Wow, I heard things on tape I never heard before


Today I attended a daylong seminar at ATR Services. The first half of the day was in a classroom environment that explained, in detail, the theory of magnetic recording, tape machines and the tape media formulations that are used.

Topics such as such as how the various brands of machines transfer information to magnetic tape, tape speed, bias frequency, tape formulations and tape drive designs all have an effect on the final result. After the theory discussions the floor was open to questions. The first one asked was " Why do you hear things on tape you don't hear on another format?"

The answer Mike Spitz gave was one I've never heard before and I'll pass it on to you for thought. If you have a mind to offer a reply, one way or the other, it will be interesting to hear YOUR thoughts.

The question was posed after a discussion on phase problems that develop when music is recorded with many microphones and passed through and processes by many digital boxes.

A drawing of the stylus in a record groove showed how the right and left channels are reproduced by left and right movement of the stylus. There is another movement of the stylus, vertical, that is the component of phase relationships. That movement doesn't have an effect on the left and right channels but is noticed on a tape recording and adds air that gives the music an effect that won't come across on an LP.

Have those of you that have the same selections on tape and vinyl noticed the sonic difference between the two. If so, what are your thoughts on the subject?

Ken
kftool

Showing 4 responses by normansizemore

Ken, isn't ATR essentially Ampex 456? Comparing the two, they seem to have the same color, smell (yeah, different brand smell differently..Scotch 206 makes me flash back, but that's another story) texture etc. They also seem to record the same. I have not had to reset my bias when using it as that is a pain on my consumer machines like the Pioneer (my personal favorite) Sony or ReVox. On the Crown it's a cake walk, but even there I don't notice a huge difference between the ATR and a Maxell UDXl.

Interesting story about Maxell and whale oil. I had never heard that before. There was a small studio in Indiana that used to mix down to Maxell tape. Almost all other's used Ampex, a few would use Scotch. I haven't tried the RMGI which I think uses the BASF formulas. So, it should be very good tape. I see that Quantegy is still offering professional 2" tape on there web site. Do you know if they are manufacturing again?
Thanks Ken.
Norman
I have never experienced that before, at least not when making copies of LP's to open reel. That doesn't seem to make sense to me. I would agree that even a second generation master tape is far superior to LP. I use 1/2 track machines running at 15ips (Crown sx822, Pioneer RT 1050, Revox B77). I will say (slightly off topic here) that when recording CD to open reel, the CD suddenly becomes listenable. Something wonderful happens, don't know what, but wonderful. Many of my favorite CD's that are not available in LP have been dubbed on open reel. The transformation is astounding.
Hello Ken, well you have me wishing I could afford an ATR machine and a Krell SACD player. I do agree, it takes the 'digital harshness' off the music. I too am selective. If I can find NOS maxell UDXL then I buy it. It comes up every now and then on ebay. Other than that ATR is a wonderful tape. I order mine through my local Guitar Center.
Here in Chicago, there are several small 'boutique' studios that are going straight analog. It's kinda cool seeing Refurbished Ampex, Crown and Studers doing what they do best. I love it.
Thanks for the great post.
Norman
Ken, and I thought I was knowledgeable. Thank you for the post and all of the great information. I am going to order a few ATR pancakes, as I have plenty of empty reels laying around.

Keep in touch.

Norman