Reel to reel

I know I'm repeating, but there is a good reason; while you don't need new caps all throughout the deck, they will greatly enhance your recordings if installed on "input" and "output". Get the best electrolytic capacitors available.

Inna:   Yes, it is!  It is near new in appearance and operation. Quite exceptional since it was built in 1986.  RE: tape transport.  Just my HO.  I have spent minimal time with the Otari and should reserve judgement.  I am awaiting a replacement integrated amp, (Decided toobs are not for me... back to solid state) which is arriving today.  Hope to spend more time with the MX in the coming weeks.  I may find I am mistaken.

orpheus10:  I believe I have confused you.  The Otari came with all documents, provided by Mr. Wall.  I have owned the 1506 for 35 years and all this time without an owners manual (or feet for that matter).  During the refurb, I will take the time to read and learn the significance of the Bias and Equalizations switches and how they relate to different tape types.  Appreciate the input.

Thank you Benjie, knowing the bias and EQ before I buy the tape gives me the consolation that I'll get good results.

Gusser, I'm glad you have the proper paper work, now you'll get the best results. That will help you enjoy your new deck even more.

clio09, thank you, appreciate it.
If that Otari is as good as it looks, the price is right. You don't save $1k when you go with higher end R2R deck. Technics transport is smoother than Otari ? Are you sure, that's unexpected ?

Orpheus10,
 I wish I could help but when I purchased my 1506 in '84 at a hole in the wall used hifi gear shop in Lawton, OK while in the army, the soldier selling it via the shop did not provide with feet, all 6 selector switch plastic covers were cracked and barely hanging on, and most importantly, it did not come with a manual.  I used Maxell UD-180 10.5" tape reels exclusively and I experimented with the positions of the bia and equalization switch positions.  Right or wrong, I left both on 1 at all time as it seemed to provide the best clarity for all frequencies.  Not very technical, I know, but all I can offer.  I'm glad Benjie was able to step in and provide the proper settings for your tape selection.

I now have the owners manual AND service manual in PDF form.  I'm sure will be quite knowledgeable about the deck I've owner for 35 years when I've complete the refurb.  Until, I will defer to others, like Benjiie, who are better informed. 
Good luck! 

Thank you for the kind words Uberwaltz.  Appreciated.  

orpheus106,082 posts04-07-2019 6:03pm
Gusser, I hope you can help me; I'm looking at page 9 of the RS-1506 operating instructions, where they have the bias, and equalization chart. I'm trying to translate this for new tape that's not listed.

This is the tape I'm purchasing;


        https://www.atrtape.com/products/mds-36-14-x-3600


Now I'm trying to figure what bias and equalization I set on the RS1506 for this tape?

Gusser.

That is one sweet looking deck!
Thank you for the link and information.

Enjoy it.

Gusser, I hope you can help me; I'm looking at page 9 of the RS-1506 operating instructions, where they have the bias, and equalization chart. I'm trying to translate this for new tape that's not listed.

This is the tape I'm purchasing;


        https://www.atrtape.com/products/mds-36-14-x-3600


Now I'm trying to figure what bias and equalization I set on the RS1506 for this tape?

Hi Orpheus10,

In all fairness, I really wasn’t planning on getting one, but even after being a tapehead (tapeheads.net...another forum one should check out for r2r stuff) for half a century, I wasn’t aware of the half track mode... always wondered what that 2trk 4trk switch was for on my RS1506, but was only interested in recording bands I was in or FM music. 4trk was all i needed.

The Otari brand kept coming up as a pro machine, even more than the technics, but in all fairness, the transport on the 1506 is smoother. It was just good timing that I was introduced to Mr. Walls as he was finishing my new pride and joy.

Another poster here on AG inquired and Mr. Wall gave me permission to give him his contact info. He had 3 Otari’s (not sure what models) doing final burn in the wings, soon to be posted on Reverb.... he now has two. :)

He also gave me permission to share his reverb webpage where I felt it was appropriate.

Mr. Walls does a detailed testing of all active and passive electronic components during his refurb. If a transistor, IC, (newer models) cap or diode is out of spec, he replaces it. Caps I believe are the weak link. Especially in the older R2R’s. I believe he mentions that in the details of the refurbishment of my deck, but check to be sure. .

I believe he does about 2 Otari’s a month. But delays in getting ordered replacement parts can slow things down a bit. As I mentioned, timing was everything for in this case, having the good fortune of finding such a clean example of this venerable deck nearing completion. Being an r2r enthusiast, I felt it was surely worth the cost of admission.

Happy hunting!

Gusser, I'm green with envy; hope he's got one for me.

I don't think refurb includes new capacitors; if not, they don't cost much, and they make a huge difference. "Nichicon" are very good. The price of the work would depend on the difficulty, but your reel would be closer to a new one.


Happy listening!

Addendum:  Here is a link to Reverb showing the original ad Professor audio posted.  I believe you may have to be a registered member of reverb to view "sold" items so the link may not work.  If that is the case, my apologies. 
FYI:  I had purchased the deck before it was listed.  You can read the description of the detailed work he did on my deck as well as look at the pictures showing the deck and all accessories he included as a package.  As I have not figured out how to post pics on the forum, please enjoy the pics in lieu of my posting the pics myself.  

https://reverb.com/item/16672128-otari-mx-5050bii2-reel-to-reel-mastering-tape-deck-fully-restored-museum-condition?show_sold=true

In the filters on the left hand side of the page, be sure "All" and "Sold Listings" are checked.  Enjoy.the read and the pics.  

After a lot of research, I just purchased a beautifully restored/refurbed Otari MX5050Bii2 from a gentleman known as Professor Audio on Reverb. His work is superb and the Otari now trumps my Technics RS1506 (needs a complete refurb including caps) and my consumer grade TEAC X-1000R in appearance, sound, and functionality. Mr. Walls also provides lifetime technical assistance when you purchase one of his Decks. In addition, he will take the time to talk you through a basic calibration if the need arises for your deck if you have the desire to learn how to DIY. He specializes in refurbishing and repairing Otari’s and is passionate about the brand, but he may have expertise with other brands as well. But he has been doing rtr repair and refurbishment for over 4 decades and certainly has the experience. If you need more info, please PM me. If there is a way to post pictures here, please tell me and I will post of few of the professional pictures he sent me upon completion of the deck before the sale.
If you reach out to him, tell him gusser recommended him via the AG forum. :)

@inna it would probably be beneficial to have someone close to you do any work on your deck if possible. Prior to my finding someone local to me who works on Paul Stubblebine's decks I bought a Pelican case for my Otari to protect it during shipping. It's important that the large power transformer remain secure because if it breaks off it will most likely result in additional internal damage. As far as recommendations, Soren Witt in Chicago serviced my Otari and I did my own upgrades using parts supplied by Athan Corporation. John French is great as well. For Revox I would suggest Arian Jansen from Sonorus Audio who has rebuilt/upgraded many an A-77 and B-77, and knows his way around Studer decks as well.

 @benjie how about it lol! I asked a couple questions in between and gone blown right past lmao! It’s all good though!

Anyone considering a R2R should first find out if they can get it worked on, should it need repair, and if parts are available.

If they're going to get it refurbished, ask about capacitors and transistors; they won't cost much more if the unit isn't too hard to work on.

Once all of that is done, you will have almost a new R2R for less than the original price, and cost a fraction of a new one.

The last few days have caused me to reorient my entire line of thinking; I had planned to upgrade my rig with a Koetsu Urushi cartridge and a Herron Phono pre when funds were available, but that's a lot of money.

Honestly folks, those funds may never be available, but now, I'm no longer lusting for those components because I found an audio equivalent; 15 IPS CD's, and the only expense is the tape.

No, this had absolutely nothing to do with any of the gear, someone else had the same problem, it was entirely do to the room acoustics; as a matter of fact, it took a lot of troubleshooting to discover the problem was "room acoustics". 

In reality, both channels were equal; it just sounded that way from the listening chair because of  unequal wall reflections, but on playback of the stronger signal, it was balanced again; the stronger signal overcame the bad room acoustics.

I had something similar happen to me recently... the right VU meters' signal was lower than the right.  Then I remember reading somewhere if you play a 1/2 track tape on a 1/4 track machine (in this case, my TEAC X-1000R) the right channels' track is slightly misaligned, thus not providing perfect centering of the track, resulting in less signal, although you can hear the music.  The tape was purchased used and had some choir music on it (quite well recorded I might add).  I believe I confirmed it was a 1/2 track recording as when I reversed playback direction, the recorded music was also playing reverse.  Am I correct in my assumptions?  Hope this helps.

I've just been listening and evaluating this morning: vinyl from computer hard drive, just fine. If you're not getting the same results, you're doing something wrong.

LP's recorded at 7.5 are good; the new thing is CD's recorded at 15 IPS; will order new tape.

Cleeds you're good, anytime I have a problem I'll give you a ring; but in the meantime I'll handle this.

According to my evaluation, although it's nice to have a reel to reel; if done right, your computer is a good substitute; however, this CD to tape at 15 IPS is flat out addicting.

orpheus10

Just a little while ago, I recorded "Trance Mission" ... During recording, the music sounded louder in the left channel; that's normal for my room, not good, but normal.

On playback, all was straightened out; the holographic sound stage was spread evenly across the rear wall.

Let me explain this; the louder left channel is because of the room acoustics, it has nothing to do with electronics; the very strong signal from the reel, straightened all that out, it overcame the bad room acoustics ...

It sounds like your tape deck is somehow misaligned or not properly calibrated. It works out well in your installation because of its unusual room acoustics, but those tapes aren't likely to sound good using headphones, or when played back in a more neutral acoustic environment.

Just a little while ago, I recorded "Trance Mission", Meanwhile; Meanwhile, is the title of the CD. It has cuts titled with names like "Chasing the Moon Rabbit". Instruments include didgerdoo, clarinets, percussion, winds and digital atmospherics.

Before I recorded, I demagnetized and cleaned the heads; my rubber rollers are relatively new. The signal was straight off the out of the Marantz CD player to the in of the reel.
The recording level was less than 2, any more and the needles went into the red; they were really popping at that level.

During recording, the music sounded louder in the left channel; that's normal for my room, not good, but normal.

On playback, all was straightened out; the holographic sound stage was spread evenly across the rear wall.

Let me explain this; the louder left channel is because of the room acoustics, it has nothing to do with electronics; the very strong signal from the reel, straightened all that out, it overcame the bad room acoustics, and delivered a "holographic" sound stage.



Think about it; when you buy a beautiful "Studer" that handles tape magnificently, it still has old capacitors and transistors; hopefully you at least buy new rubber rollers.

The same as in any analog rig; "The devil is in the details". Happy listening, and may the force be with you, and the wind in your sails.

johnss, do you know who can be trusted with decks to service them and make necessary upgrades ? Studer and Otari. I would see no reason to go with Technics. Maybe pro Sony and top Revox too.

Wynpalmer, while most would probably agree that Otari and Studer are better than my Technics RS1500; The results I'm getting must be due to the fact that I replaced all the electrolytic capacitors with "Black Gates" (this was before they stopped selling them) plus I replaced all the transistors with new ones from Panasonic.


Now that I've finished recording my favorite vinyl to 15 IPS tape, I'm starting on CD's; they turn out even better than LP's when you select the good one's; that's what I'm doing today. Once done, there isn't even the remotest hint of digital; it's pure analog.


Soon I will be enjoying the fruits of my labor, sorry you aren't getting the same results.

 I haven't read all of the posts in this thread, so my apologies for being redundant if I am being so, but I have to ask the question.
Other than for archival purposes why on earth would you wish to record vinyl onto tape? Sure, if you want to add head bump, head wear and poor calibration frequency response modifications, tape hiss, compression, harmonic distortion, and additional wow and flutter- it's just great.

I have a properly calibrated/maintained (and measured!) 1/4" 2 track Otari MX50 and my friend has a equally carefully maintained Studer A820 and they're both fine machines, but the degradation/alteration is obvious to me- even at 15IPS. By the way, the decks sound a bit different and I prefer the Otari (slightly) over the Studer and in blind tests my friend, reluctantly, agreed, even though in non-blind listening he declared the Studer was obviously better- confirmation bias is hard to control. Both machines are re-capped, but have stock opamps. Both are, indeed, very fine machines.

However, what I found better as an archival method was to use a really high quality ADC/DAC- such as the RME ADI-2 PRO FS. 
ABX and extended period AB blind testing that I have performed with friends has indicated that the resultant playback is indistinguishable from the original on a statistically significant basis, and no more than 24 bits/96kHz PCM seems to be required to maintain that statistical significance.
I was absolutely certain that this would not be the case, and until I actually went through the tests I would always say that the digital was inferior- but now, very reluctantly, I have to say I was wrong.
I've also digitally archived 15IPS tape masters- generally 3rd generation- such as Kind of Blue, Dark Side of the Moon, Elgar cello conc. with Dupre etc. and again, I and those who I have conducted a valid AB test with cannot tell the difference despite the initial certainty that we could.
The converter is comparable in cost to the tape deck and hard drives are much cheaper than tape.
I buy my SM468 tape from Splicit- it cost about $60 and gives me 2500 feet and a nice metal reel- and about 33mins of recording time.
Roughly the same price buys me a 2TB drive and at 33MB/min for 24/96kHz wav we're talking 1000hrs of recording or about 1500hrs with FLAC.

^^ +1

benjie

I go to your studio and record my music in your studio and I want it on analog tape ... I want to use that master tape that we just recorded to produce CD’s and vinyl albums because of the perceived richness this distortion produces. Since we are using the master tape with the distortion, would’n that distortion also transfer to the other media ...

Of course. And if you then use analog tape to record an LP or CD made from that analog master, you’ll be adding more of the distortion inherent to analog tape, however slight that may be.

On top of that, many consumer tape decks are not properly aligned and calibrated. If that’s the case, even more distortion may result, and some of that may be quite euphonic.

Remember, I’m not trashing tape here - I’m a tape and vinyl guy. But it is what it is.

Yes, I agree that the Technics 1200 is an average machine, competent but not extraordinary.  I liked it more than most machines from the 1970s and 1980s like Duals, Rotels, Miracords, BSRs, Garrards, etc.  It is a good test unit for universal use vinyl.

That piece of s... Technics with Grado is nothing really, DJ toy at best.

@inna

Yes- precisely the point. When mastering an LP you can't do it so that only the very best pickups will do the job. The groove you cut must be easily played on an average machine and the Technics is a pretty good 'average'.

Inna

I think you missed Ralph's point entirely on the usage of the Technics.......

Ralph, you keep self-advertising, and that's that. That piece of s... Technics with Grado is nothing really, DJ toy at best.

I am afraid that I just cannot agree with a blanket statement like that.

@uberwaltzYes, its all about provenance.
@benjie The 3rd harmonic in tape machines has to do with the nature of the record and playback heads, both being inductive devices. If a 2nd order shows up, its a sign that something is wrong with the machine.

benjie

Why does this distortion not exist in digital or analog LP recordings? What is unique about a R2R’s recording circuit that causes this to happen?

It’s not really the recording circuit that causes this distortion. I know that you may not want to hear this, but the distortion common to analog tape recording is a function of the nonlinearity of the tape itself. The use of bias increases linearity and - as you may know - is only applied during recording, not playback.

Magnetic tape is also challenged with high level (approaching 0 dB) HF. The use of EQ is a technique to improve that performance.

One way that I think there is great similarity between LP and analog tape is that both systems seem to have profound, although different, limitations ... on paper. In practice, they both can result in extraordinary performance. The experiences of tape users in this thread is an indicator of that.

Pre-recorded cassette tapes also were terrible, but if you recorded the cassettes at home off of the LPs, they sounded just fine

I am afraid that I just cannot agree with a blanket statement like that.

I have a LOT of pre recorded cassettes and find them to be just about as variable as vinyl, there are definitely clunkers but there are some really well done examples as well.

I have two different playback decks, a Nak and an Akai and both show the differences in quality of tapes fed through them.

Just my opinions and findings,nothing more.

atmasphere

When in record mode the primary distortion component of reel to reel (at 0 VU) is the 3rd harmonic, which the ear treats very much the same way as the 2nd; it adds 'richness'.

Yes, that's the euphonic distortion that I referred to, and which often explains some people's preference for analog tape.

Ralph, I don't fully trust your hearing and your neutrality and objectivity. Tape is overall superior to any LP pressing in real world. As for theoretical possibilities, I don't know, but there is always an issue of playback. Put $200k vinyl set-up against $25k Studer and the vinyl will lose big time, not just lose.

@inna , I run a recording studio with a number of tape machines as well as a Scully lathe equipped with a Westerex 3D cutter. My perspective is probably a bit different from yours. I play master tapes, dubs, cut lacquers and play them back on my system at home. Test pressings we get back are variable but its clear that QRP rules the roost with making the pressings with the lowest noise- a noise floor with which tape simply cannot compete. I can record 35KHz easily on LP, but can't do that on the tape machines. We use a Technics SL1200 with a Grado Gold for playback in the studio; any LP we cut has to be able to play back on a machine like that. So I don't agree at all that $200k vinyl playback can be bested by tape; a lowly Technics can beat tape easily. But it all has to do with provenance, which I apparently did not do a good job of explaining to @benjie 

atmasphere you seem to be talking out both sides of your mouth here. In earlier posts you praise the qualities of vinyl and the downfalls of tape. In response to my question about a master tape I have vs the vinyl album you now list all of the problems with vinyl and talk about how great tape is and how much you love tape. You seem to want to have it both ways to support your position....

....All of the quotes that I have listed in my previous posts which are directly from manufactures and magazine articles, you state them as "false". You know the saying, " You only know what you can show ". Well I am showing my evidence to support my position. All you are showing me is your opinion and ***a bunch of technical facts*** that really don’t mean anything in the real world of listening to music on a home stereo.

My position is, Analog tape is king!   Prove me wrong.

(emphasis added) 'Technical facts' are like other kinds of facts, things that are real. That is why we (and you) use the word 'fact'. Again, you are confusing provenance of individual media, construing it with **all** media of the same type. Its easy to find plenty of reel to reel recordings that really aren't that good! Not to say that they were bad, but a lot of pre-recorded reel to reel stuff done back in the 60s and 70s just wasn't up to snuff with the LPs of the same thing. But! If you were to get a dub of any of those recordings today on 15IPS you might find that it sounds excellent and better than the LP.


Pre-recorded cassette tapes also were terrible, but if you recorded the cassettes at home off of the LPs, they sounded just fine. 


The reason is *provenance*; where and how the individual example of the media came into being. I gave you facts about why the LP is a superior media in terms of noise floor, bandwidth and distortion, but at the same time gave you reasons why its often not realized. But one must not make the mistake of assuming that just because its often not realized that it therefore is inferior.

Anyone using 1/2" or 1" deck ? Big difference ?

Yes. When you hear what 1/2" brings to the table you won't want to go back to 1/4". BTW, 30i.p.s. has problems playing bass.
@cleeds 

That some here have noted some of the inherent limitations of tape doesn’t mean we think it’s "so flawed." As you stated, there is no perfect recording method.

When creating a newly remastered LP, it makes sense to start with the original analog master. No copy made from that master can be higher quality than the original. That’s not to say that you might not prefer a copy of the original, but it can’t contain musical information not present on the master.

^^ This +1

You may well be correct - but not necessarily. After all, the LP wasn’t made directly from the master tape, right? It would have to go through an RIAA EQ network, and almost certainly some amount of limiting or compression, if only to protect the cutter head.

LP does not need limiting or compression compared to tape. But it often gets used to reduce mastering costs. The head can be blown up by carelessness and limiting or compression has nothing to do with that.
@gusser

One of the reasons I gave away most of my cd's was the engineer who mixed the cd used either compression and/or did not allow the original mix to shine through.

CDs employ compression as there is an expectation they will be played in a car. Its an industry thing and part of why analog usually is more dynamic and interesting bycomparison.
@benjie 

I am sorry but I can’t go with you on this one. I have restored both of my R2R decks, Techincs RS-1500 2 track and Revox PR99 MkII. And I can say without a doubt that there is no "euphoric distortion" generating circuit in either deck. I don’t think the term existed 35 or 40 years ago.

When in record mode the primary distortion component of reel to reel (at 0 VU) is the 3rd harmonic, which the ear treats very much the same way as the 2nd; it adds 'richness'.
@inna 

Walter Davies of LAST, nice man by the way, said that he had used his own preservatives for all his reels and decks for many years.

Yes- very nice. He might still have a letter from me about the LAST head preservative I sent to him many years ago. I was doing an on-location recording and my machine had a worn head; I used LAST on the head to improve head wrap and it worked a charm- no loss of high frequencies and the recording was successful. Good stuff.

When you record good CD's to reel at 15 IPS, the playback is pure "analog". If you recorded a bad CD the playback would still be analog, but why bother, that's why I specified "good" CD's, once a bad CD, always a bad CD.

This transformation of CD's to fantastic analog is truly unbelievable, and I'm enjoying it to the hilt; as a matter of fact, I just ordered new tape.

BTW, good CD's recorded at 15 IPS sound fantastic on playback; they just sound like the most involving music I've ever heard.

I judge music by it's ability to transport me back in time; maybe even as far back as my first love in high school; music at 15 IPS does that for me.

Yeah. I talked to him couple of times thru emails, his reply was very friendly and so detailed that at some point I couldn't continue following him because he was getting into chemistry. He was also very straightforward.
We can't really talk much here about speakers but it is a huge subject. I believe that speakers should be both transducers and musical instruments, this might be a utopia to properly design them like that but I think it's the right direction. Instruments do sound different, take two good guitars, as an example. Not right or wrong, simply different, and they have every right to be that. So do equally good but different speakers. Ideally, signal that reaches the speakers should always be the same or at least very similar, and then you choose the preferred sound of your 'instrument' - speakers.
Another thing about playing vinyl is that it is very difficult to find best table/arm/cartridge/cable match
With tape deck and pre-recorded reels you will come closer to that ideal. Besides, think of the simplicity of the set-up - deck, power amp and speakers. And minimum cabling, not to mention that deck reacts less to wall current quality fluctuations than turntable and to external vibration. You should still deal with internal vibration, of course. Another reason to get a deck with the best transport you can find and afford. Electronics can be modified.
Anyway, vinyl can sound truly excellent, we are just talking about something even better, sometimes much better.

And what am I going to play on a nice Studer, my own recordings, or buy some $500 reissues?  Maybe you're very wealthy, but even my friends with $850,000 and $1,200,000 audio system/rooms don't play RR.  One is analog only and the other has digital only formats.  I listen to analog and digital formats.  I have limited mental abilities but use them to most educated extent.  So being forthright is a benefit using the knowledge that I have accumulated.  I'm constantly in doubt but have acclimated to my intellectual limitations.  I am constantly learning.  You must be a rich genius to know that a Studer is superior sounding to a Tandberg and a Technics.   I've heard Ampex 300s and Studer's in studios that I've appraised/recorded in and they can sound superb, but so can my inferior RRs.  

@inna, you are so right about Walt Davies. He had a hi-fi shop in the 70’s, and I bought my Revox A77 (which I still own!) from him. His Last products (for LP’s, styluses, CD’s, tapes, and recorders) are all excellent.

For a man with a suppressed ego you are quite bold, maybe you underestimate yourself. Anyway, please don't get personal. And you don't have a pro deck, maybe you should get one ? Just get a nice Studer and you will know the difference.

Cartridges that sound different does not mean wrong.  There are bigger differences in high end speakers $100,000+.  Solid state versus Tube, my Tandberg versus my Technics RR, an Ampex 300 versus a Revox or Teac RR.  They all sound significantly different.  I favored the Tandberg RR and cassette decks because of their full, warm sound and excellent S/N without Dolby.  However, I also want reliability so I'm using a Technics RR now and a Nakamichi 7 cassette deck.  
My enthusiasm hasn't shrunk and I'm not known for having a big ego, rather a suppressed ego.  Maybe your're the one with a big ego, RR over everything else.

After this thread just go read about guys comparing $10k cartridges and saying that they all sound quite different. Of course, they all sound different, it is different colorations. None of those cartridges sound right, that should be the point. The same with tables and arms.
But if they start thinking like that their enthusiasm will go down big time along with inflated egos.

LAST is easily bought directly from thelastfactory.com or from needledoctor.com and some others too, I think, like elusivedisc.com and musicdirect.com. I usually buy directly from Walter - he makes more money this way, price is always the same everywhere.

Thanks Benjie.

I see it at $35.

Sworn by it for my stylus, not sure why I never even thought about it for tape!

In regard to HI-Rez files, they're as good as the upper end of the cartridge, tonearm, TT thing; so therefore, if you do not have an "upper echelon" analog rig, the Hi-Rez will be better.

This 15 IPS thing has become addictive, I just might go completely 15 IPS; "Mo money, mo money,  always mo money"