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

[Rekmeyata]

I was going to buy a used Akai reel-to-reel for $199 supposedly restored after a friend of mine couldn't find his old machine he was going to give it to me because he hasn't used it in 40 years, but after looking into it a lot I decided against it. First off, the parts for reel-to-reel machines are very difficult to impossible to find depending on the part, I found that out from a shop in town that repairs vintage gear from all over the US, he said tape heads are especially difficult to get if you can even get one for a particular machine. Secondly, the blank tape sold is either old reconditioned tape or new tape made poorly, what the heck does reconditioned mean? I looked into some of the new blank tapes and none of them got high reviews outside the company's own reviews who are cherry-picking them. Then thirdly, trying to find pre-recorded tape was a pain as well, and the stuff they had I'm not interested in listening to, then the prices were stupidly high like as much as $1,500 for one album on tape, there's probably some out there that cost more than that. It seems rather silly that someone can charge that kind of money for the duplication process, and where do they get their tape from? If no one is making quality new blank tape to buy, like BASF, Maxell, etc, then what are they doing? Using an inferior grade of tape I would think that's what they're doing. And if the tape is inferior, then the studio making the tape is probably doing something to correct the problems associated with the poor-quality tape which means the music quality has to be suffering due to frequency correction to take tape noise out, at that point might as well go with vinyl or CD and forget the tape.

I know a lot of you here own systems that cost $20,000 and a lot more, I'm not in that sort of income bracket to afford such outlandish expenditures on stereo gear, so for me going tape would be unaffordable.

 

[dminches]

I was going to buy a used Akai reel-to-reel for $199 supposedly restored after a friend of mine couldn't find his old machine he was going to give it to me because he hasn't used it in 40 years, but after looking into it a lot I decided against it. First off, the parts for reel-to-reel machines are very difficult to impossible to find depending on the part, I found that out from a shop in town that repairs vintage gear from all over the US, he said tape heads are especially difficult to get if you can even get one for a particular machine. Secondly, the blank tape sold is either old reconditioned tape or new tape made poorly, what the heck does reconditioned mean? I looked into some of the new blank tapes and none of them got high reviews outside the company's own reviews who are cherry-picking them. Then thirdly, trying to find pre-recorded tape was a pain as well, and the stuff they had I'm not interested in listening to, then the prices were stupidly high like as much as $1,500 for one album on tape, there's probably some out there that cost more than that. It seems rather silly that someone can charge that kind of money for the duplication process, and where do they get their tape from? If no one is making quality new blank tape to buy, like BASF, Maxell, etc, then what are they doing? Using an inferior grade of tape I would think that's what they're doing. And if the tape is inferior, then the studio making the tape is probably doing something to correct the problems associated with the poor-quality tape which means the music quality has to be suffering due to frequency correction to take tape noise out, at that point might as well go with vinyl or CD and forget the tape.

I know a lot of you here own systems that cost $20,000 and a lot more, I'm not in that sort of income bracket to afford such outlandish expenditures on stereo gear, so for me going tape would be unaffordable.

Just a couple of comments.

1 - Collecting and playing 15ips tapes is very expensive due to the cost of the machines and the cost of tape. If you are fine with 7 1/2 ips things can be much cheaper.

2 - When a company offers a tape for sale their cost is well beyond the cost of duplication. They also have to pay licensing fees unless they own the rights. Blue Note isn't selling tapes so all those albums have associated licensing fees.

3 - There is some very good blank tape available, made by Recording The Masters and Capture as well as some others. I don't here people complaining about the quality of those blanks.

 

[Kingrex]

I mean a record like my new Steely Dan UHQR. Or a direct to disc like Gary Koh has helped make.

 

[dminches]

I mean a record like my new Steely Dan UHQR. Or a direct to disc like Gary Koh has helped make.

I see. I think the Blue Note Tone Poet series as well as Classic are really well done too.

 

[Foxbat]

I was going to buy a used Akai reel-to-reel for $199 supposedly restored after a friend of mine couldn't find his old machine he was going to give it to me because he hasn't used it in 40 years, but after looking into it a lot I decided against it. First off, the parts for reel-to-reel machines are very difficult to impossible to find depending on the part, I found that out from a shop in town that repairs vintage gear from all over the US, he said tape heads are especially difficult to get if you can even get one for a particular machine. Secondly, the blank tape sold is either old reconditioned tape or new tape made poorly, what the heck does reconditioned mean? I looked into some of the new blank tapes and none of them got high reviews outside the company's own reviews who are cherry-picking them. Then thirdly, trying to find pre-recorded tape was a pain as well, and the stuff they had I'm not interested in listening to, then the prices were stupidly high like as much as $1,500 for one album on tape, there's probably some out there that cost more than that. It seems rather silly that someone can charge that kind of money for the duplication process, and where do they get their tape from? If no one is making quality new blank tape to buy, like BASF, Maxell, etc, then what are they doing? Using an inferior grade of tape I would think that's what they're doing. And if the tape is inferior, then the studio making the tape is probably doing something to correct the problems associated with the poor-quality tape which means the music quality has to be suffering due to frequency correction to take tape noise out, at that point might as well go with vinyl or CD and forget the tape.

I know a lot of you here own systems that cost $20,000 and a lot more, I'm not in that sort of income bracket to afford such outlandish expenditures on stereo gear, so for me going tape would be unaffordable.

Too many misconceptions to cover, but in a nutshell - no, it is not a trivial hobby such as, say, streaming. So basically my advice is - stay away, unless you really feel you must go through all that aggravation. It is for nuts like myself, who have been doing it for over 60 years and still fell like I am just starting.

 

[Atmasphere]

Ralph, I'm curious your take on cleaning "New" records. Do you find there are contaminates on new records that need to be cleaned. Even records such as UHQR, Quality Records, ORG etc. Is it all in my head I think a record is more quiet after cleaning, or is there something that is really coming off a new record that degrades performance and needs to be removed. Your comment about surface noise is what made me ask.

I rarely have to clean a new LP!

'Surface noise' can also be caused by the phono section itself, if it has a poor high frequency overload margin.

[snip] Secondly, the blank tape sold is either old reconditioned tape or new tape made poorly, what the heck does reconditioned mean? I looked into some of the new blank tapes and none of them got high reviews outside the company's own reviews who are cherry-picking them. Then thirdly, trying to find pre-recorded tape was a pain as well, and the stuff they had I'm not interested in listening to, then the prices were stupidly high like as much as $1,500 for one album on tape, there's probably some out there that cost more than that. It seems rather silly that someone can charge that kind of money for the duplication process, and where do they get their tape from? If no one is making quality new blank tape to buy, like BASF, Maxell, etc, then what are they doing? Using an inferior grade of tape I would think that's what they're doing. And if the tape is inferior, then the studio making the tape is probably doing something to correct the problems associated with the poor-quality tape which means the music quality has to be suffering due to frequency correction to take tape noise out, at that point might as well go with vinyl or CD and forget the tape.

'Reconditioned' tape is probably tape that has been baked to remove moisture content, which otherwise causes the oxides to shed.
New high quality tape is made right here in the US

 

[andromedaaudio]

I have many tapes from may be 30 different labels .
The recording quality is all over the place .
The best i would say are acoustic sounds , open reel records , hemiolia , tape project .
These tapes are very well recorded and very quit .

Some others are just outright noisy and awfully recorded , absolute waist of 300 euros a tape .


I reckon recording is like any other profession.
Some know their craft and others not

 

[Gregadd]

I rarely have to clean a new LP! [emphasis supplied]

'Surface noise' can also be caused by the phono section itself, if it has a poor high frequency overload margin.


[text omitted]

You don't have too, but you should. My records allays looked clean. But all I had to do was give it a good swipe with the cleaning brush that collected plenty of evidence to the contrary. While you are at it, "de -stat" and replace record sleeve with a rice paper one. IME.

 

[andromedaaudio]

I m thinking of buying a Telefunken M15 A 1/2 inch machine
As far as i know acoustic sounds also can provide 1/2 inch versions , see what that does .
More magnetized particles ....higher resolution ???

 

[Atmasphere]

zyou don't have to but you should. My records allays looked clean. But all I had to do was give it a good swipe with cleaning brush collected plenty of evidence to the contrary. While you are at it, "de -stat" and replace record sleeve. IME.

Since my phono system has a good high frequency overload margin, I really don't experience surface noise unless the LP is actually damaged. People often ask if I'm playing a CD since the noise is well behaved. I do use a carbon fiber dust brush though. I used to use a record cleaner but didn't find that there was that much benefit vs the effort.

 

[Atmasphere]

I m thinking of buying a Telefunken M15 A 1/2 inch machine
As far as i know acoustic sounds also can provide 1/2 inch versions , see what that does .
More magnetized particles ....higher resolution ???

Lower noise and slightly higher saturation.

 

[Gregadd]

Since my phono system has a good high frequency overload margin, I really don't experience surface noise unless the LP is actually damaged. People often ask if I'm playing a CD since the noise is well behaved. I do use a carbon fiber dust brush though. I used to use a record cleaner but didn't find that there was that much benefit vs the effort.

I am sure you already know this but, I wll remind you. Dirt is not only a noise producer, it can cause wear to both record and stylus. Just handling a record can produce static and attract dirt.

 

[Atmasphere]

I am sure you already know this but, I wll remind you. Dirt is not only a noise producer, it can cause wear to both record and stylus. Just handling a record can produce static and attract dirt.

Yes! You have to be careful. That is what the dust brush is for. Its attached to a wire that is grounded so the conductive nature of the carbon fiber is put to use in more ways than one.