3-track question

[petzi]

Why were 3-track tape machines invented in the first place ?
Would it make any sense to release 3-track session tapes unmixed on a multichannel SACD or DVD ?

Thanks :)

[Steve Hoffman]

Three-track machines were created by Ampex for master recording with a left/center/right setup. Remember, in those days, overdubbing was against the union rules, so everything was live, with the singer or soloist using the center channel, and the orchestra spread between the left and right.

It was feared that a "phantom" center channel wouldn't hold up and the studios wanted a "hard" center channel.

Well, of course, the phantom center has indeed held up, and the three-track machine (at least for cutting records) was obsolete by 1959.

Of course, the three-track tapes had to be reduced to two-track, thereby involving "remixing" for the first time in recording. It's in this remixing stage that essential things were added (echo, eq, limiting, etc.) Without these things, some three-tracks are unfinished, and would be useless to be released that way.

[DanG]

Good question, petzi!

[Dan C]

So how long did three-track hang around untill it was pretty much replaced by four-track? Didn't the major labels continue to record classical in three-track through the mid 60's?
Dan C

[Steve Hoffman]

Yes indeed, Dan. I've seen three-track tapes from 1970!

Most "vintage" engineers saw no reason to add a fourth channel, until overdubbing became common. "Live" sessions were usually done in three-track until 1968, or whenever the machines started to wear out.

Problem is, the new four-track decks were usually solid-state. Bummer.

[lukpac]

I'll add a point that I think Steve might have missed:

Back in those days you were mixing for both mono and stereo. If you recorded directly to 2-track, the vocal (in the middle) would be 3dB louder in mono than in stereo. Also, many people wanted to be able to raise or lower the volume of the vocal in relation to the backing. If you record directly to stereo you're locked in, while with 3-track you can change later...

Of course, Atlantic got their 8-track machine in 1958, so... Sadly just about all of those multitracks are now gone.

[Steve Hoffman]

Originally posted by lukpac


Back in those days you were mixing for both mono and stereo. If you recorded directly to 2-track, the vocal (in the middle) would be 3dB louder in mono than in stereo. Also, many people wanted to be able to raise or lower the volume of the vocal in relation to the backing. If you record directly to stereo you're locked in, while with 3-track you can change later...



Remember Luke, most major studios had a seperate mono machine going for the mono version. No need to use the three-track for remixing to mono...

[Andy]

Interesting stuff.:D I've learned a lot since I started hangin' out here.

[John Oteri]

Yes, me too! :cool:

So an old mono is first generation, and the stereo version is second generation, right?