer is following the tape machine, you will locate to where you want to be on the tape and hit play. Within a fraction of a second, your computer will lock to the tape tracks. Your system will operate much smoother.


I see..thanks Eric....

I haven't synced a lot of these things to a computer.......done it a million times with keys,synths,MPC's and such...

[DAS]

Originally posted by Raw-Tracks

However, even if it is possible to slave the tape machine to the computer, I think it is best to slave the computer to tape. Here's why: If you slave the tape to the computer, when you hit play on the computer, your computer tracks will begin immediately. Your tape machine will be shuttling around trying to lock up. This may take quite a while if it has to rewind or fast forward. If your computer is following the tape machine, you will locate to where you want to be on the tape and hit play. Within a fraction of a second, your computer will lock to the tape tracks. Your system will operate much smoother.

The reasoning in this statement is true, however, there is another truth that points toward slaving the tape to the computer as being best.

When you make a computer follow a tape machine you introduce all kinds of timing anomalies into the computer. This depends greatly on the synchronization system being used, but if the computer is to sync tightly to the tape machine jitter and other problems can be introduced that degrade the quality of the sound in terms of what your A/D and D/A converters are accomplishing. If the computer is the master, then the tape machine will follow and have no more or no fewer timing anomalies than it has anyway, but the DAW can operate on its internal clock (or some other highly accurate time base), which is ideal for sound quality.

As often happens in audio, you may have a compromise between optimal sound quality and convenience. The other downside of the computer as master is that it tends to be much more expensive in terms of the synchronization equipment required.

So...

Computer as master = optimal sound quality, more cost, less convenience (although this convenience aspect can be mitigated with high end synchronizers that can control both systems simultaneously).

Tape as master = lower cost, potentially degraded sound quality on the digital system, potentially more convenient

[euphoria_rising]

Hey i just wanted to let everyonewho offered their advice know that i finally got my machine synced up. I turned out that the SMPTE code i was striping the tape with was way to loud/hot of a signal. I ended up running my SMPTE generator through my mixer and attinuating the signal to -10db. At that level the box read the code fine and my computer locked right up with it.

Thanks every for your advice and help.

-Sean

[euphoria_rising]

PS are the sync boxes i would need to make my computer the master and the tape machine the slave hard to come by/expensive?

[lvjazzman]

Here it is at Sweetwater... $159.00

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/PPS2/

[Raw-Tracks]

Originally posted by lvjazzman
Here it is at Sweetwater... $159.00

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/PPS2/

The PPS-2 is not going to allow him to sync the tape machine to the computer. It is just the opposite. It will stripe SMPTE to the tape. On playback, the PPS-2 will read the SMPTE and convert it to MTC to be read by the computer. In this scenario, the tape machine would be the master.

[lvjazzman]

It also reads MTC from any source, and converts it to SMPTE, so it should work both ways.

[euphoria_rising]

Originally posted by Raw-Tracks
The PPS-2 is not going to allow him to sync the tape machine to the computer. It is just the opposite. It will stripe SMPTE to the tape. On playback, the PPS-2 will read the SMPTE and convert it to MTC to be read by the computer. In this scenario, the tape machine would be the master.

Yes i am using the PPS-2 already. But to slave my analog machine to my computer i would need another syncronizer (i think like the zeta III that you mentioned above). Just for curiousities sake i was wondering how much and where i could get on.

-Sean

[DAS]

The fact that the PPS-2 can output LTC (SMPTE) when presented with an MTC signal is true, but not necessarily that helpful in terms of solving the problem.

A real tape machine synchronizer is still required. Such a synchronizer would (need to) be able to access the motor speed and transport controls of your tape machine, and control them. The first prerequisite is that your tape machine allow for this type of control. Many of the Fostex multitrack machines do allow for this type of control - your specific model may vary. You can get a clue about whether yours supports this type of function by looking on the back panel for some sort of multipin port called "synchronizer" or something like that.

If it can be controlled in such a manner then you do need a synchronizer capable of controlling your specific machine. A Zeta will is one model that stands a good chance of working, but you would need to consult with them about the exact model of your machine to know for sure.

You may be able to find a used one at a decent price, but even then it is likely to be up to or over $1000 for a basic model (with no remote, etc.). If you do get this far then you can do away with the PPS-2 because you will get the MTC ability in that synchronizer anyway.

[lvjazzman]

Oops, I overlooked that, my bad. The last time I did this we used the TimeLine Lynx system, very sweet, but I think it is expensive (was expensive, I don't think they are made any more).