IK Multimedia T-racks Tape Machine Collection

[Scotty]

I have a few tape emulation options here but any hardware experience is limited and so far and in the past that memory isn't even remotely reliable. I didn't take the time to test out all four in depth so I lazily read this article and went with the 24 first and soon the 80. I have a couple of Waves tape plugins and UAD-2 Studer. The J37 and Kramer MPX have a tape delay effect which is nice and the J37 has more obvious character than either of IK tapes. This is likely due to it being modelled after an earlier machine. For creative tape sounds I get a lot of mileage out of the rarely discussed Nomad Magnetic II tape plugins. I am assuming that these IK models are spot on but I wouldn't really be looking for that vibe. Regardless I've got two of them now so we'll see how much mileage they get here.

https://www.musicradar.com/reviews/ik-m ... collection

[jamcat]

One thing I noticed about the Tape Machine 80 is the GUI shows a Studer A80 configured as a ¼” 2-track, though the product description says it is a 24-track multi-track machine.

A80s could be configured for 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, or 24 tracks. Looks like IK′s graphics guy grabbed the wrong image to work from, and made it look like a stereo mixdown machine, which is a bit confusing for the user.

Or, the product description and marketing are wrong and it does emulate a 2-track. Seems mostly likely since there is already a multi-track in the bundle. without the A80 being a mix/mastering deck the bundle wouldn't be as well rounded.

IK? Guidance on this?

Both the 440 and the 99 are 2-track machines, so it would make sense that the 80 would be intended as a 24-track configuration (as the marketing material states), giving you two 2-track machines and two 24-track machines.

Plus, the Studer A80 is THE studio standard for multi-tracking, so that's what users are going to want it for.

Why would it even just ever-so-slightly matter (unless you are really familiar with both these versions of the hardware)?

I doubt there is any discernible sonic difference at all. For me, the problem is that it gives the appearance that IK intended it for the master buss rather than for multi-tracking, which would be pretty questionable and odd.

I've 2 of them now, the 80 and 440. which would be better for tracking?

As I said above, the Studer A80 is the studio standard for multi-tracking, while the Ampex AG-440 is a 2-track machine. The 440 would be a good choice for something with a '60s garage vibe, or lo-fi trip-hop.

[plexuss]

Both the 440 and the 99 are 2-track machines, so it would make sense that the 80 would be intended as a 24-track configuration (as the marketing material states), giving you two 2-track machines and two 24-track machines.

Plus, the Studer A80 is THE studio standard for multi-tracking, so that's what users are going to want it for.

That's good info and analysis. Yes it can be confusing because of the graphics they used for the 80: it looks like a 2 track mastering deck. But yes its not going to make or break a track when in use and there is nothing wrong with the quality of 2 tracks of a 24 track A80 running at 30 ips! But good to know, thanks for clarifying.

[Havok]

Have said this before but it would be cool if they had an 'eco' mode with reduced oversampling for realtime use, and then full quality (+ linear phase filtering etc) on render export - some of the best developers do this, Voxengo for instance.

Quoted from Peter @IK post on GS:

"For everybody to note... Sorry that I provided some incorrect info and was corrected by our devs. The internal magnetic recording physical model works at 384 kHz, not 192.

This explains why these emulations sound so accurate. As many here know, analog tape recorders work with a signal that linearises the tape medium (this is simplifying, I know), and the frequency of this signal is always well outside the audio band (for example on the Studer it is 150 kHz). To allow the physical model to run the internal sampling rate can’t be lower than the double of that or this and the true characteristics of the tape machine could not be replicated with authenticity.

This increases CPU load, of course, but as stated above it is the only way to faithfully reproduce what the tape machine/recorder does. Yes, there are already tons of “tape saturators”, but we didn’t wanted to make another one of those. The T-RackS Tape Machine Collection plug-ins are a true digital replica of what happens on the real system as a whole."

[MogwaiBoy]

Have said this before but it would be cool if they had an 'eco' mode with reduced oversampling for realtime use, and then full quality (+ linear phase filtering etc) on render export - some of the best developers do this, Voxengo for instance.

Quoted from Peter @IK post on GS:

"For everybody to note... Sorry that I provided some incorrect info and was corrected by our devs. The internal magnetic recording physical model works at 384 kHz, not 192.

This explains why these emulations sound so accurate. As many here know, analog tape recorders work with a signal that linearises the tape medium (this is simplifying, I know), and the frequency of this signal is always well outside the audio band (for example on the Studer it is 150 kHz). To allow the physical model to run the internal sampling rate can’t be lower than the double of that or this and the true characteristics of the tape machine could not be replicated with authenticity.

This increases CPU load, of course, but as stated above it is the only way to faithfully reproduce what the tape machine/recorder does. Yes, there are already tons of “tape saturators”, but we didn’t wanted to make another one of those. The T-RackS Tape Machine Collection plug-ins are a true digital replica of what happens on the real system as a whole."

Ahh, now I get it. That's around 8X oversampling for typical 44/48kHz use. Ouch! But that's the price of quality I guess. Knowing the market was already "saturated", they clearly went really deep on the development of this collection to make it something special.

[jamcat]

Has anyone else noticed that Tape Machine 80 at 15 ips has a weird "wooshy" effect when strapped across multiple audio channels?

This doesn't seem to happen at 30 ips or with other models, such as the JH 24.

Can anyone else confirm this?

[alex_danilov]

Has anyone else noticed that Tape Machine 80 at 15 ips has a weird "wooshy" effect when strapped across multiple audio channels?

This doesn't seem to happen at 30 ips or with other models, such as the JH 24.

Can anyone else confirm this?

I use Tape 80 only on master bus and don’t hear nothing strange. I wil try it on multiple channels

[jamcat]

Has anyone else noticed that Tape Machine 80 at 15 ips has a weird "wooshy" effect when strapped across multiple audio channels?

This doesn't seem to happen at 30 ips or with other models, such as the JH 24.

Can anyone else confirm this?

I use Tape 80 only on master bus and don’t hear nothing strange. I wil try it on multiple channels

Thanks. It seems to be a cumulative effect.
Try switching all instances between 15 and 30 ips. I think you should be able to hear the swooshing pretty clearly when you do that.

If you can enable and disable multiple plugins across multiple channel at once, create 2 instances on each channel, one at 15ips and one at 30ips, and switch back and forth. Or you could try the Tape Machine 24 model at 15ips and compare to Tape Machine 80.