Now that we have officially launched Essency Records--we are looking to "update" our little recording studio and install a good quality reel-to-reel deck.
We don't need anything fancy...just a Teac or Roberts--something that will take standard 7" reels and record in stereo (2 or 4 track)
-
Curley-Ann
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:34 am
Probably want ability for playing 10.5" reels, too.
12" and 14", not so much.
Minimum fidelity for this application would be 15 ips 1/2 track 1/4". Ampex. Studer. Nagra. MCI. Otari. Scully (yea!).
Save extra money for new heads from JRF. Head quality is most of the challenge to good sounding tape.
dbx Type I and Dolby A and Dolby SR would be good to add to the shopping list, if playing back only 1/4". 1/2" adds 3 dB SNR, but good NR adds more like 10 dB SNR. Also, if tape was recorded with NR encoding, it has to be de-coded with the same type of maschine.
Also Calibration tapes. deGausser (Han-D-Mag).
- Les Bing
12" and 14", not so much.
Minimum fidelity for this application would be 15 ips 1/2 track 1/4". Ampex. Studer. Nagra. MCI. Otari. Scully (yea!).
Save extra money for new heads from JRF. Head quality is most of the challenge to good sounding tape.
dbx Type I and Dolby A and Dolby SR would be good to add to the shopping list, if playing back only 1/4". 1/2" adds 3 dB SNR, but good NR adds more like 10 dB SNR. Also, if tape was recorded with NR encoding, it has to be de-coded with the same type of maschine.
Also Calibration tapes. deGausser (Han-D-Mag).
- Les Bing
-
Curley-Ann
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:34 am
While that sounds good--we've always gotten excellent sounding material from 2 or 4-track standard consumer reels recording at 7 1/4 IPS on a good Teac machine.
We can't afford to go as big as what was described above...that runs into some big bucks and I'm at the age where I just need simple--yet not cassette.
Buddy Holly started out with just a simple mono reel machine and a single mic...
We can't afford to go as big as what was described above...that runs into some big bucks and I'm at the age where I just need simple--yet not cassette.
Buddy Holly started out with just a simple mono reel machine and a single mic...
I'm a DIY electronics guy since I was a teenager. I own an Ampex 300 that Perry Como and Billy Joel used to record on; it's on its 2nd or 3rd set of electronics. I believe I paid $700 for it (in 1978)- then sold it for $700 - then bought it back for $300. It's been around. I haven't used it lately, as newer decks sound just fine and are easier to work with. But nothing beat an original Ampex for sheer panache. And they are indestructable; mine has outlasted 50 years of consumer decks.
If you're able and willing to wield a soldering iron to keep a vintage pro recorder going, look around for a restorable old Ampex 350 with 2 channels of 351 electronics for a top-of-the line deck at a bargain price.
If you need some newer (and more portable) good tape deck, look for a Tandberg or Revox from the 70's - they're higher end consumer, a step up from the Teac/Sony set of recorders (which are fine for what the were - my first reel to reel was a Sony). I worked with those Euro decks in college and they sound great. But they're a little techy and can be broken). Any decks from that era will probably need new rubber parts: belts, wheels, etc. Transistor decks need less maintenance, but still need repairs when something eventually wears out from old age.
If you're able and willing to wield a soldering iron to keep a vintage pro recorder going, look around for a restorable old Ampex 350 with 2 channels of 351 electronics for a top-of-the line deck at a bargain price.
If you need some newer (and more portable) good tape deck, look for a Tandberg or Revox from the 70's - they're higher end consumer, a step up from the Teac/Sony set of recorders (which are fine for what the were - my first reel to reel was a Sony). I worked with those Euro decks in college and they sound great. But they're a little techy and can be broken). Any decks from that era will probably need new rubber parts: belts, wheels, etc. Transistor decks need less maintenance, but still need repairs when something eventually wears out from old age.
That's a strange speed. The standard is 71/2 ips. (: (You know, 15 ips / 2...)Curley-Ann wrote:While that sounds good--we've always gotten excellent sounding material from 2 or 4-track standard consumer reels recording at 7 1/4 IPS on a good Teac machine.
We can't afford to go as big as what was described above...that runs into some big bucks and I'm at the age where I just need simple--yet not cassette.
Buddy Holly started out with just a simple mono reel machine and a single mic...
Here's what R. Runstein writes in his Modern Recording Techniques (1974):
"...Most work is done at 15 ips because this speed allows all audio frequencies to be recorded at full level without saturating the tape and produces a good signal-to-noise ratio. In addition, this speed spreads out the recorded signals far enough apart for easy editing [w/ pushbutton or razor!]. Consumer hi-fi tape machines move tape at 71/2 ips in order to save tape. As a result, most 1/4" studio recorders operate at both 15 and 71/2 ips so that copies can be made for clients at the proper speed. The 71/2 ips produces too much of a compromise in signal quality for use in multitrack master tapes, so 30 ips is sometimes available as a second speed."
For what it's worth, the Crickets chirped during an era prior to the invention of planned obsolescence and el cheapo materials. Unfortunately, no one planned on them being used for more than 50 years, and we are right about the end of that duty cycle... Still, tubes and transformers with military build and large topology components which even Fred Flintstone could desolder are much easier to fix than things made out of plastic and obsolete chips.
I paid $600 for my used ATR-102 and $600 for my used A 80 R. Great deals: one, on eBay; the other, a local studio sale. However, that was the beginning of the investments which would follow (and which are likely to be required for any used machine that isn't completely rebuilt by ATR Services, Jeff Gilman (MDI), or A. Fred Thal (ATAE)). For starters, new head assemblies were wanted. New capstan/tach for the ATR and new pinch roller tyre for the A 80 R. I still need to get the capstan re-roughed. Athan are great for that. But if you want to make studio-quality recordings to and/or from tape, you'll want to have a better machine than the end user who plays the dubs or hears his tape on CD, since, with analog, unlike digital, there is a loss in quality with each generation. One must start at a high level even to achieve decent, nostalgic warmth of yore, imho.
A new full track 1/4" Flux Magnetics head from ATR Services costs $470. So, there's mono, and then, there's MONO.... (L:
I've seen the Ampex 300 in photos of Alan Douches previous premastering studio and can recommend the Ampex user's e-mail list for the intrepid who operate them still in studios. Older than that would likely be worse than a high end prosumer Revox... Here's an interesting comment from Jeff Gilman from his newsletter:
"... I may have mercifully steered some of you away from recorders that I call "dinosaurs". These are old, very old technology machines that are just too difficult to work with and far too costly to keep running; and, in this era of digitally trained ears, most of them present with enough flutter as to be audibly ugly...
For better or worse, we live in a new world and in my humble opinion, pedigree and romantic attraction aside, despite our best efforts, some machines are better left to take their place among the great relics of the Smithsonian."
Here's an interesting auction:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Otari-MTR12-GUARANTEED-customized-your-needs-2-4-track-1-2-1-4-inch-/220886797630?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item336de10d3e
rebuilt Otaris for sale (6 available) with 4 channels on 1/2" or 2 on 1/4" (with other 2 amps as spares). May be mod-able to preview maschine?
For a preis, yes. But, these look like decent analog players....Ships from Palm Springs, but Seller has good feedback.
Finally, if you are serious about not spending a lot for this muffler, how about a hybrid Ampex/MCI for $700?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Westlake-Ampex-2-track-tape-machine-/320866561590?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4ab5232e36
- Spike Volta
Last edited by Serif on Fri Apr 20, 2012 9:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Curley-Ann
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:34 am
-
Steve E.
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:24 pm
- Location: Brooklyn, New York, USA
- Contact:
I've got a feeling that for your aesthetic and usage, a 1/4 inch deck will be fine. Don't bother with this half inch stuff, unless you intend to record 8-channel. 1/2 inch tape will be WAY more expensive, vs the returns.
I've messed around with 4-track open-reel Teacs endlessly for multitrack recording since my teens. I had a pair of A-3440s from the 1980s, which have both died. The sound was just never so great. Always a lot of hiss, and when I got some dbx II consumer units, it just added a layer of inconsistency and muffledness to the sound.
Lo and behold, recently I recorded an album for barter of an earlier Teac 3340-s. It turns out to have MUCH better, less hissy sound (better electronics, I think) than my other Teac decks. Just something to know, if you find one around cheap. And, it still works.
My dad left me a Sony quarter-track quarter-inch from the 1970s. Plays in both directions with an auto-switch, was used for long party mixes. It is not designed for studio work, but know this: It has glass heads which have never worn out, and the sound was ALWAYS a lot better than the Teacs.
That said, I agree with what everyone here has said about checking out more serious brands. I'm merely adding my limited experience to the woodpile.
EDIT: I must admit, the Otari listed above that has 1/2 inch for four channels has its appeal, too. But do look into current tape prices before going there. I also agree with everyone who says you want a machine that takes 10.5 inch reels. Crucial! When you are in a recording session you don't want to be constantly wondering if the tape is going to run out mid-take.
I've messed around with 4-track open-reel Teacs endlessly for multitrack recording since my teens. I had a pair of A-3440s from the 1980s, which have both died. The sound was just never so great. Always a lot of hiss, and when I got some dbx II consumer units, it just added a layer of inconsistency and muffledness to the sound.
Lo and behold, recently I recorded an album for barter of an earlier Teac 3340-s. It turns out to have MUCH better, less hissy sound (better electronics, I think) than my other Teac decks. Just something to know, if you find one around cheap. And, it still works.
My dad left me a Sony quarter-track quarter-inch from the 1970s. Plays in both directions with an auto-switch, was used for long party mixes. It is not designed for studio work, but know this: It has glass heads which have never worn out, and the sound was ALWAYS a lot better than the Teacs.
That said, I agree with what everyone here has said about checking out more serious brands. I'm merely adding my limited experience to the woodpile.
EDIT: I must admit, the Otari listed above that has 1/2 inch for four channels has its appeal, too. But do look into current tape prices before going there. I also agree with everyone who says you want a machine that takes 10.5 inch reels. Crucial! When you are in a recording session you don't want to be constantly wondering if the tape is going to run out mid-take.
Last edited by Steve E. on Wed May 02, 2012 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
One of my decks in storage is a Tascam 40-4, similar to the Teac 3440; a 4-track, 1/4" deck that works quite well if you can find one with transport guides and heads that aren't overly worn. The 40-4 is a bit of a beast, it probably weighs 50 lbs, but it sounds quite good for a deck in 1/4 track format. If I need to work with tapes recorded in 1/4 track format, it's my go-to deck.
-
Steve E.
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:24 pm
- Location: Brooklyn, New York, USA
- Contact:
I should add something...
Tape is awesome. Once you know its ins and outs, you can use it to "color" sound much the way you can use film to saturate color in a pleasing and not entirely realistic way.
Recently I've been using tape as a temporary medium, in the mixing stage of things. I do all my multitracking digitally, but sometimes, on rock recordings, I plan my mixes with nutty things popping out of the mix. I deliberately mix guitar solos 5 to 10 db too loud. They sound exciting but "wrong." Then, I transfer the mix to tape, and set the levels so only that solo will pop into the red. Low and behold, the result sounds dynamic, but the "too loud" elements get folded back into the mix at the correct levels, just a bit crunchy and punchy. In other words, I'm using the tape as an organic compressor. The effect is really pleasing! I've also found that it generally warms mixes up nicely even if I'm not doing extreme dynamic things. It's trial and error--I monitor the results til I find a level I like.
Then, after transferring, I reuse the tape. I'm on a tight budget, yo.
Tape is awesome. Once you know its ins and outs, you can use it to "color" sound much the way you can use film to saturate color in a pleasing and not entirely realistic way.
Recently I've been using tape as a temporary medium, in the mixing stage of things. I do all my multitracking digitally, but sometimes, on rock recordings, I plan my mixes with nutty things popping out of the mix. I deliberately mix guitar solos 5 to 10 db too loud. They sound exciting but "wrong." Then, I transfer the mix to tape, and set the levels so only that solo will pop into the red. Low and behold, the result sounds dynamic, but the "too loud" elements get folded back into the mix at the correct levels, just a bit crunchy and punchy. In other words, I'm using the tape as an organic compressor. The effect is really pleasing! I've also found that it generally warms mixes up nicely even if I'm not doing extreme dynamic things. It's trial and error--I monitor the results til I find a level I like.
Then, after transferring, I reuse the tape. I'm on a tight budget, yo.
If you're just learning about tape recording, you probably need to know about tape shed. Any mylar-based tape eventually starts to break down at the molecular level, like a hair braid with split ends. Water molecules attach themselves to those loose ends, with the result that the tape becomes "sticky" and shed oxide and backing all over the machines tape guides and heads. I have a whole storage room of tapes from the 1970's through 90's that are in various stages of shed.
The normal, easy short term solution to a reel with tape shed is to place it in an electric oven such as used for drying vegetables; 150 degrees Fahrenheit for a half hour is usually sufficient to drive off excess water molecules and make the tape playable again. Oddly enough, the tape doesn't seem to be otherwise affected by such seemingly drastic measures.
The normal, easy short term solution to a reel with tape shed is to place it in an electric oven such as used for drying vegetables; 150 degrees Fahrenheit for a half hour is usually sufficient to drive off excess water molecules and make the tape playable again. Oddly enough, the tape doesn't seem to be otherwise affected by such seemingly drastic measures.
-
blacknwhite
- Posts: 483
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:57 am
- Location: US
Right, about the sticky-shed issue: Choose your tape CAREFULLY. Running one bad reel of old tape can foul up a deck, requiring careful cleaning. You should be safe with the newly-made studio tape.
I researched 1/4-inch-tape sticky-shed problems (as far as doing lots of google searches & reading internet newsgroups) recently, looking for reliable brands.
I came down to between 2 choices: The one you'd want, as others here have mentioned, is that there are atleast 2 companies which still newly-make 1/4" studio tape at reasonable prices, and it seems to have a good reputation for quality on the net. I forgot the company names (maybe someone already mentioned them in an earlier post?) -- easy to find w/ Google...
(BTW, for myself, I went with the other choice, finding some new-as-possible New-Old-Stock still-sealed reels of the older 1950's-style formula of plain iron-oxide non-back-coated tapes. I found a boxful of a dozen reels of Ampex 631 manufactured in 1990. But I chose that route for 2 reasons: (1) I plan on being around for atleast another 50 years, so I want tapes to Last As Long As Possible, and the old-style NON-back-coated iron oxide formula is the most reliable/stable over long time periods; and, (2), because I like messing around with restored consumer-grade vintage 1950's tube-amp tape decks which were "tuned" for the old formula; I'm not using them in a recording studio, just for casual "1950s-consumer-grade-hi-fi" listening...)
I researched 1/4-inch-tape sticky-shed problems (as far as doing lots of google searches & reading internet newsgroups) recently, looking for reliable brands.
I came down to between 2 choices: The one you'd want, as others here have mentioned, is that there are atleast 2 companies which still newly-make 1/4" studio tape at reasonable prices, and it seems to have a good reputation for quality on the net. I forgot the company names (maybe someone already mentioned them in an earlier post?) -- easy to find w/ Google...
(BTW, for myself, I went with the other choice, finding some new-as-possible New-Old-Stock still-sealed reels of the older 1950's-style formula of plain iron-oxide non-back-coated tapes. I found a boxful of a dozen reels of Ampex 631 manufactured in 1990. But I chose that route for 2 reasons: (1) I plan on being around for atleast another 50 years, so I want tapes to Last As Long As Possible, and the old-style NON-back-coated iron oxide formula is the most reliable/stable over long time periods; and, (2), because I like messing around with restored consumer-grade vintage 1950's tube-amp tape decks which were "tuned" for the old formula; I'm not using them in a recording studio, just for casual "1950s-consumer-grade-hi-fi" listening...)
-
Aussie0zborn
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:23 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
-
Perisphere
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 9:53 pm
- Location: Mountain Home, Arkansas
There's the normal slight shedding of tape, and then there is 'sticky-shed syndrome' which is the situation in which a tape will require 'baking' to drive out the moisture absorbed by the tape binder.
DO NOT bake acetate base tape! No acetate tape will exhibit sticky-shed syndrome; the offenders that do have SSS were all introduced in 1974 or later, and the last acetate tapes were produced AFAIK in 1972.
Acetate base tapes are translucent--one can hold a reel of it up to bright light and see light through the layers of it.
RMGI (moving production from Holland to France) and ATR (in the US) are today's two tape manufacturers.
DO NOT bake acetate base tape! No acetate tape will exhibit sticky-shed syndrome; the offenders that do have SSS were all introduced in 1974 or later, and the last acetate tapes were produced AFAIK in 1972.
Acetate base tapes are translucent--one can hold a reel of it up to bright light and see light through the layers of it.
RMGI (moving production from Holland to France) and ATR (in the US) are today's two tape manufacturers.
-
Angus McCarthy
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:22 pm
- Location: Bloomsburg, PA, USA
This is becoming more and more popular, I find. So wonderful to see new uses of the old technology in the digital age!Steve E. wrote:I should add something...
Tape is awesome. Once you know its ins and outs, you can use it to "color" sound much the way you can use film to saturate color in a pleasing and not entirely realistic way.
Recently I've been using tape as a temporary medium, in the mixing stage of things. I do all my multitracking digitally, but sometimes, on rock recordings, I plan my mixes with nutty things popping out of the mix. I deliberately mix guitar solos 5 to 10 db too loud. They sound exciting but "wrong." Then, I transfer the mix to tape, and set the levels so only that solo will pop into the red. Low and behold, the result sounds dynamic, but the "too loud" elements get folded back into the mix at the correct levels, just a bit crunchy and punchy. In other words, I'm using the tape as an organic compressor. The effect is really pleasing! I've also found that it generally warms mixes up nicely even if I'm not doing extreme dynamic things. It's trial and error--I monitor the results til I find a level I like.
Then, after transferring, I reuse the tape. I'm on a tight budget, yo.
Don't mess with a consumer deck. Besides not sounding great, they are hard to work on. You should be able to make a great recording on a revox A77, but again, you have to take the back of the machine off to align it!
However, unlike Jeff Gillman (quoted above), I think an Ampex 350, 351, or 440-B are all great sounding decks. They don't have super sophisticated transports, but do you really need that? No! The newer machines (ATR 102, Studer A810, etc) have great transports, but if they break they are much harder to repair.
But, be prepared to spend some money or time. You might spend more on just replacement parts than just the machine alone. The old Ampexes need a good amount of transport and motor rebuilding, but they sound great and are simple.
However, unlike Jeff Gillman (quoted above), I think an Ampex 350, 351, or 440-B are all great sounding decks. They don't have super sophisticated transports, but do you really need that? No! The newer machines (ATR 102, Studer A810, etc) have great transports, but if they break they are much harder to repair.
But, be prepared to spend some money or time. You might spend more on just replacement parts than just the machine alone. The old Ampexes need a good amount of transport and motor rebuilding, but they sound great and are simple.
-
Aussie0zborn
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:23 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
-
Angus McCarthy
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:22 pm
- Location: Bloomsburg, PA, USA