If tape is so good why does it record so poorly?

[Kingrex]

I have listened to 5 or so tapes in the last week. 30 or more records. There is a house sound to my equipment. It does not take a highly refined ear to recognise it.

I may at some time record a song off a record. But thats what started this whole thread. A tape copy of CD. See post 1.

 

[Alrainbow]

I have listened to 5 or so tapes in the last week. 30 or more records. There is a house sound to my equipment. It does not take a highly refined ear to recognise it.

I may at some time record a song off a record. But thats what started this whole thread. A tape copy of CD. See post 1.

I have done that it’s more complex then just record a tape and playback to understand the house sound
in osrt it’s your pre amp and phono pre I think first but all in the chain counts

explain house sound ?

 

[adrianywu]

In my system the vinyl has a touch of cupped sound in the midrange when compared to tape. And the resolution is not near the same. On Vinyl, guitars might stand out and stand up. They capture your attention and seem to have detail up the wazoo. The tape blends those guitars into the performance while delivering a much more precise recreation of the harmonic structure that fills out the music. Its not added detail. Detail is never added in a step back generation. Its detail that is there you don't realize on the vinyl.

My analog productions 45 rpm Cat Stevens Tea for the Tillerman for example. Where Do The Children Play. I like this album alot. I also have original pressings. When I found a first Generation 1/2" copy of the master tape, Island ILPS9135 I bought it. There is no question the tape is far more engaging. it is very different to listen too. It reminds me of when I heard Mikes Led Zeppelin. It pours forth information. There is so much more to listen for because all if it is intelligible. Some of the detail I feel is missing on the vinyl might be there. But you have to focus for it. It requires attention to hear it. With the tape its just there, and it makes much more sense a whole for it to be there. Its sensed as missing in the vinyl. What caught my attention in this song was a very subtle guitar note that is more a chord harmonic note that is so delicately touched after the primary note, I never heard it before. Not until I was playing my tape. It probably is in the vinyl, but as I played the tape today, it was a holly XhiX that's amazing realization. It is very clean and easy to digest and recognized.

That is why I say the vinyl has a little cupped midrange. Its like it highlighting. Trying to hard to resolve. Part of that resolution is dynamics. I think my vinyl is presenting a tad to much contrived dynamics. But I could also say, while the tape has enormous scale, its speed does not seem as fast as the vinyl. That speed for me is interpreted as a midrange bump. And it is delightful. But in the end, your giving up way to much balance and overall, well blended detail to reach for it. In all honesty I wish a tad more speed came with the tape. At least in my system, tape presents much different than vinyl. And it is perceived on many levels as much better. It does lack a touch of speed that would be a nice add.

My experiences is very similar to yours. I have about 300 reels of master tape copies, mostly 1:1 copies direct from production or safety masters done professionally. It is unfair to compare master tape to vinyl, since vinyl is a commercial product, and the tape is the means to produce that product. They have different purposes. The 15ips 1/4" tape just simply contains a lot more data than an LP, even at 45rpm. The warmth from the head bump etc. would still be there if an LP was cut from a recording originally made on tape, so it should not make any difference. It is the subtraction of information when the music was put on vinyl that makes the difference, as well as the unavoidable distortion coming from the mechanical nature of LP production/playback. What you said is very true, music played from a tape does not bring attention to itself. It is the only medium that ever gives me the illusion that I am listening to live music. It has a scale, fidelity of tone and density of sound that approach that of a real music event. I am using the same phono preamp model (Vacuum State RTP-3C) for the tape head and for my phono cartridge. I built the first one with point to point wiring, which I modified for IEC/CCIR Eq, and my second one is built on PCBs but with the same circuit and upgraded components, which I am using for vinyl. Of course, my tape machine (Nagra T Audio) was state of the art at its time (and still is), but my Vinyl playback is very modest (Classic Turntable 301, Bokrand AB309/SME 3012, Ikeda 9TT) by high end standards. I have no desire to put in more resources for my vinyl and digital playback, and I am in fact culling my LPs, selling off those titles that I have on tape. The difference is just too great in most instances that there is no point in keeping the LPs.

 

[Kingrex]

I have done that it’s more complex then just record a tape and playback to understand the house sound
in osrt it’s your pre amp and phono pre I think first but all in the chain counts

explain house sound ?

I think I can close the gap or change my vinyl house sound with a better stand, a new phono pre and cartridge. Probably a $12K investment if I went with the RADA.

My vinyl house sound is a very suble paper cup sound in the midrange. It highlights guitars, horns and vocals. Its pleasant in a way. It does veil a little . Finer details are getting buried or the Hana ML/Allnic H1201 are not capable of retrieving them, or they are not on the media in the same measure as on the tape.

The tape house sound is a little less staccato and pop. Its smoother.

Tape is massive in scale rising and falling in overall intensity much greater than the vinyl. Classical tapes in quiet passages have all the taps, clicks, throat clearing going on in the hall. It goes from very quiet with clear articulate detail to massive orchestral output.

The tape is dense in information. As Adrian says, it takes you closer to live. I do hear the tape hiss at high volumes. You would expect it to cover other information, but oddly it makes subtle notes more present. I have no idea how or why.

I am not in any way saying I would ditch my vinyl. In the last week I have teared twice. Once with a tape of Cat Stevens. The other time with a vinyl if the Gypsie Kings.

 

[morricab]

I have listened to 5 or so tapes in the last week. 30 or more records. There is a house sound to my equipment. It does not take a highly refined ear to recognise it.

I may at some time record a song off a record. But thats what started this whole thread. A tape copy of CD. See post 1.

The only tape machine I have heard with almost no “house sound” was a Nskamichi ZX-9. We recorded,as Carlos suggested, both vinyl and digital and it was very difficult to tell the tape recordings from the originals.

 

[Kingrex]

I almost got a ZX7 a few times. I think Tim is a master of tape machines with all his history. I am hoping his double speed BX300 does the trick. He might get into that project very soon. It sounds like they will make about 30. I would put in an order.

 

[DasguteOhr]

The only tape machine I have heard with almost no “house sound” was a Nskamichi ZX-9. We recorded,as Carlos suggested, both vinyl and digital and it was very difficult to tell the tape recordings from the originals.

This is great tape machine tandberg tcd 3004 sounds amazing built completely discrete no opamp in the signal path.with metal tape like reel2reel machine.

Wish i had buy years ago...

 

[Kingrex]

Metal tape is the real catch. There is high bios CR02 tape. I have 30 or so blanks. But there is no true metal tape out there. I actually have 1, that I got way back and recorded something on it. I have scoured ebay from time to time. Its even hard to get 1/4" tape.

 

[Atmasphere]

In my system the vinyl has a touch of cupped sound in the midrange when compared to tape. And the resolution is not near the same.

Vinyl is considerably more transparent (lower distortion) and wider bandwidth than tape. But there are usually more generations between the final LP and the master and often less between some of the reissue tapes and the master- and that can have an enormous difference!

 

[Kingrex]

I played more tapes yesterday. Some of my classical are very fast with crisp speed. The media really makes a difference.

 

[Walter66]

I've been re-starting with compact cassette approx. one decade ago. Had some Studer/Revox Models and could audition the differences in sound quality between those models and even the cassette types and manufacturers. It was audible what character a true chrome like BASF had and which was the difference to asian pseudo- chromes. Had some different metal tapes, too.

Many of them were noisy as hell, much more noise than an excellent chrome. I don't talk about the cheap ferro or rare fe-cr types. The first type is noisy and the other is too rare to be used daily.
But when I tried out my first R2R, a simple Revox A77 and compared the sound with compact cassette, this chapter was over for me.
Sold my decks (much to early, today they have doubled in value) and got rid of those 500 cassettes.

Just because this was the first time, a tape recording sounded as I wanted it to sound. Big, deep, creamy sound, not like the always thin sounding CC decks. It is said that Willy Studer didn't liked CC. It was very clear to me from that point onwards, why. Its not about the frequency range, that may be as good. Its just for the better sonics, the more energy which can be stored on broader tapes (I only use two track, never four track) with faster speed. This is, where CC sucks.

Some people on forums often spread the word "I can't hear a difference between the recording and the original". Thats bullshit. Or something just people with mediocre sounding analog audio systems experience. Everyone who has a high definition, high resolution system that is capable of transporting energy (!) into the room and not just reproduce the whole frequency range can hear the difference.

But many people think they have highend gear at home and aren't being able to hear the difference between source and tape recording.
I hear it even with a Studer R2R or a Revox, but now it doesn't make me feel bad, because the sound is a little different, but still as rich, full and deep sounding like an analog LP record as the source. And maybe even better sounding compared to a digital source, some people say they favor the analog R2R recording of a digital source when listening to both. Well, that may be true, the effect is there. You cannot record on any medium, and the sound is still the same.

That's what I experienced many years ago with digital recordings on blank CD's from an original CD. The copy sounded different. Not that much in difference that an analog copy shows, but enough to make notice about it with the trained ear.

So every copy of any source, digital or analog is a loss in quality, but with R2R it doesn't bother me any longer. My Studer is much better than the Revox A77 though, but both degrade CC to what it always was: a cheap format for the masses with very small analog tracks and a very low speed, too low to compare with better formats, too small to compare even to the infamous Elcaset, which was a Frankenstein format between R2R and CC.

I have deep respect for the evolution of the CC in terms of sound quality and tape materials, but the format was ill fated from the beginning.
Too low were the standards for its speed and track width, once I read it was intended as a format for speech steno purposes.

Only later some people saw the chance with better tape materials to record music, too. Maybe that was possible, technically speaking, but like Willy Studer thought, its not as good as R2R and it wasn't satisfactory for me, too. Love R2R and recording, long may it live in the future.

 

[Kingrex]

I am going to try the double speed cassette, but I fear what you say. I don't find any of the production 7.5" ips tapes I have to be very good. Nothing like a 15 ips master. But therein may lie a lot of the reason. The masters are masters. The 7.5 ips is probably a dupe of a dupe. And both dups were done to my Otari 5050. I am quite confident the production tape itself was done on an Otari. My Otari did not play all that well till I got an external preamp with the head wired out. That was dramatic. So if a master went through 2 iteration on my machine, it lost the magic right there.

This CC will have modified record and playback electronics and be biased specifically for the Maxell XLII90 CrO2 tapes. I think it has a chance of doing well. I wish he were able to wire the heads in parallel and double the track width too.

I have a few cc I made from a Duel table to a Kyocera deck. I found my stash of tapes a year back. They suck compared to anything. Streaming spotify included. I have reaervations. But the guy making the UHA decks is making the Nakamici deck, so I have hope there.

 

[ddk]

This is great tape machine tandberg tcd 3004 sounds amazing built completely discrete no opamp in the signal path.with metal tape like reel2reel machine.

Wish i had buy years ago...

Beautiful machine, and I love it but don't forget how crappy cassettes are !

david

 

[Walter66]

Prices for used or NOS Metal Vertex cassettes are much higher compared to new R2R prices.
This may be just good for nostalgia reasons, is there any manufacturer who still produces metal type tapes?

 

[Kingrex]

Prices for used or NOS Metal Vertex cassettes are much higher compared to new R2R prices.
This may be just good for nostalgia reasons, is there any manufacturer who still produces metal type tapes?

I won't use a metal cassette. To much money. Cassette are so much easier to load and use than R2R. Its something to try.
Are R2R even metal. I don't see anything on the Recording the Masters website.

 

[Atmasphere]

For those that want tape (including cassettes) see ATR Magnetics

 

[Walter66]

Metal tapes have only existed in CC. Almost all R2R is ferro type. For a short period, there were companies who tried to extend their portfolio in reel tapes to chrome types, that was called "EE (Extra Energy)" by Maxell but they are as rare and had no success in the market as the FeCr types in cassettes.

 

[Kingrex]

For those that want tape (including cassettes) see ATR Magnetics

Good to know. How does one understand what tapes are best for what work. Like, what 10.5" tape is for duplication of a tape. What is for recording off a mixing board etc. Thanks

 

[Bruce B]

Good to know. How does one understand what tapes are best for what work. Like, what 10.5" tape is for duplication of a tape. What is for recording off a mixing board etc. Thanks

I exclusively use RTM SM900 tape... have for the past 10 or so years...

 

[Walter66]

There is studio R2R and there is amateur R2R tape. The difference is in thickness of the layer of magnetic coating and the thickness of the base material polyester or PVC. The studio machines most often run high speed recording with 15 ips on powerfull motor machines. That needs a thicker base material compared to the weaker motors and slower speed recordings of amateur machines.
Even the magnetic layers are thicker on SM (Studio) tape compared to the thinner layers of amateur long playing tapes (for example the famous LPR35 or the newer LPR90 from RTM).
So you have to look what tape your machine needs to be able to calibrate the electronics for exactly that type of tape and if you run higher speeds than a professional tape type is favorable to the long playing tapes.
With R2R, the machine always has to be calibrated for recording to the tapes you use, if its a modern machine, it can be calibrated to more than one type of tape and stored those parameters. This is relevant for recordings on this machine, no other tape from a different type or manufacturer can be recorded 100% perfect without the machine was setup for that tape.
With playback, this isn't relevant. The machine can replay any other tape, as long its the same (mostly ferro) type. But for recording, this is a major difference to compact cassette decks which often can record on cassettes and not having to be calibrated to each manufacturers tape individual.