Why no interest in reel to reel if you're looking for the ultimate sound?
Wondering why more people aren't into reel to reel if they're looking for the ultimate analog experience? I know title selection is limited and tapes are really expensive, but there are more good tapes available now than ever before. People refer to a recording as having "master tape quality", well you can actually hear that master tape sound through your own system and the point of entry to reel to reel is so much more affordable than getting into vinyl. Thoughts?
@scar972 In my main system downstairs, I have a Studer A820 1/2 inch and a 1/4 inch Otari MTR12 with a Dolby 363 NR unit, containing Dolby SR/ Dolby A cards.
In my study, I have the 2 R2R machines, which I could carry upstairs. I have a pair of Sony APR 5000 units (5003 & 5002) and a Studer A807/!! (all 1/4 inch) with another Dolby 363 SR/A unit.
I purchased a TEAC 1000R in 83 when I was in Germany in the Army. It has been stored since the 90’s. It is not that I didn’t like it, but I never used it. CD was the new kid on the block and I bought a nice Dbx player and built a collection. The few years that I did have the RTR in the system it was more for show. I had 3, six hour reels that I recorded and played back once or twice. The unit has well under 100 hours of total use, again at that time I was all in on CDs. One of these days I will dig it out of the closet and service it and prolly sell it to someone that will use it.
"As much as I can appreciate the best quality pure analog, today’s digital is so so-oooo good that I can’t spend $450 for the tape."
Indeed that would be true if the digital file is as good as the master tape. I can testify to that, having archived many 15IPS master tapes in my collection in a straight zero level transfer with a professional Prism Sound A2D converter. The digital file sounds pretty much indistinguishable.
The problem is that many modern digital files are not just transferred, but remastered from the tape, and are often made worse. This is particularly true if compression is added after the transfer to make the sound "better" on a phone, rather than on an audio system.
I agree that R2R is a great format. My 1980s recordings are really low noise and have the breath of real life. I have dozens of 1950s pre-recorded 2 and 4 track 7.5 ips tapes that are super dynamic and open sounding. I also have about 100 1960s 3.5 ips pre-recorded 4 track tapes that are okay, not great. Especially classical music where all sorts of shenanigans occurred (e.g. Bruckner Sym. 5 with Klemperer-the 4th movement has a sudden lower volume at tuttis versus the LP and CD versions). I suspect little effort to make the 3.5 ips tapes was done. Hiss is also prominent. The 7.5 ips 1960s tapes are pretty good and dynamic but mostly pop music. With over 500 pre-recorded cassettes, they do not sound wonderful to me on my Nakamichi ZX7, especially classical. My own non-Dolby recordings made on a Tandberg 310 sound wonderful played back on the ZX7 with very very faint hiss. Tape quality and live source makes a huge difference.
sdrsdrsdr134, I am so into R2R that I haven't posted on this thread in regard to R2R, but that was in response to "Raul" always commenting on distortion and noise.
I’ve been into R2R since that was the only option for serious home recorders. I still have my quarter-track Tandberg TD20A and half-track rebuilt Crown SX822. I use them mostly to listen to historic recordings, which should probably be digitized for posterity. Maybe some day I’ll get around to that.
For me, audio is not about trying to get the best sound, but about getting the best sound from recordings that you actually care about. Efforts from boutique labels such as The Tape Project can sound fantastic, but I can’t justify the price. As much as I can appreciate the best quality pure analog, today’s digital is so so-oooo good that I can’t spend $450 for the tape. YMMV.
Dear @scar972 : ""
I'm more satisfied with my vinyl setup now than ever before and it performs at a high level. ""
Good, but that does not means that that same analog rig can performs way better that what you have rigth now and I'm not talking because those are my " preferences " no I'm talking because I know for sure that that will be when you pull the trigger about.
Anyway, only an opinion, the important one is yours.
I got into R2R seriously about 6-7 years ago, after lots of help from a good friend Stewart Emmings, who sadly passed away from cancer at 49. Stew was the chief archivist and serviced all the vintage video tape and audio tape machines at the British Film Institute (BFI). He taught me how to line up and calibrate a machine and the equipment I needed. I don’t think you can truly get into R2R without learning this. The bare minimum you can get away with is at least 1 MRL test tape, a set of decent meters (I have a pair of PPM meters with mono-sum function for checking azimuth), test tones (wither a generator or a set of calibrated tones), as well as a demagnetiser, isopropyl alcohol (plus a different cleaner for the rubber) and swabs for cleaning heads and guides. An oscilloscope is helpful, and a proper testing unit (I have a Sound Technologies 1510A and an older Ferrograph RTS2/AU1 units) is a bonus. IMO, if you are seriously into tape i.e 15 IPS 2 track, then having 2 machines is almost a must - why? Every vintage 2 track master I buy has been around for at least 30+ years. Every tape I purchase is archived during its first play onto a) 24/192 digital using my Prism Sound Lyra 2, and b) new 15 IPS RTM SM900 or LPR90 tape stock with Dolby SR. The original is then stored and I use the next generation Dolby SR copy as my standard play tape. There is no way that I would consider using a vintage production master tape as my regular play tape. Finally I think that every tape should have test tones at the head of the tape - a 15/16 kHz tone to check azimuth (a 10 kHz will also be ok, although not quite as accurate), as well as something like 1k, 500 & 100 Hz. Every time I play a tape (either a newly purchased production master) or one of my own duplicates, I check that the levels and freq response are correct before I play the music.
Charlie
PS The importance of a high quality tape transport is also more important than the repro electronics IMO. Take a look at the chassis plates for a Studer A820 or A80 and see how rigid they are. Add in the precision guidance transport on the A820 or A80, as opposed to forced tape guidance on almost everything else, and you can see why the top Studers were so good. Remember you have to keep the tape running at precise speed with no deviation across the head, whilst minimising other problems like scrape flutter caused by all the surfaces the tape has to run over. The mechanical engineering on a high quality R2R is way more complex and expensive to manufacture than any turntable system.
Yes R2R is not cheap. Yes, R2R is not as reliable. Yes, the choices in this category are slim. Yes repairs can be expensive unless you can do them yourself. Yes, its what the professionals used. Yes the performance is superior.
These together are compelling reasons to stick with a more conventional format. Of course these are also the reasons most car enthusiasts never bought a 12 cylinder Ferrari in the 60s and most likely will never get to enjoy one.
@tomic601 +1 for the recommendation of Opus 3 sampler. I especially like volume 3, the first cut "House of Rising Sun" is worth the whole tape. Truly fantastic music and sound quality, highly recommended as a first purchase for tape newbie!
@rauliruegas I like the Sota mat and Basis Audio reflex clamp recommendation. Your ideas on how I can improve my quality levels are more or less your personal preference. I'm more satisfied with my vinyl setup now than ever before and it performs at a high level.
Dear @scar972 : I think that you can make some changes in your analog rig to improve the quality level of your analog experiences with.
As I posted that ZYX could be better served by a solid/gimball bearing tonearm as: Kuzma 4 point, Durand gimballed ( not the unipivoted. ), Reed, VPI gimballed or SME and Triplanar.
In the other side try that the LP stays in direct contact inside the TT with no metal type of mats. If you can try to find out the vintage/out of production Sota Mat that with out doubt is second to none in that place along the Basis Audio reflex clamp.
Thopse changes can gives you better quality overall performance levels.
My systyem main target is to put every kind of distortions / noises/resonances/etc at minimum and from this kind of way of think and no matters what I stay as far away I can from tube electronics ( any. ) that I experienced in the past till I learned.
your post is about what ’the ultimate’ tape can do. Interesting, however ’ultimate anything’ is probably not relevant for the majority of us.
I think it might give the wrong impression of how good R2R tape sounds without ’ultimate’ upgrades.
Without upgrades, played on a readily available ’prosumer’ tape player (i.e. Teac X1000R, other models and brands) readily available 4 track pre-recorded tapes: ...... easily ........sound better than my/your well set up LP system.
btw, 3-3/4 ips was not a standard of the next era as someone might think reading your text.. 7-1/2" ips was the existing standard consumer speed, 2 track, and 4 track. 3-3/4" ips was the ’added’ alternate cheaper version (only half the tape needed, lighter shipping, ...) Each album had 7-1/2 ips and 3-3/4 ips versions. Look on eBay, a ton of 7-1/2 ips pre-recorded tapes exist along side the 3-3/4 ips versions. Then as now, price differences exist. The masses go for compromise as you know.
A few have had bad results, there are exceptions, but once again:
The MAJORITY of 50-60 year old pre-recorded tapes sound great. I repeat from my prior post: I bought over 500 R2R tapes, every one offered returns, I never had to return a single one. Some, like any format, disappointed in content when listened to, yes. Some great engineering choices, other’s, like any format, not great. ALL 7-1/2 ips sound better than my matching LP versions.
And, I sold 150 of mine years later, 148 customers quite pleased, 1 box smashed en-route, 1 customer got ’low volume’ when he played it, who knows why, refund, no questions asked, keep the tape.. I gave each tape a farewell listen, added leaders, added return strips,
To get into R2R without spending a lot of money, buy deck and tapes returns accepted only, and my advice remains: be handy enough to do the mechanical work on the player yourself, or, have a shop near enough to drive to for that so no packaging/shipping in/out time/cost/damage potential is involved.
@rauliruegas I'm glad you enjoy vinyl as much as you do and own 6K+ LP's, that's a lot more than what I have for sure. You may not be looking for an analog alternative but this post might pique someone else's interest, or at the least brings awareness to an analog medium that MAY be superior to vinyl but gets very little attention on these boards. Ten years ago, I may have heard of R2R, but never knew it was any good until it was mentioned again in other forums and I got to experience it for myself. Thought you should know, I too enjoy analog as digital and agree with you that digital can sound fantastic. You may have missed it glancing through my system, but my DAC and disc player is listed in there as well as my MacBook pictured sitting on top of the D'Agostino amp with over 5 terabytes of music to play with. As for my vinyl setup, if you have a better approach for how I could improve it, I'm all ears and would appreciate learning a thing or two.
Dear @scar972 : First, even that I own 6k+ LP's I'm not looking for the ultimaTE ANALOG ALTERNATIVE.
I'm looking for the ultimate MUSIC enjoyment. My system is a good system with very high resolution and with every kind of distortions at minimum.
I enjoy analog as digital too and today digital alternative is hard to beat even by R2R and we can find out almost any recording through digital mediums.
I can see that you do not own digital audio items and that in the LP analog alternative your best cartridge is mounted in tha Moerch unstable tonearm, not the best approach.
... I have never released a vinyl record (since my band in the 80s,
anyways), so I don't even know if mastering plants have the capability
to cut from an analogue tape.
I was thinking about this recently, when I came across an ad for a Revox reel to reel.
Recently, some of my LPs have sounded like I was in the studio, listening to the master tape. That liquidy but crisp high frequency sound, with a climate- and acoustic-controlled environment. Everything wet and dry at the same time (I am getting nostalgic for those long ago days in the 80s and 90s, spent laying viola tracks in professional studios).
But then there was one particular L.P. that I realized, I liked better when it sounded like a record! Can't remember which one it was.
Vinyl has a sound all its own. Yeah, some call it distortion, and while that may be technically true, the inherent negative connotations of that word make it not quite appropriate.
If I could acquire my favourite 25 or so recordings on tape, without breaking the bank, I woukd seriously consider getting a tape deck. Partially because I would like to record my piano quartet's next release as an all-analogue production, from beginning to end. But I have never released a vinyl record (since my band in the 80s, anyways), so I don't even know if mastering plants have the capability to cut from an analogue tape.
A clean RtR tape blows away any other version- premium LP remaster, SACD, 24/96 download. Miles Davis- Sketches of Spain, Dave Brubek- Take 5, Stan Getz-Gilberto, Stan Getz- Focus, and so on. These tapes are PHENOMENAL !
All of those great LPs recorded pre 1985 were recorded on RtR decks. In the 80's we discovered that original master tapes contained much more information than was pressed into original LP grooves. In fact we discovered that many classic, indeed cherished records were compromised to allow home playback on crude record changers. Bass was cut below 75-80hz, then a 125hz bump was added, and HF was rolled off above 12khz. (The conundrum was some of the new remasters were essentially what was on the tape with minimal editing, and the resulting LPs sounded so much different than what we were used to hearing. Subsequent remasters were made to sound closer to the original LP so the new pressing became a better version of what was familiar.)
If one wants true fidelity from back back in the golden era- well at least to the early/mid 80's than prerecorded RtR tapes can deliver a better sonic experience then most LP pressings. Caveat is to seek only 7.5ips tapes and avoid anything at 3.75ips.
I have a restored Teac X2000r deck, and I have direct experience in how wonderful a clean RtR tape can sound. I recently acquired an original Broadway cast recording of West Side Story, recorded at 7.5ips. WOW ! I am literally sitting 10th row dead center and transported back to 1958. A clean RtR tape blows away any other version- premium LP remaster, SACD, 24/96 download. Miles Davis- Sketches of Spain, Dave Brubek- Take 5, Stan Getz-Gilberto, Stan Getz- Focus, and so on. These tapes are PHENOMENAL !
I was lucky in acquiring my deck. I found a lightly used example with full wooden case, rolling rack, flawless mouse ears. I was able to resell the case and rack to pay for restoration by Sam Palermo.
RtR is not industry supported and it is not easy for hipsters to acquire RtR decks then quickly use them in their hipster caves with their hipster hoodie buddies. There is time, effort and cost involved; much more than LPs which can be found for pennies and TT which can be found by the thousands at garage sales.
Commercial reel to reel tapes sound truly horrible. I recently bought a few dozen, and they are much worse than I remembered. I guess it is because I am now comparing them to something other than how they sounded on my old 1970's system, and then they did not come close to D to D. That is why the best RtR's were bypassed to make D to D LP's. Instead of investing in this format, go to a concert or jazz club. To me, buying into RtoR is as senseless as buying a Ferrari as an investment, and being unable to use it, except on very rare occasions. Things are made to enjoy. Investments are something else.
for anyone who has a teac 1/4 tack deck, especially the earlier A series, its pretty simple to re-route the tape head signal. if you remove the head cover, there is a PCB directly under it. unsolder the wires leaving that PCB and solder in some Mogami shielded console wire. the mogami is thin enough you can maintain the stock appearance of the Teac deck, and route the cabling out the back side of the deck where you can connect to outboard playback electronics. and you dont need to spend mulit kilo bucks to do so.
also if some want 1/4 track playback heads on their 1/2 track deck, contact JRF. he will tell you if there is enough room to add the 1/4 track head.
Have an Otari MTR-15 which is 4 speed half track only, but had JRF add a quarter track head to head block and now can play 1/4 track tapes on that deck.
Howdy, I recently scored a beautiful SonoruS Audio modified ReVox PR99 MKI R2R deck. It is a 2-track machine and runs at 15 ips. I am absolutely floored by its sound. So quiet and so beefy and full sounding music from tapes. I also own a nice vinyl rig and the Sheffield Lab D2D of Dave Grusin - Discovered Again which to me is a damn fine sounding slab of vinyl! R2R still beats it though. Tapes are out there and yes a little more expensive, but darn well worth it. I play people my Steely Dan - Gaucho 15 ips Sonorus Holographic Imaging tape and their jaw literally drops. Highly recommended!
I would like to state a few facts for R2R, firstly just like anything else it cost a little to get started. Once you have gotten your foot in the door it gets better. Ok you have your machine it’s tuned up and ready to go, you buy a few tapes to get started. You start to meet others who are into tape and you begin to swap tape copies with each other, this is how you get around having to buy all the tapes you like at high dollar prices. Before you know it you have 30 or so really nice sounding tapes, now truthfully how many of you listen to more than about 30 of your LP collection on a regular basis??? I have 1000 albums but find myself for the most part listening to the same 20-30 all the time. So why not have those 20-30 albums on tape? This is how I have gone down that road and the more of us that do this the better it gets for all, just my opinion...
Or you could skip all the hassle and expense and go with a portable cassette player and some good headphones. Nothing wrong with them apples 🍎 in these stressful, cash strapped times. Just about the time cassettes stopped production they had figured out how to make fantastic sounding cassettes. Tape is a natural medium. It breathes.
There are really three different important reel to reel tape eras. The first one consists of the prerecorded stereo tapes from the 1950s and 60s. The best were the 7.5 inch per second (ips) two track tapes produced by RCA, Mercury and Capital and other lesser labels. They were expensive at the time costing as much as 5 times more than an LP. Some reel to reel machines at the time were made by German and Swiss companies. I remember that one audiophile machine was sold under the Fisher label. Of course Ampex was the gold standard, but it was really a commercial unit with tube electronics. Ampex machines were often used to produce 30ips master tapes, particularly the RCA Living Stereo line. Mercury modified a commercial movie projector and used 35mm film coated with magnetic particles to record masters for their prerecorded Living Presence tapes.
In the 1960s, the Swiss-German Revox brand became popular with its transistor electronics. However, early transistor products were rather harsh sounding compared to tubed ones. Later, when cheaper 4 track 3.75 ips tapes became the norm, solid state Japanese machines like Technics and Pioneer were in vogue. Still, I feel that Revox made some of the best sounding transistor decks with their A77 and B77 lineup. While they may have been among the best, none of these decks were really high end because I have bypassed their playback electronics with outboard tape head preamps. This elevates the sound of prerecorded tapes, in particular those old 2 track, 7.5 ips ones, to audiophile levels which rival or surpass LPs. A few commercial 15 ips prerecorded tapes were made which are particuarly spectacular.
The next revolution came when people realized that the studios sent what they called recording master tapes to their LP stamping plants. These were 15 ips, 2 track tapes which sometimes used Dolby A encoding and decoding to reduce tape hiss. While the studios wanted the LP plants to destroy these tapes after pressing the records, some did not and they started showing up for sale for more than $1000 per reel and an LP would usually require 2 reels per album. These tapes sounded their best on the vintage Ampex machines, but by that time in the 70s and 80s, the tube electronics in the Ampex units had deteriorated to the point where they had to be rebuilt or bypassed with outboard playback preamps and the tape heads needed to be replaced. David Manley was particularly involved in demonstrating these tapes at hifi shows using his own rebuilt Ampex tape deck.
The third revolution started a few years ago. There are now a few companies rebuilding Technics and other tape decks with state of the art heads and electronics. These decks are expensive, costing in the thousands. While they can play the best prerecorded tapes from the 50s and 60s, those tapes are rare and many have deteriorated by shedding their metal oxide coatings and they have weakened tape substrates which can stretch and break. So, a new industry has begun to make what would have been called LP recording masters. They are second generations of real time copies of the original recordings. Since the irreplaceable originals from 50s and 60s are so fragile and valuable, a copy is made to use for subsequent copies made in real time, usually at 15ips. This process is so time consuming and expensive that the tapes sell for $300 and up per reel. There are also some prerecorded commercial tapes of contemporary artists. So, the audiophile tape saga which began in the 1950s is being repeated with better solid state decks and higher quality prerecorded tapes. Try to hear some of these systems at hifi shows. I think you will be impressed.
R-T-R has another annoying limitation -the rarity of machines with TWO playback heads, one for 1/4 track tapes, and one for half-track. My excitement over the Tape Project was diminished due to the prices for fancy boxes and 15ips-only IEC-only half-track tape. I was able to get a hold of one issue someone wanted to sell. The entire 40 minute album was on TWO reels which of course had to be rewound first and played back for 20 minutes each. I even ASKED them if they would "consider a consumer-line" cutting back on the packaging and offer 7.5IPS-NAB on ONE reel which still would have sounded excellent and would have cost much less money. For the less-fussy folks with a good machine at home. They were very "put off" by my suggestion, never mind thinking about all the qtr-track TEACS on the market. There's a word for that attitude which I will refrain from using here. If you're completely devoted to 15- even 30 IPS tapes- 1/2 inch and ONE-INCH tapes and outboard preamps, then you are either a technician or an engineer- or your best friend is. David Wilson had a superb Studer at his studio with all-custom built electronics; Mark Levinson customized a Studer-A80 which you can find for sale every few years, and with the proper ancillaries make mind-blowing live recordings if you can hire musicians to come and perform. OR... you can have a nice Teac, Technics, or a Revox which will do a lot of things but not what certain companies will support. It seems like people are actually trying to discourage you from enjoying using your (well-cared for) deck. It really is a shame. P.S.- I have an Otari MX-55N WITH two playback heads. And I believe there exists somewhere a Studer A-810 with two playback heads. BUT try to find one...!
I have three working Revoxes (A’s & B’s) and an A700 project, which looks like it’s going to remain a project. My pre does not have a remote.
The R’s maintain their settings pretty well, especially when you replace those dirt cheap pots. It’s not very hard to set if you have a spectrum analyzer with a white noise generator. But it's true that my listening room is pretty clean.
You guys crack me up. Sure, RTR sounds great, when it does. But what does it take to get there? Lots of work, parts and mostly $$$. It's like golf - it's supposed to be fun. Until the day you realize that you will probably never get to your performance goal.
I spent years installing and later selling RTR decks to studios and rich celebs.
IMO RTR is just waaaay too much work for the average audiophile, to set up but more to maintain And pro/semi pro RTR decks require a lot of routine maintenance. And no one has mentioned yet thew air filtration system you will want for whatever room your RTR is located. Dust/dirt/pet hair are sure fire killers of tape decks.
Check out YouTube “Garrard 301 vs Studer”. Best audio quality of any YouTube I have heard. As good as the 301 sounds when the Studer comes on you don’t want it to leave! But, for sure, tape is a rich man’s game. But it sure is amazing!
I have read that this is a tape pre head amp input and not just a labelled line input. It is also labeled tape head and not tape input. It is also positioned along with the mm input. I think the Marantz 7 preamp might have this too. Watch the “PNWAS tape meeting with Ki Choi” on YouTube. He talks of this.
Every vintage preamp I ever used had tape input RCA pairs. These RCA pairs were not connected to an internal a head amp, but were line level inputs. The purpose of labelling these line level RCA pairs seems to have been to correspond to the notations on the selector.
A head amp has a similar function to the phono section, (that is, it has to amplify and shape a tiny signal). As such, it is a highly specialized piece, but one which was never close to as common as phono. That is why it was usually part of the tape deck.
@sdrsdrsdr Apparently they did have direct output option back then, according to deHavilland Audio's website: "
Some machines such as the TEAC 7030 and 6010 have direct play head outputs" http://www.dehavillandhifi.com/222_Tape_Preamp.htm
I have a Mcintosh mx100z preamp. It has a tape head input. I assume this could be used. But I’m confused as what it was meant for in its day. Were people going direct out of their decks back in the 60’s. And did they have direct output option back then?
I love on vinyl occasionally hearing the short, faint, ghost section of a tune right before the real section starts playing, caused by the tightly wound master tape imprinting itself onto the next layer.
The Modjeski quote reveals why his Music Reference amplifiers are so trouble and maintenance free, unlike many of the more well-known and owned tube brands. RM was doing repair work in a shop while still in High School, and learned how NOT to build an amp.
Very high cost plus very limited selection makes the firmst, however technically desirable, of very limited value. I’d rather have a huge selection in perfectly good fidelity at much lower cost. It’s about the music! If I can get into a tune playing on my car radio, I can live without the cost and selection compromises of RTR
Bottle head DIY has pretty much all the info you might need on bypass of head electronics on the deck and can often result in a dramatic improvement as cited above
@pch300 you missed the point I was trying to make, or I did a very poor job of describing it The point was not to record your LP to tape,and A-B against the LP, the point was to compare the commercially released LP, played back through a high end table and phono stage, and compare to same commercially released 7.5 ips tape played back through a reworked deck with high end tape playback electronics (not the high neg feedback electronics that all tape decks have). And secondly, we are not talking 15ips master dubs. We are talking about the the tape releases made by ampex, united stereo tape, and others back in the day. if you A-B the LP on a high end table and phono pre to the tape on a reworked deck and high end tape playback electronics, not always, but usually the tape is much better, more open, more dynamic, greater imaging, etc . for those interested, its not hard to modify a phono play back circuit. The RIAA curve has 3 time constants to make the curve, the NAB and IEC curve have two. Its usually about 5 bucks worth of caps and resistors and presto, you have a tape playback preamp...... and if you are really on a limited budget, you can pick up one of the EAR or Marantz 7 tube clone phono stages from china for under 500 bucks, and use that as your tape plackback eq. you do not need to spend multi-kilo bucks unless you want to go all out on tape playback, no different than going all out on LP playback or hi rez, digital file playback. .. hope this helps.
I've had the same experience with Studer-ReVox, they are excellent machines but they all likely need some work especially replacing those Frako capacitors. I've tried to recap a Revox B-77 before and their PCB board is very prone to trace lifting, I recommend leaving the Studer-Revox to professionals. The Otari and Tascam I originally recommended are a lot more reliable. This is coming from a Studer owner.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
