So, as more high-res albums are offered for download, there seems to be a question regarding how high the resolution of the source can ever be. If master analog tapes were archived digitally, what was that resolution? Where's the weakest link in the album's history,especially the older ones? you have a few different cases. there are the 80's and 90's digitally recorded but mastered to tape examples. in this case, such as 'Famous Blue Raincoat', there is an analog master tape that is digitally sourced. the best example is going to be the artist approved analog tape. who knows how the digital work parts might compare? then you have the digitally archived 50's, 60's and 70's recordings. no way to predict exactly what would be best. potentially no doubt that the original analog tapes would be best. and i'd expect finding a well preserved 'safety' would be the best possible source if the original master is damaged. then there are the original analog masters that are still good enough. these are best. most of my tapes are from these or safeties sourced from these. I have seen cases where the vinyl is the best source for a an original analog tape recording where the tape has been lost. much has been written on this subject and i'm only scratching the surface on this issue. |
Hi ZD542 - I guess the phrase 'close to master tape' normally attaches to sources, in the same way as one uses the term 'studio sound' for speakers. |
Mike, i love the world of reel to reel. I worked in the studio, but must be a joy for you to have good gear and good quality sources at home. |
Even mastertapes from the 1950's can sound great today, if they were stored properly. Witness the recent floods of jazz reissues. |
Lowrider,
I've had a few dozen older vintage tapes in the past, seen the 'sticky shed' and related issues, and after trying to mess with them I returned them to the seller as I realized that was not the part of the hobby I was prepared to deal with.
those tapes were likely recoverable by someone with the requisite patience, skills and tools. i'd rather just get the modern formulation dub from those efforts.
one problem is that the transports they were originally recorded on are not the most tape friendly. later master recorders had much advanced levels of tape handling.
i'm a plug and play kinda guy and the reality is that if you commit sufficient assets to tape it can be real world easy to use and sound superb. |
The degradation of tape i was referring to is the 40 or 50 year old masters and dubs, usually produced by major labels. Poor storage conditions, temperature, humidity are factors and they're usually put in a room not setup for archiving. Or sent to a warehouse and not even cataloged.
I,ve seen the recording side of tapes flaking off and it was hit or miss trying to dub down a 2 inch tape to 1/2 inch for preservation. The old tape decks also put a lot of wear on the tapes during a recording session. |
So, as more high-res albums are offered for download, there seems to be a question regarding how high the resolution of the source can ever be. If master analog tapes were archived digitally, what was that resolution? Where's the weakest link in the album's history,especially the older ones? |
added note; most of my master dubs have 2 reels for one album; some titles have 4 reels. so my 150 'titles' likely equal 250+ reels.
when buying tapes you are going to pay 'per reel'.
tapes are not cheap. however; if you compare the entry fee to tapes with the very top level vinyl the vinyl hardware will cost you much, much, more to really play at the top level and approach the performance level of tapes.
it depends on how many tapes one might plan to own how that would work out. |
regarding life span of tape, and of time-span of optimal tape playback; not all tape is created equal. I'm an amateur with only anecdotal experience but I have about 150 master dubs all done with modern tape formulations. quite a few of them are now going on 7 years old, and some have been played many dozens of times with zero apparent degradation.
possibly part of the issue is that I play my tapes exclusively on a pair of Studer A820's which do have remarkably gentle, smooth tape handling. my tapes are stored in a climate controlled (cool, dry) environment. I keep my tape path clean.
I'd say that my tapes are sounding better than ever today and I'm now going thru my collection to re-calibrate their relative sound quality in my mind as I've not played tapes much since I made changes in my system a few years ago. they all sound new to me now and I'm really enjoying the journey.
spend time with some high quality tape dubs and they will really pull you in.
there is really nothing like a great tape.
Sunday night I played a very fine 15ips 1/4" master dub of the RCA LSC-2603 Heifetz, Bruch 'Scottish Fantasy' which literally blew me away. I've had this tape about 6 years and had only played it once previously and it had not stood out nearly as dramatically at that time. I don't know it's provenance. but it surpasses the Classic 4-disc 45rpm version quite nicely (and in some places shames it) which I've always liked. it was as enjoyable a listening session as I can remember and I was just so full of joy afterwards.
tape will do that to you.
I only have 150 of these tapes, and i'll likely never have more than 200 of them. vinyl still dominates my listening time. but like a great expensive single malt once in a while it's great to sit back and 'go there'. |
The master tape usually refers to the 2 channel tape of the final mix, not the 24 track (or greater) tracking recordings. |
Even if you had a studio master tape you would likely be unable to play it unless of course you had a 24 track tape machine at your disposal. No one gets a studio master, are you kidding? This is the tape that Roger Waters, Nick Mason, David Gilmour and Rick Wright sat in the studio and listened to as they discussed the mix. |
Thats the problem, magnetic tape and other media degrade.
That's why archivists welcomed digital. But many masters had
to be restored before transfer to digital, and some were
beyond repair so they were transferred with the flaws.
I worked at the Library of Congress to setup the transfer of
different formats of analogue to digital tape (music, video,
film). Now they are using digital files for archive. |
How long do master tapes last? Doesn't oxidation cause deterioration? Are there still master tapes for classic albums of the 60s that can source DSD? |
I am a happy customer of this recording company. You can listen to samples at this link. Ultra Analogue RecordingsZd542
I don't think we are talking about the same situation here. I was thinking of masters from one of the big recording companies, like Sony, that have them locked in a vault somewhere. I didn't consider the possibly of getting masters from an individual or a smaller recording company. Speaking from personal and a couple of friends experiences; anyone that acquires a 15 IPS machine, develops the hunting skills necessary to find master tape dubs outside of small recording companies. Rcprince
Now whether you want your system to get you closer to the master tape, or to provide you an involving musical presentation, that's another question and another thread. In regards to the Ultra Analogue Recordings. They are very musical and involving. Some of the reasons behind this are explained by Roger Ginsley Studer Rep for Canada. He set up the machines for UAR. Roger Ginsely
"Initially we debated over using butterfly heads (0.75mm gap) versus the more standard 2mm stereo heads. We opted for butterfly as there is more recorded area used. This does have the slight drawback of more crosstalk between channels (they are closer together) but for classical recording this works out extremely well. There is far more `blending' between channels producing a wider and fatter result. Of course butterfly used for say rock recording would not be advise able as instruments panned hard left and hard right would tend to be dragged more towards the centre which would result in some clutter and lack of definition." |
"The term most of us use is Master dub and It is indeed possible to get them."
I don't think we are talking about the same situation here. I was thinking of masters from one of the big recording companies, like Sony, that have them locked in a vault somewhere. I didn't consider the possibly of getting masters from an individual or a smaller recording company. |
I have heard master tapes (1) from the NJ Symphony's recording engineer, Tim Martyn, in my system, (2) at a demonstration we held for the NJAS where we made a recording using three recording mediums, and (3) from Wilson Audio demonstrations where Peter McGrath brought some of his master files, in two cases digital files and in one case from analog tape, digital files and the Edison Cylinder(!). In those cases I did not hear the final product, but I also have been able to listen to the master tapes and the CDs of a couple of concerts that some of the choirs I sing in have made. I can say that there is a good deal of information in all areas that gets lost in the final product, as good as it may be. I'd also think that one of the reasons Wilson gets such good press at audio shows is the use of Mr. McGrath's master files, which truly sound superb.
Apart from that, though, I would think only true industry insiders or those who make their own recordings (John Atkinson, for example, in the reviewing ranks) have really had the chance to hear the master tapes of recordings that are available commercially.
Now whether you want your system to get you closer to the master tape, or to provide you an involving musical presentation, that's another question and another thread. |
As an ex taper of Grateful Dead concerts, I can tell you that the master was always the best. Every generation away created a loss in dynamics and clarity. There is great value in getting close to the master! |
You're right on that. There's no way an audiophile will be able to get their hands on a master tape. Maybe there's a rare exception, buy I've never heard of it. The term most of us use is Master dub and It is indeed possible to get them. Examples are The Tape Project, Yarlung Records and the German audiophile society. At one time all of them offered master dubs, perhaps some still do. I have tapes from each of these sources, some are extraordinary. |
The argument of the Master Tapes...a nice argument, but it is worthless when you don't have it. But stop, do your own...connect a mic to your Tape and sing "Mary had a little Lamb...." |
"I keep hearing the phrase closest to master tape. The fact that it is the closest thing to neutrality, and the best 'reference' that said who actually has master tapes?"
Are you talking about comparing the masters to other formats like cd and vinyl, or equipment? For example, does preamp A get you closer to the Master than preamp B.
"who can get their hands on them? how do you get them? Has anyone audiophile got proper access to them?
I ask this because people keep saying their system sounds like master tape of x or y recording, but is this simple bluff - ie is it just a journalistic phrase from those saying that what they have have heard is neutral? or is it a genuine comparison?"
You're right on that. There's no way an audiophile will be able to get their hands on a master tape. Maybe there's a rare exception, buy I've never heard of it. |
I would use the term "purity" when talking about a copy of a master. And a studio would not lend out a master tape; they would send a submaster or a clone. If someone is telling you he has a master, it's most likely going to be an exact duplicate (clone). Anyway, nowadays master tape is being transferred to digital files.
But we need to be specific; are we including analogue tapes that have been remastered to digital?
With digital masters (which are files), a studio can burn a copy, that in theory, is the same quality of the master.
So with a master tape, you are hearing the purity of the sound on the tape, however, at a show where music is being demoed, the coloration's of the system and the room will never match the original studio. |
Probably a bluff. You know, like "closest to live unamplified music." |
