# Massey Tape-head



## immortalgropher (Feb 16, 2010)

So, I'm trying out this plug in atm and I have to say...as soon as I switched to bright I was like:



Might not need a summing box after all. holy cow!


----------



## trifidmaster (Nov 18, 2006)

OK, can you be more specific?
Are you using it on Mac?


----------



## immortalgropher (Feb 16, 2010)

No, I am using it on windows with PT 

The only thing I can really say is try it out and hear it for yourself haha. The difference is ridiculous.


----------



## ngarjuna (Mar 29, 2010)

Massey is very good. Nebula Reel2Reel is even better.


----------



## immortalgropher (Feb 16, 2010)

I've heard a lot about nebula lately but haven't tried it or anything. Is the free version worth checking out?


----------



## ngarjuna (Mar 29, 2010)

AstralPlaneStudios said:


> I've heard a lot about nebula lately but haven't tried it or anything. Is the free version worth checking out?


Kind of...there are a few tape programs (I believe, has been a while since I used the free version) but they are very colored tape machines, not the kind of thing I would get much use out of. Typically third party demo programs (the free ones) don't work with Nebula Free either, they are only for people who own the commercial plugin.

One place Massey probably has an advantage over Nebula is in CPU load; it takes a whole lot of resources to process all that analog behavior. I'm not sure how the Massey is in terms of that but I doubt it's as intensive as Nebula.

The real beauty of Nebula (for tape emulation) only comes when you purchase not only the plugin itself but also two third party libraries (I'm not sure if there are any demo programs from either library, possibly not):
CDSoundmaster's R2R Essential Tape Collection, which contains:
Studer A800 mkIII (at 15 and 30 ips on Ampex 499)
Otari MTR-10 (at 15 and 30 ips on Ampex 499 and ATR)
Studer Revox B77 Pro (at 7.5 and 15 ips, it's the Pro variant of the B77 with higher speeds on Ampex 499 and ATR)
1950s Wollensak 1515 (at 3.75 ips, this is an unbelievable machine though very colored, on various tapes)
1970s Sony TC-640 (at 3.75 and 7.5 ips)
1970s Akai 4000DS mkII (at 3.75 and 7.5 ips)
Teac W-6004 Cassette (on Maxell XLII)

each unit sampled at a variety of different calibration levels (so if you want hot tape you've got it, likewise for various levels of less hot). Probably 80% of what I do I use the Studer A800 but sometimes the other machines are just the trick.

The TapeBooster+ Programs (the other third party package, also from CDSoundmaster) adds in saturation. It's amazing. You can actually use just the TapeBooster saturation programs without a tape machine (although, personally, I prefer the sound of the tape machines, but that's a taste thing). It's flat out the most amazing saturation I've ever heard in the digital realm.

So it's not exactly cheap (though it's not exactly expensive by plugin standards) to get started with Nebula for tape sounds; figure $100ish for the plugin, another $99 for the R2R and I think TB+ is $40.

It's also super resource intensive (especially once you start using Nebula for console emulations [which are complete CPU hogs] and reverbs and other effects in the mix), it can really change your workflow. It's a sacrifice until modern CPUs can handle what Nebula is doing. For some people (where time constraint is a bigger issue than that last 2% of quality), Nebula might be a bad choice. For me (where I actually have as much time as I want to render), it's well worth the effort.


----------



## DragonMusic (Apr 6, 2009)

Yeah I'm using almost all the Massey stuff. Excellent plugins. Especially the CT4 and the L2007.


----------



## immortalgropher (Feb 16, 2010)

DragonMusic said:


> Yeah I'm using almost all the Massey stuff. Excellent plugins. Especially the CT4 and the L2007.


I need to spend more time with the CT4, it's characteristics are neat. lol


----------



## immortalgropher (Feb 16, 2010)

Could one of you guys help me understand this plug-in a bit better?

To my ears it seems as if the tape head adds compression and harmonics. Is that right? Do you guys use it on individual tracks or AFTER you've done all mixing and put it on the buss?


----------



## ngarjuna (Mar 29, 2010)

AstralPlaneStudios said:


> Could one of you guys help me understand this plug-in a bit better?
> 
> To my ears it seems as if the tape head adds compression and harmonics. Is that right? Do you guys use it on individual tracks or AFTER you've done all mixing and put it on the buss?


Unlike digital, analog distortion tends to sound nice at lower levels until you cross a threshold. Tape works basically the same way. The "zone" between where the distortion actually begins and the point where it gets overwhelming is what's referred to as saturation. It's a distortion effect which, in addition to the harmonics, does indeed compress the audio a bit.

As far as how to use it, it depends on how "tapey" you want it to sound. If you are going for the full "tape machine" sort of sound, you want that saturation (to varying degrees depending on the track material) on each individual track and potentially another instance on the master buss. If you just put it on the master buss you won't have the saturation on each track but you'll get something similar to what happens when you output a digital mix to tape (which some people actually do) which is nice as well.

When I'm setting up my projects I will usually first make decisions about individual tracks (which machine, which tape, how hot [the digital trim going into the tape programs], how much saturation). Then I use a different deck/tape/saturation on the master channel. When it's all said and done and I've added console emulations as well, the signal path looks pretty much like it would have pre-digital if you were recording to a multi-track tape, through a console and then out to a different deck for the mix:

track digital -> console emu in -> tape machine emu -> saturation effect -> console in emu -> console buss emu (buss summing occurs here) -> console master out (master track in the DAW, summing occurs here) -> master tape machine -> any additional saturation I desire. The trick is learning the various stages you're emulating and how hot to drive them for a particular sound; not everything sounds best at maximum drive/saturation levels (hence the decision, in the old days, about what gets slammed to tape and what gets applied more gently).


----------



## immortalgropher (Feb 16, 2010)

So let's say I turn the "drive" knob all the way to 10 which is obv full saturation, but even cranking the drive knob boosts the track's level...which is where the trim would come in handy, yes? So basically I should get the drive set first, THEN attenuate?

Hmmmm, so I could end up using this plug for gaining as well then eh? I could end up putting tape head across all tracks and use the trim from it to do that as opposed to using the trim plug in pro tools?


----------



## ngarjuna (Mar 29, 2010)

AstralPlaneStudios said:


> So let's say I turn the "drive" knob all the way to 10 which is obv full saturation, but even cranking the drive knob boosts the track's level...which is where the trim would come in handy, yes? So basically I should get the drive set first, THEN attenuate?
> 
> Hmmmm, so I could end up using this plug for gaining as well then eh? I could end up putting tape head across all tracks and use the trim from it to do that as opposed to using the trim plug in pro tools?


Well my opinion is that you should attenuate first based around your 0VU marker and then feed that signal to the saturation program. I don't know if Massey's documentation gives a 0VU reference but on Massey's blog he has a whole article on gain staging in digital (which he is a proponent of) and he suggests that he defaults his metering to 0VU = -12dB but that even more headroom is probably even a better idea. Many digital plugins have an optimum operating range. I can't find any data on what TapeHead's optimum range is.

The trim attenuator on the plugin itself can then be used to adjust post-FX to compensate for whatever changes the plugin caused. But I think, in general, you want your levels somewhat set prior to processing the signal.


----------

