does mixing kill the soundstage?

BMP- I have done some interesting experiments with 2 and 4 mic setups with non-acoustic type recording. I have tried to have bands play in a large room and position them at various distances from the mics but the results varied. I have also tried to overdub instruments with the same technique using a stereo pair but again, the results varied. I think the best recording I ever made was of a violin recital. I used an AKG C24 in Blumlein flanked by a pair of Neumann KM130 omnis. The mic preamp was an old and heavily modified Ampex tube unit all of which ran to a Nagra D. Analog is the way to go but a 1/2" reel at 30 ips gets mighty pricey (about $50-75 for every 15 minutes of record time). Honestly, recording on 1/4", 15ips Ampex 499 to a Ampex ATR or Nagra IV-S is pretty sensational (I have access to several thousand master tapes on this medium that are better than anything else out there). I am also amazed at the amount of artifical signal processing that is put on to even symphony recordings. If people heard an original master vs. a post production CD release, they would be astonished at how much the sound often changes.

Slartibart, it has been a long time since I paid close attention to engineering. I used to produce in the 80's, and have been teaching since the 90's. You are inspiring me to take a more active hand in the recording project I am just beginning. Thank you. Once you have tried 30ips on a Studer 16 track, and then a Studer 24 track, it's hard to go back to less expensive formats. I will be recording digitally in a very intimate and well designed studio with only mid level recording gear, but a very good engineer. If I can get enough interest in my work I will pursue a more desirable recording format in the future. Man, talk about bass authority, you a'int heard nothin' till you hear a Studer 2" 16 track. Whoa! I think that Led Zepellin's second album was 16 track and that Who's Next was recorded on 16 track, but I don't know which machines were used. Anyway, I will speak with the engineer I will be working with and attempt to formulate a plan to achieve some semblance of a true soundstage. First idea that comes to mind is to record the different musicians and their instruments in the part of the room that they would be standing in if the entire band was in the room, and then assemble a facsimile of the soundstage. I'll let you how things progress.

If anyone is interested, I made a post where I copied some of the emails from the Harbeth user's group (harbeth.com) where one of the BBC's recording engineer members spoke of his experiences. It was titled "BBC engineer s bent on live recordings." Lots of similar discussions can be found on that site.

BMP- The track width on a 2" Studer and a 1/4" are the same. Also, the new tape formulations have made a world of difference (Quantegy 499 and GP9). The most kick-ass mastering deck is: http://www.atrservice.com/atr/onetwo.htm. It is a 1" 2 Track Ampex ATR. I have worked with Studer decks in the past but have been more favorable towards Ampex and Nagra. I am going to be buying a 2 track machine in the not too distant future and am torn between an Ampex, Nagra, and Studer. The beautiful thing about the Nagra is its size but it is frightfully expensive. For your recording, what kind of mics do you have to work with? No signal processing or recorder can do a darn bit of good if the mic and preamp aren't up to the task... also remember that EQ's and compressors can wreak havoc on recordings if not properly used...

Slartibart, Thanks for the tips.I'll check on those aspects. The mikes will be mostly Nuemann's. I once mixed to a 2 track Studer and felt it was the best I had heard. Many of the Ampex machines I used were noisier, but they were probably older models. I have used a Nagra once or twice and loved it. Good luck with
your 2 track purchase. My old Otari 2 track wasn't too bad, now that I think about it.