Alsihad syncing to 2"

[Linear]

Hi,

I'm wondering if anyone knows anything about this. And don't worry, I'm not going to start slagging off Protools even though I got to experience first-hand how rubbish it really is.

How do you get a 002 to sync to a tape machine?

I've got an Opcode 64XTC which follows the timecode properly, however the 002 doesn't have wordclock input (which i can't believe). We couldn't even get protools to follow midi time code through it's midi input.

Am I missing something?

Cheers

Chris

[Kris]

You will need to add the digidesign Sync i/o unit. That's what it was made for.

[Chris H]

Hi Chris,
Here is a quote from the Mixonline review;

http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_digidesi ... index.html
Probably the most ballyhooed difference between the full and LE versions of Pro Tools is that there

[Linear]

OK that seems to have cleared it.

We were using LE, and we tried using the ADAT input for wordclock to the 002. no matter what we tried, we couldn't get any sync action, LE just wouldn't pick up the MTC or the sync.

In the end, we just canned the whole lot and used the whole rig as a metronome which we recorded onto track 16.

What a drag.

Chris

also kris i don't think the sync thingy is designed to work with a 002, although i could be wrong.

[Howard Jones]

Correct. The 002 is a standalone unit and the Sync I/O is not designed to work with it.

[davemc]

You need to the DV toolkit (more money) to do that.
I have resisted so far. I think Chris (MFDU) does it this way.

[Kris]

you could always just stripe a track with timecode and lock them up that way.

[Linear]

you could always just stripe a track with timecode and lock them up that way.

Maybe I should have been clearer - the first thing I did was stripe the tape.

I then wanted to get the 002 to follow the tape through an Opcode 64XTC. The opcode has midi out (for MTC) and wordclock out. The 002 had no wordclock input, so we used a Nuendo 8 channel pre (that did accept wordclock) as the interface, with the ADAT out of that going to the 002 input. We just couldn't get LE to recognise the ADAT sync nor get LE to follow the MTC.

I'm just wondering for next time when someone brings in an Alsihad rig.

Cheers

Chris

[toddd]

Digidesign strikes again....

[harmony head]

I never had any problems at all syncing PT to my 16 track analogue using MTC. Once i got my offsets right, it worked right everytime.. except for the odd drift in speed of the analogue machine.

I swear.. this was about the easiest thing in the world. And i was just using an old ADAT/BRC as my SMPTE to MTC converter. It's a bit of mucking around in setting up (mainly because i have to go and get my BRC from wherever i stored it last), but it ALWAYS worked.

One of the things i did learn though was that i then needed to use the ADAT as my master clock, which wasn't a big deal, except for the old sessions that were done on 16 track slaved to an ADAT (actually, that shold be the other way around). Sometimes the lightpipe audio would 'unlock'. Solution? Run those 8 tracks from the analogue outs. Problem solved.

HH

[rick]

i use to use my moto box to convert smpte to mtc and back, it worked fine but it was only with the 24trk and protools le , no clocks no mucking about , the only thing was protools would sometimes dick about for 20 secs, most of the time it took 5 sec
i wonder about your mtc box , frame rates, computer setting etc .
i think you may be shooting the wrong end of the snke here
mtc does work with le pretty well , so the question is what went wrong ,
tools , your mtc box or some combination of both

also i think the hardest thing i have ever done in studios is to get multitrack tape machines to "lock together" syncronisers just never worked properly
still dont

[Linear]

i use to use my moto box to convert smpte to mtc and back, it worked fine but it was only with the 24trk and protools le , no clocks no mucking about , the only thing was protools would sometimes dick about for 20 secs, most of the time it took 5 sec
i wonder about your mtc box , frame rates, computer setting etc .
i think you may be shooting the wrong end of the snke here
mtc does work with le pretty well , so the question is what went wrong ,
tools , your mtc box or some combination of both

also i think the hardest thing i have ever done in studios is to get multitrack tape machines to "lock together" syncronisers just never worked properly
still dont

I have locked my mac (running OS9) to the 2" without any problems, so I know it's not the sync box. It outputs MTC and wordclock without any issues @ whatever frame rate I choose, and is rock-solid in Logic.

I think the problem was that it was a borrowed LE rig, and I don't know how to use Protools at all. We tried for about an hour to get it to follow the 2" and it just wouldn't. I thought maybe there was some magic trick that we were missing, which is why I'm asking here.

No big deal, just wondering.

Cheers

Chris

[harmony head]

There are a bunch of little setup things necessary to make PT play nice with MTC. The one thing that got me initially was setting the session start time correctly (control+2 or apple+2 for Macs) in the session setup. Having session times start at wrong timecode places was a simple mistake i often made. the good thing though was when going to the session setup menu, it's nice enough to tell you what the incoming time code time is.

Apart from that, making sure you have the right things setup in 'setups>peripherals' and there should have been no problem.

Ironically Chris, i used to have the same problems when i was a logic user, when it was on PC. I guess i felt towards logic back then how you feel about PT now... which goes to prove that neither is actually rubbish as a lot of other people seem to do quite well with either.

I do miss Logic's arpegiator though. I know there';s a simple arpegiator out there. can anyone direct me to it?

HH

[rick]

i think the main reason i have protools sitting around here is so i know how to use it , i hate bashing away at computers trying to get them to do the simple things.
why dont you spend $700 on a mbox and use it upstairs to make computerised dance music for the super information highway
while your learning how protools works...

actually dont even bother answering that :)

[mfdu]

took me a while to get in here and find this topic - been a little busy.

i see dave mentions me as running dv toolkit - i don't. i run standard ptLE 7.1.

i use the smpte in/out on my midiman 8x8 interface, sending/feeding my Ta@#$% 58 via the smpte in/out.

therefore in record/playback the 58 counter is supplying smpte timecode to p/t.
protools locks to the incoming by selecting external sync in "properties" - can't remember the actual clicks that take you there - i can provide a screenshot if needed.
all you need to do then is enable the "wait for sync" button on the transport toolbar, and hit play on the tape-deck.

that would be the magic button that chris (linear) mentions . . .

when doing this, i always use p/t as the slave.
i don't print smpte to a tape track - the digital counter on the 58 keeps it all tight.

it has always worked for me. even back in the days of LE 6.4 on the 001.

if you need more, i can supply more. . .

chris.

[harmony head]

YES!! I forgot to mention the 'wait for sync' button! That was another one i missed initially, and to make sure i hit the play button as well!

Chris, anytime you have a PT problem like that, knock on the door. I'm just next door and happy to help...

HH

PS. Did the snare drums get a use at all? Again, if you need anything gear wise, just ask and we can work something out.

[Linear]

took me a while to get in here and find this topic - been a little busy.

i see dave mentions me as running dv toolkit - i don't. i run standard ptLE 7.1.

i use the smpte in/out on my midiman 8x8 interface, sending/feeding my Ta@#$% 58 via the smpte in/out.

therefore in record/playback the 58 counter is supplying smpte timecode to p/t.
protools locks to the incoming by selecting external sync in "properties" - can't remember the actual clicks that take you there - i can provide a screenshot if needed.
all you need to do then is enable the "wait for sync" button on the transport toolbar, and hit play on the tape-deck.

that would be the magic button that chris (linear) mentions . . .

when doing this, i always use p/t as the slave.
i don't print smpte to a tape track - the digital counter on the 58 keeps it all tight.

it has always worked for me. even back in the days of LE 6.4 on the 001.

if you need more, i can supply more. . .

chris.

yo Chris,

what's the 58 counter doing? I've never heard of this before. If you don't stripe the tape, how does it get positional information as to where you are? what happens if the tape slips or the counter gets reset?

the counter on my mm1200 is not very accurate at all, in fact 1 play through of a track yields an error of about 5 seconds. i am running lower tensions which probably has something to do with it.

we did press that 'magic' button but it still didn't work. i verified that MTC was coming out of the midi port because my mac locked to it in logic.

anyway, doesn't matter now. rick, as usual you're not far off the mark! my mate who's in on the studio wants to buy a 002 for upstairs, and have tielines to downstairs.

as much as protools irks me, it's pretty ordinary not having a system to dump audio into files, and having to spend an hour trying to get the thing working. a 002 upstairs would fix that.

Cheers

Chris

[Linear]

YES!! I forgot to mention the 'wait for sync' button! That was another one i missed initially, and to make sure i hit the play button as well!

Chris, anytime you have a PT problem like that, knock on the door. I'm just next door and happy to help...

HH

PS. Did the snare drums get a use at all? Again, if you need anything gear wise, just ask and we can work something out.

yes, your snares rocked dude. thanks! I tried to drop them in to you last night but you'd left.

it does seem silly that you're about 8 metres away I know, I will ask next time although the two dudes trying to work out the problems were already pretty knowledgable with protools.

and likewise you're free to use any gear I have, it was really appreciated.

Cheers

Chris

[mfdu]

aaah - the Ta@#$% 58 has a microprocessor controlled transport with digital timecode readout.

there's a smpte in/out on the d-sub connector ("remote") - just need a schematic to tie the midisport smpte to the 58 and bing-o bang-o.

i realise that i SHOULD be striping smpte to tape, but it's an 8-track and i don't have tracks to spare! anyway, i haven't had a problem with matching up the tape tracks with the p/t tracks. yet.

:)

chris
(mfdu)

[Kris]

the counter on my mm1200 is not very accurate at all, in fact 1 play through of a track yields an error of about 5 seconds. i am running lower tensions which probably has something to do with it.

The counter should have nothing to do with it. If it can be reset then it's not code, it's just counting. SMPTE code cannot be reset unless starting from scratch (once striped/formatted). If you're getting that much drift then it's definitely not locking to timecode. I've had 4 machines slaved to the one code source and have not had an ounce of drift. SMPTE is pretty much rock solid. Hard to say without being there to have a butcher's.

[mfdu]

when i first tried using the counter, it was because i was scabbing for all the tracks i could get. it was a punt, and it worked.

i have not experienced any drift when i have done this, but i normally either use tape or p/t - i don't commonly need to sync t smpte

but yes, the counter can be reset, and therefore presumably aint as solid as a track stripe.

i'll look into it further when i have time (and am not in a session) - i want to see if i can break sync. and if so, how. gotta know these things before a client is sitting waiting for the red light to go on!

chris
(mfdu)

[Linear]

the counter on my mm1200 is not very accurate at all, in fact 1 play through of a track yields an error of about 5 seconds. i am running lower tensions which probably has something to do with it.

The counter should have nothing to do with it. If it can be reset then it's not code, it's just counting. SMPTE code cannot be reset unless starting from scratch (once striped/formatted). If you're getting that much drift then it's definitely not locking to timecode. I've had 4 machines slaved to the one code source and have not had an ounce of drift. SMPTE is pretty much rock solid. Hard to say without being there to have a butcher's.

i know that, i was trying to work out how MFDU uses a counter in place of timecode. he obviously can, whereas I think it would be impossible (on my machine, at least).

the tape was striped with timecode. all i was saying is that my counter (and in fact, any counter that relies on tape movement) wouldn't be accurate enough for syncing.

don't worry about it, it's all sorted now.

Chris

[mfdu]

what counts is it is sorted for ya.

far as i understand it (from the schemo's and from zoran, the ex.teac service department dude) the counter for the 58 runs off the transport gears, not the tape itself.

i see why you have concerns about me doing it this way - possible tape slippage catastrophe etc.

i'll re-assess my sync methods!

:)
chris - mfdu

[rick]

the counter provides "tac " pulse and tac comes out of most pro machines so when the machine is in fast forward or rewind the smpte syncronisers can have a guess at where they should be.
i am surprised it is stable enough to lock to, but if it works then good o

[Howard Jones]

I have a number of comments:

[1] In general, you would sync an analogue tape machine to the digital with digital as master, not the other way round.

[2] Sync pulses are as Rick says. However, some transports have wide-band (high frequency) playback cards fitted to, say, track 24. The machine (under synchroniser control) will have the tape travelling close enough to the heads to be able to pick up a viable payback signal from the TC track. The high-speed TC can be read by the synchroniser.

[3] Because of the amount of tach slippage on most units, it was common for synchronisers to use tach until it thought the tape was in the approximately correct area. It would then slow the machine down and drop the lifters in so that it could get a sniff of TC at a slower speed. The synchroniser would then get the tape to where it should be.

None of which helps with the original problem...

[Linear]

I have a number of comments:

[1] In general, you would sync an analogue tape machine to the digital with digital as master, not the other way round.

[2] Sync pulses are as Rick says. However, some transports have wide-band (high frequency) playback cards fitted to, say, track 24. The machine (under synchroniser control) will have the tape travelling close enough to the heads to be able to pick up a viable payback signal from the TC track. The high-speed TC can be read by the synchroniser.

[3] Because of the amount of tach slippage on most units, it was common for synchronisers to use tach until it thought the tape was in the approximately correct area. It would then slow the machine down and drop the lifters in so that it could get a sniff of TC at a slower speed. The synchroniser would then get the tape to where it should be.

None of which helps with the original problem...

Interesting. I don't think MM1200's were really designed with sync in mind, although I am led to believe that they can sync up.

I'm interested also to know why you would slave the tape machine to the digital recorder. I understand that the clock would be more accurate from digital, but wouldn't it be much quicker to use the transport controls of the tape machine and have digital (which can move to any position instantly) being the slave?

I've never sync'd two tape machines (i've seen it done) and it is pretty hit-and-miss to say the least. Almost as bad as syncing 2+ ADATs. I don't know if this ADAT was dead/dying, but we had to give about 30 seconds worth of pre-roll to make sure they were lined up at the beginning of the song!

And yes, you're right. I know sync can work, I just wanted to know how to make it work with an MM1200, a 002 and LE.

Thanks for all your input.

Cheers

Chris

[Howard Jones]

Hi Chris,

[Q] Interesting. I don't think MM1200's were really designed with sync in mind, although I am led to believe that they can sync up.

[A] Dunno. Ask Phil Punch or Owen Reynolds. Successfully syncing a multitrack machine means being able to varispeed it's capstan motor in order to slew the tape speed to match the master (incoming) TC. Some brands of machine used frequency-control for their capstans and some used voltage control. So, the first thing that you would require would be a synchroniser that either outputted control in the required format or else had an interface box to do the same thing.
Despite what Rick said, both the Lynx Timeline and the ADX Turbolock (yay for local product) achieved great results. Both of these brands brought synchroniser control to great heights just at about the time when the industry started not to need it much any more. One of the most important points in getting a synchroniser to work properly was usually ensuring that the client didn't get near the thing!


[Q] I'm interested also to know why you would slave the tape machine to the digital recorder. I understand that the clock would be more accurate from digital, but wouldn't it be much quicker to use the transport controls of the tape machine and have digital (which can move to any position instantly) being the slave?

[A] There are 2 questions about synchronisation tucked away here... Commanding a device, be it digital or analogue, to locate to a given start point isn't really to do with synchronisation as such - that is really just locating to a given TC point. And yes, you are right, a non-linear device will snap to that point instantly. However, synchronisation generally implies the act of controlling the speed of one device (the slave) so that it keeps perfect sync with another device (the master) over a prolonged period of time when playing back or recording. In a nutshell, it is impossible to varispeed a digital device, definitely impossible if you are using digital outputs from it, without varying the output sample rate - obviously a useless outcome. Therefore, you designate the digital device as the master and it runs along locked to it's own very accurate clock. The capstan motor in the analogue tape machine can then lock to the TC coming from the master (simplification).
You have problems doing it the other way round. Multitrack tape machines have inherent small speed variations, no matter how good they are, and there is no way to slew the speed of the digital device to match.
When using a synchroniser to sync up a master and a slave, if you enter a "go-to" TC point on the master, given that it is the digital device, it snaps straight there which then answers your original point. The analogue device goes off looking for the same TC point, controlled by the synchroniser. Even if you did it the other way round and entered a "go-to" TC point on the analogue device, the digital device would still snap straight there.



[Q] I've never sync'd two tape machines (i've seen it done) and it is pretty hit-and-miss to say the least. Almost as bad as syncing 2+ ADATs. I don't know if this ADAT was dead/dying, but we had to give about 30 seconds worth of pre-roll to make sure they were lined up at the beginning of the song!

[A] I have looked after studios for years where 2 multitrack machines have been synced every day of the week. It shouldn't be a problem. 30 seconds to sync up ADATs doesn't surprise me in the least. Their ability to sync properly was close to zero and they should in no way be compared in ability in this area with a decent multitrack. You'll note that DA-88s sync up fine. That format is still with us and ADATs are goooorn. Not surprising.

[Q] And yes, you're right. I know sync can work, I just wanted to know how to make it work with an MM1200, a 002 and LE.
[A] Pro Tools have tried very hard to make you buy HD not LE if you want easy TC operations.

Howard

[rick]

howard i would really like to take you to task about wether syncronisers "worked" or not
maybe mostly worked would be a good discription

i dont need to use them anymore and i have about 30 adam smith 2600 modules under my house rusting away to prove it
( they were about $2500 per modules so you cannot chuck them away right ..?)

maybe i will just relate a little story about why i hate them so much

one day i was at rhino studio mixing some bands masterpiece on their really big ssl console, they had 3 mitsubishi 32 track tape machines and of course we had all of them locked together with the ssl desk sycro.( eventually...)
as per usually with these things they would work fine for hours then for no reason you could track down they would refuse to lock up.

after i had been mixing for 13 hours and the song was nearly nailed somebody asked me if i wanted eggplant with my chicken roll, it was such an odd question, i turned around to make sure i heard the assistant correctly, when my eyes rolled back to the desk , i had dropped my whole head space, i pressed play and then the syncros went belly up

there were about 450 patch leads going into the desk and three tape machines playing completely out of sync through god knows what combination of effects and reverbs !,

the sound that came out of the speakers was straight from the devils own personal collection and it fried my poor little noodle,
by the time we reset the syncro boxes and got the song to play back normally , i had lost the song to the magic mixing monster .

i stopped mixing that track and swore on the spot that was the last time i ever locked three machines together, i managed to keep to that promise.

well untill one night
at apocalpse we had 4 multitracks and 27 video machines tied together plus two whole digital video editing suites with a live punch in feed to an o/b truck with a mysterious amount of technology inside.
so the thing is i know syncros CAN work, but a little lady called madonna was paying the bill that night and it took about 15 people totally wired on stress to keep it going.
once it was actually working we made the call and madonna walked in and i do believe she thought it was normal studio protocall to have everybody in the building looking like they were about to have a heart attack and wet their pants every time somebody pressed play or lent on the shuttle knob.
not my idea of a fun night out i assure you !

protools and quicktime seems like a magical process in comparison

[davemc]

Hey Chris(MFDU),
Thought you had the DV toolkit going.. So far I have either dumped tape to tools(edited and stay ITB) or stayed on tape only. I used to sync my old 8 and 16 tracks to MIDI a long long time ago.
Might have a play next time I have some free time.

[Howard Jones]

Ah! ...nothing like synchroniser war stories to stir the passions. Rick, those Adams Smith modules should have already been put under the house when they were still worth $2,500.

A well-understood synchroniser working regularly (permanently) with several multitrack machines should not have caused problems. A roped-in synchroniser working with several multitrack machines - well, who knows?

Don't get me wrong - I've had my share of synchroniser problems starting at 8pm and not sorted out til 2am. But really, a competent person (e.g. me) working with a decent, known synchroniser could sync decent machines well enough.

Much more so than many more modern pieces of apparatus, synchronisers required a really detailed blend of software and hardware to work properly. Both Lynx and ADX nailed it. The R&D on machine ballistics was everything and only these 2 really bothered to do their homework properly.