cutting direct from tape. advise needed for studerA80 delay

[Tremdall]

Good digital provides a perfect 1:1 transfer of sound,

Objectively, the "perfect 1:1 transfer" has simply not been invented yet, despite the many marketing claims throughout the years.

Really... )
To just stick with the facts; just tell us on which digital equipment do you base your scientific assumptions? What digital equipment did you actually use to come to such a negative result? You can claim all these things, but without being specific it is just an assumption without any ground. Despite all the nice words!

[markrob]

Good digital provides a perfect 1:1 transfer of sound,

Objectively, the "perfect 1:1 transfer" has simply not been invented yet, despite the many marketing claims throughout the years.

Really... )
To just stick with the facts; just tell us on which digital equipment do you base your scientific assumptions? What digital equipment did you actually use to come to such a negative result? You can claim all these things, but without being specific it is just an assumption without any ground. Despite all the nice words!

Actually, I think the burden of proof is on you. You made a very strong claim of perfection! How would you even make that determination??? What would be the methodology that would be used to draw that conclusion?

Mark

[Tremdall]

Actually, I think the burden of proof is on you. You made a very strong claim of perfection! How would you even make that determination??? What would be the methodology that would be used to draw that conclusion?

Mark

Perfect for the EAR for a start...

That's all what matters to me

When you make claims you can actually hear "digital audio side effects" (end quote) I like to hear from you which equipment you actually use. Don't expect pro quality when you're using 1000 euro consumer electronics!

I saw on the equipment list of Jesus his only piece of digital gear is a Tascam da3000. This standalone converter is listed at bax for 942€. No wonder he's negative about digital. Don't expect a Rolls Royce when you buy a Mini... Do some serious research in equipment before you make negative claims. And base it on pro equipment. Not consumer electronics...

For the rest read this to understand all the misunderstandings there are around digital: http://productionadvice.co.uk/no-stair-steps-in-digital-audio/

[jesusfwrl]

Hahaha, so you use your ear to determine if your converter is achieving a "perfect 1:1 transfer"...

And since you can't hear any difference, you are confidently concluding that nobody else can hear any difference either, so it must be a rule then...! Very entertaining, if a bit ridiculous.

My statement is not particular to any make or model of converter, the same applies to all of them. I have experienced and worked with quite a few over the years, not only for music production purposes, but also for instrumentation. They all have limits and shortcomings, there's never a "perfect 1: 1 transfer". I have never heard or measured a converter whose influence was undetectable. Whenever I have compared converters, I have always heard (and measured) differences between them. Each one has its own sonic footprint, because none of them is achieving the "perfect 1:1 transfer" ideal. This is nothing strange or unexpected, nor is it black magic.
Please refer to the basic theory, such as Shannon's Sampling Theorem as an example relevant to PCM, a lot of the reasons why the "perfect 1:1 transfer" has not been achieved yet have already been given there.

If I would ever find myself unable to tell any difference between two different converters, or between the source signal and the A/D and D/A converted version, I would question the accuracy of the monitoring system and my own hearing ability, long before I accept that the "perfect 1:1 transfer" has been achieved.

What is perfect for your ear is merely a subjective evaluation of one person and may not necessarily translate well to other ears. I personally prefer to remain more humble in this respect and not simply assume I have reached perfection just because I cannot hear the problems. I always assume there are problems there, even if I cannot hear them, and I actually get suspicious when I cannot hear any problems and try to think of ways to reveal them, for I am sure that any hidden problems that find their way into my work (or anybody else's work) will one day be revealed, as the field of audio is further advanced and developed.

I feel flattered that you took the time to look through my equipment list. I do not choose gear by price tag. The particular sonic footprint of the DA-3000 was found to be acceptable for my purposes and favourably compared to several other unit I heard and tested at the time, so this is what I chose. Currently, only about 1% of my work requires any form of ADC or DAC, so it doesn't see that much use anyway. Prior to Magnetic Fidelity, a lot more of my work had to do with converters and even software development for audio on the distant past!
My real passion however, is for analog sound, so this is where I am directing all my efforts at present.

[Tremdall]

there's never a "perfect 1: 1 transfer"

Watch this closely Jesus:
https://www.xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml

Might be some interesting information for you

[markrob]

Hi,

Great video, that explains and demonstrates digital sampling theory quite well. But it does not prove that a real world digital system is perfect. Why, because:

1. The design of the sampler is such that its not perfect due to timing jitter, aperture uncertainty, sample hold errors due to dialectic absorption, and a host of other real world engineering issues.
2. The DAC reconstruction filter whether it be analog or a digital FIR/IIR or some hybrid combination is not perfect (e.g. finite FIR length,IIR math rounding/precision errors, analog component tolerances).
3. The input anti-aliasing filter to the to ADC is also not perfect (see #2).

So yes, if all of the input and output systems were perfect, you would have a "perfect" system. In the real world this is not true. I don't think the person that produced the video would make the claim that such a system exists. Can a well designed digital system be of excellent quality? Sure, but not perfect (your word). Never will be. I suspect that you are just trolling us here.

Mark

[jesusfwrl]

Tremdall, sorry, I do not educate myself through internet websites and videos. If you can recommend any serious book, describing any recent technological breakthroughs I might have missed, please feel free. In the meantime, you may want to do some serious reading on how converters actually work. Thinking about it, better start with loudspeakers.

Markrob's post very correctly points out some of the important considerations. I also share his concluding suspicion. I guess the forum name "lathe trolls" might be lending itself to misinterpretation, but I can assure you, this definition of trolling is not the intended direction of the forum...!

[Tremdall]

Tremdall, sorry

No worries Jesus, not trolling at all.

Only love from here

My system works perfectly, thank you!

Hope you have good results with your Tascam.

[jesusfwrl]

No, Tremdall, you are not trolling, you have only been posting on a forum dedicated to cutting records, on a thread about cutting from a Studer A80, claiming that your converters can achieve a "perfect 1:1 transfer" because your ears tell you so, suggesting that your unnecessarily long signal path can achieve better results (although you do not appear to be cutting records with it) and full of love, while demonstrating profound lack if technical knowledge understanding converters and audio in general and despite the fact that you do not cut records and likely do not even have a disk reproduction system, you are telling us that the converters of choice of people who actually do cut records are not adequate or professional enough.... based on the price tag!

It is just that our vocabulary is quite poor and we couldn't come up with a more appropriate term than "trolling"...

If I wasn't getting the results I wanted from the DA-3000, I wouldn't be using it. Nobody forced me to. But, more importantly, despite your efforts to direct the discussion elsewhere, I am also getting excellent results with no need for any A/D or D/A converter whatsoever, by cutting directly from tape or direct-to-disk, entirely in the analog domain. It appears I am not alone with this, others are also doing the same or are interested in doing it.

Let us not forget that the entire industry had been doing just that for almost 90 years, prior to digital converters becoming widely available. Many exceptional sounding records remain as a testimony of what can be achieved with no need for digital assistance and more keep on being produced on a regular basis, even nowadays. Digital equipment is by no means necessary for recording, mixing or mastering, nor does the use of digital equipment in a disk mastering setup offer any kind of improvement in sound quality. The phonograph record is an analog mechanical storage medium and as such does not require any digital equipment or process to be recorded or reproduced.

Now, with all this out of the way, will you kindly allow us to continue discussing matters particular to disk cutting, such as the A80 in standard or preview head configuration as the source?
Do you have anything to contribute to this topic?
If you would like to keep on discussing your illusions about your converters, would you mind starting a separate thread, in the appropriate section, suitably titled?
Full of love of course, as always.
Thank you for your understanding.

[Tremdall]

Jesus, relax...
You're acting a bit over the top...

Try to see things a bit in perspective
Your words are merely a projection of your own thoughts. Making assumptions I don't cut, don't know where you get the idea from. Not that its any of your business, but I work on a Souri vinylrecorder and cut for my own musiclabel.

Hope this takes some of yr paranoia away

Love as always,

Yours

Tremdall

[Aussie0zborn]

Gentlemen,

How about we stick to exchanging ideas rather than insults?

[socialroots]

Tascam... I love my Tascam 4track cassette portastudio! I love it cuz it sounds perfect to me, and
Tremdall, your absolutely right, cuz thats all that is important to me!
Maximum respect,
Patrick
p.s , I only use the Tascam when the musicians cant cut it in 3takes,and need to rely on overdubs, otherwise with great arrangements, masterful performance capabilities I just mic record straight into my rek o kut..nothing better than that for my taste! Merry xmas everyone

[Tremdall]

Gentlemen,

How about we stick to exchanging ideas rather than insults?

Amen. Case closed.

[jesusfwrl]

Vinylrecorder...
Ok, time to get this discussion back on topic: Cutting records directly from tape, possibly with a Studer A80 or other preview head machine!

Of course you can also use any standard tape machine without a preview head assembly if you're cutting at fixed pitch, or manually variable pitch. The sole purpose of the preview head is to feed the automatic variable pitch/groove depth system with information on the program material in advance, to allow adequate time for everything to automatically move around as it should. Without a preview head, you just have to do this manually.

Frustratingly, there were 3 different standards for the preview time required by the automation system, and each standard requires a different time offset for each tape speed and disk rotational speed.

The MCI JH-110M has the benefit of incorporating enough rollers to alter the tape path, to cater for 7.5 ips, 15 ips, 30 ips, 33 1/3 rpm, 45 rpm, 1 revolution offset and 0.5 revolution offset, all on one machine!
In addition, the repro amplifiers can be switched between CCIR and NAB equalization, with external knobs for aligning to each tape that comes in, and even levers to alter azimuth without extra tools! The head blocks and rollers can easily be exchanged for different tape sizes, so you can even swap between 1/4", 1/2", and even 1" with some effort to find enough roller, on the same machine, making it the most versatile preview head machine ever made.

My personal favourite in terms of sound is the Telefunken M15A, which was available in 7.5/15 ips or 15/30 ips versions, with repro amplifiers switchable between CCIR and NAB. The preview tape path was only fixed for a single system, so you had the choice of either 0.5 revolution or 0.6 revolution, depending on the version.
By purchasing additional slide bar (available back then from Telefunken) you could have slide bars for 0.5 and 0.6 revolution which could be swapped, if you can cope with having to remove and replace a few screws. They never made a 1 revolution version, to my knowledge. Swapping parts for other tape sizes is possible, but significantly more complicated than on the MCI. The M15 was very similar but with different electronics. I much prefer the M15A electronics, both in terms of sound and reliability.

The M15 and M15A preview had additional boards and electronics to incorporate two additional repro amplifiers to handle the preview. These can be added to standard M15/M15A machines, if you can find them, but it requires considerable effort (soldering and making complex wiring looms with adequate screening). The head block can be exchanged between rec/repro and preview/repro, and by doing so you can use the same machine for recording on tape. The preview versions still have the slots for rec electronics, so these can be permanently fitted. The slide bards are the hard part to find and installation in a standard rc/repro machine requires precise drilling and tapping, plus a few extra parts.
I am considering designing my own version of these, incorporating all standards on the same bar, and simplifying it compared to the original design. If I can find enough time... For now I am using a standard slide bar, thanks to a friend who had one to spare.

The Studer A80 preview assembly is almost impossible to find nowadays, for converting a standard A80. It is also prohibitively expensive to manufacture a one-off, but at least possible if you are really determined. If you want a preview A80, your best bet is to find one which is already a preview A80. The standard preview assembly was for 0.5 revolution systems. Custom ones can be made if money is no object.

It is worth noting that there were only ever five manufacturers attempting to make preview head tape machines. One of them made it in such small numbers that I've never even seen a picture of it, only ever heard rumours of its existence. In total, among the 5 manufacturers, there were only 7 models of preview head machines ever available, and I'm counting the Telefunken M15 and M15A as two separate models. Of these 4 were only particular to one standard, so these are very rare. Only 3 models were versatile enough to survive the changing standards over time, and most have either been scrapped or converted to rec/repro machines by now. Preview head tape machines are extremely rare.

I estimate that there are only 4 MCI JH110M machines surviving, if which I own one. I think there must be less than 8 Telefunken M14A Preview machines, but some have been converted from rec/repro machines. The one I own is a good example. The A80 preview I would guess at around 6 machines surviving. The Ampex ATR102, converted by Michael Spitz into a preview head machine for Sterling Sound is still there and there's another one of these elsewhere in the USA, so two of these.

If anyone has other figures or information on how many preview head tape machines are still in existence, I would love to hear from you, privately or publicly. My own estimate comes to 20 machines, plus some obscure ones in museums or so. Some facilities own more than one and others are owned by collectors who do not cut masters, so on a global scale, there are around 14 professional mastering facilities that are using preview head tape machines at present.

This number has been growing slowly but steadily and more facilities will most likely be added to this list within the coming year. Despite being rare and difficult to come across on ad listings, it is surprisingly easy to acquire a review head tape machine for anyone seriously interested. There are still a few around for sale, just not publicly advertised. Obscure items tend to circulate by word of mouth.

[THD]

Hi,

I got one of these MCI JH-110 M that I use, anyone who got a clue where to get hold of heads and rollers for using 1/2" tape on this one?






http://vinylmastering.no/

https://www.facebook.com/THDvinylmasteringOslo/

[gold]

I own three Studer A80VU preview machines. All 15/30 IPS. I have one set up for 1/4", one set up for 1/2" and a custom made one for 1" (2tr). The custom one was put together from an incomplete preview deck and a 1" deck for video layback. I know of at least ten Studer A80VU preview decks in North America. There must be more. I also have an M15 (not M15A) deck. Those are the most difficult to come by. I think it is the only working one in North America. I would love to find an M15A 15/30 preview deck I could convert to 1/2".

There were also Lyrec preview tape decks but I've never seen one.

[jesusfwrl]

Paul, the Lyrec preview head tape machine is the one I was also referring to above, which I have never actually seen, but it did once exist! I don't know how many were made, but surely not many have survive.
Your 1" 2 track machine is lovely!
Regarding the Telefunken M15A you're looking for, I can supply you with one, either in 1/4" or in 1/2" configuration, preview head version, 15/30 ips. Please email me at jesus@magneticfidelity.com to discuss further. These machines are not very difficult to find in Europe, and lots of parts have occasionally come up and I have grabbed every opportunity! I have very complete documentation of all M15A versions ever made, so I can put together any configuration you can imagine, standard or custom. Even ultra high end repro electronics if this is something you are into.

THD, really nice setup! Your MCI is a slightly different version than the usual ones out there, but most of the parts are probably compatible between the versions. A while ago Chris Mara had advertised a pair of 1/2" repro heads for this machine on the classifieds section of this board. They came in the original headblocks. I think he would be the first person to ask in case he still has them. I am not sure if he would have enough 1/2" rollers to supply, but its worth a try. This was the same part that was used on the standard rec/repro 1/2" machine, you just need to find (or make) enough of them!
If he has already sold the heads (very likely considering that it was a while back and these things tend to go fast when they appear) send me an email and I can surely come up with something, either original parts or even making custom ones, if need be.
What cutterhead are you using on your LS76?

[THD]

Hi,

"What cutterhead are you using on your LS76?"

I'm cutting with a Westrex 3DII cutterhead and Westrex RA1700 amp thats been modified by Len Horowitz.



http://vinylmastering.no/

https://www.facebook.com/THDvinylmasteringOslo/

[jesusfwrl]

Nice setup!
Do let me know if you need any help with MCI parts, in case Chris Mara doesn't have what you're looking for.