The pecking order

[FrantzM]

If I ask a simple question which requires the ownership of a digital source, a table/arm/cartridge/, and a R2R deck, your still entitled to hold an opinion of how great digital is, it just didn’t fit in with the question I was asking of people who have all three sources. I don’t know why that concept is becoming hard to grasp for some people. And with you Frantz, I understand that English is not your first language and I try to be very mindful of that.

It is very true that English is not my first language, I would however think my proficiency in it could be deemed adequate. Your original post does not require a degree in English to understand... nor does it seem after re-reading to require the ownership of all three sources to participate in the thread. A thread which as someone else noted happens to be in the General Audio discussions. Would you be so kind as to show me where this is a requisite to participate in this thread? Or have we come to a point where we have closed groups and discussions in the WBF? Groups that precludes participation by non-members of such groups or gatherings? ...

I interpreted your post about pecking order a term as I understand it and as defined by Wikipedia "Pecking order or just peck order is the colloquial term for a hierarchical system of social organization in chickens" as an order of preference ... I seem to have used the term hierarchy in one my earlier post, which is what you seemed to have invited us in declining our own or was I mistaken because of my poor understanding of the language of Shakespeare. I gave you my current "pecking order" noting in passing that your post could lead to the usual digital vs analog food fight, which it did ... I would note in passing that Bruce B alluded to such in the very first reply to your OP ...

Uh, oh Mark.... you just poked the bear!! But I do agree.....

So what is then? What is this thread about ? I am out of it anyway but for the sake of good relationship we can clear it out in PM .. Not much to learn here from this thread really: we know where and how it will end...

 

[Mike Lavigne]

that Nagra away from Mike...hmm

I know Next time I visit, I'll have my spouse distract him with a 1/2", 2-track, rolling @ 30

Then, I'll sequester the machine in my winter coat as he is swooning, hehe

Mike, did you get that QGB adapter, yet

looks like a good plan.

i have not done anything about connecting my Nagra. i'm too busy listening to (your 3rd place) vinyl that is as good as my tape. too many great sounding records to play.......

 

[Bruce B]

So what is then? What is this thread about ? I am out of it anyway but for the sake of good relationship we can clear it out in PM .. Not much to learn here from this thread really: we know where and how it will end...

I agree 100% with Mark and knew this would end up being a pissing contest.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I have tried recording both CDs an Vinyl to my RtR deck, no contest...the original sounds better.

That's interesting since there's people who claim that a tape made from an LP sounds better than the original LP. Now don't ask me why since haven't and probably won't try this. Maybe it's due to the head bump changing the sound?

 

[fas42]

That's interesting since there's people who claim that a tape made from an LP sounds better than the original LP. Now don't ask me why since haven't and probably won't try this. Maybe it's due to the head bump changing the sound?

One explanation, assuming that you don't run the speakers while taping, is that the TT parts are not disturbed by air and room vibrations: minimal acoustic feedback ...

Frank

 

[c1ferrari]

Lol

looks like a good plan.

i have not done anything about connecting my Nagra. i'm too busy listening to (your 3rd place) vinyl that is as good as my tape. too many great sounding records to play.......

Well, as you're deservedly imbibing the analog elixir
I'm chasing down a hum AND
I will enunciate, unequivocally...
that my R2R, vinyl, and digital playback systems
render the hum...flawlessly

 

[bblue]

Another point to ponder is the analog generational losses in copying the 15 ips 1/4" half-tracks; since the master should be copied rarely, that means distributed copies will come from a 1st gen dub at best, making them 2nd gen at best.

The Tape Project has a generalized description of their copy process from the original analog masters. They use all highly modified ATR100 machines. The first step is to obtain the best copy possible from the original, to a 2 track 1" ATR100. Because the track width is four times as wide, noise and distortion are significantly reduced, they say, to the equivalent of about 1/2 of conventional generation. Then the 1" master dub is used to deliver audio to a bank of 1/4" 2 track modified ATR100's to produce the copies to be sold.

They use an IEC record/playback curve at all steps, instead of the US standard NAB, claiming that its curve is more suited to the tape they use and high quality recording in general. IEC has been a European standard since the 50's as I recall.

In any event you have to have an IEC compatible machine to play them, and not just any machine but one that has the highest grade playback heads and electronics. It all sounds reasonable to me (no pun), but does assume that the consistency of alignment from machine to machine be highly maintained (they claim it is).

Meanwhile, I'll just suffer with my modified non-IEC PR99's ...

--Bill

 

[bblue]

That's interesting since there's people who claim that a tape made from an LP sounds better than the original LP. Now don't ask me why since haven't and probably won't try this. Maybe it's due to the head bump changing the sound?

That could be part of it. The other part is that in a typical LP playback system, cartridge alignment and SRA/VTA is seldom perfect.

The result is mistracking to various degrees and excessive sibilance. A tape copy will soften (but not eliminate) the effects, and also act as a lowpass filter for FM modulation frequencies generated by the stylus (above 25k) due to misalignment. The presence of those out of band frequencies causes great distress on some phono preamps and amplifiers downstream.

In fact, you can tell a lot about how well your cartridge/stylus is aligned to a particular record by watching the preamp output on a spectrum analyzer capable of at least 80khz resolution. The less output there is above the bandwidth of the actual signal (which you can see on the analyzer) the closer your calibration is.

--Bill

 

[garylkoh]

I think that it's what Peter Lederman of Soundsmith told me as "stylus jitter". First time I heard that phrase was 3 years ago, when half an hour into him setting up the cartridge for me at RMAF, I asked him what he was doing, and he told me that he was trying to reduce stylus jitter as many line-contact styluses are not perfectly aligned on the cantilever.....

On topic, what do you guys think of the ReVox PR99 Mk II?

 

[MylesBAstor]

That could be part of it. The other part is that in a typical LP playback system, cartridge alignment and SRA/VTA is seldom perfect.

The result is mistracking to various degrees and excessive sibilance. A tape copy will soften (but not eliminate) the effects, and also act as a lowpass filter for FM modulation frequencies generated by the stylus (above 25k) due to misalignment. The presence of those out of band frequencies causes great distress on some phono preamps and amplifiers downstream.

In fact, you can tell a lot about how well your cartridge/stylus is aligned to a particular record by watching the preamp output on a spectrum analyzer capable of at least 80khz resolution. The less output there is above the bandwidth of the actual signal (which you can see on the analyzer) the closer your calibration is.

--Bill

Yes, there are some good pictures on Bruce Thigpen's Eminent Technology website showing the sideband distortions from improper VTA, and alignment.

 

[microstrip]

On topic, what do you guys think of the ReVox PR99 Mk II?

Are you referring to the mechanics or to the electronics?

The PR99s are basically a B77 fitted with professional gimmicks. Used of the shelve they are good but not great machines, but if you want to tweak them they can become quite usable. As all motors are fed directly by the mains with a series controller element if your mains has some noise or distortion you should use a power re-generator, not a filter. It is not a constant tension machine as it does not have variable take-up spool torque. However with a few (many?) tweaks it can become a very nice sounding machine. Be aware that some of the replacement pinch rollers found in the market have poor wow and flutter performance. Also the usually found SKF standard ball bearings are unsuited for this machine.

The proof of the basic quality of the mechanics is that Sonorus Audio uses it as a chassis for its ATR10.

http://www.sonorusaudio.com/ATR10_FIF7.html

I still own a PR99mk3. But after I got the Studer A80 it is idling most of the time. But I do not use the standard electronics - some people claim that the PR99 extra output stage used for balancing is very poor.

 

[bblue]

The sources I've used are a live studio feed from an SSL9k going into an ATR-102 or A80, PM2 going into a Sadie workstaion and a Grimm AD1 or EMM Labs ADC8IV going into a Sonoma workstation. Also have used live feeds from location recordings and also thousands of tapes sent from the labels to digitize.

So I take it that the majority of the transfers are to DSD, and possibly a few in PCM?

--Bill

 

[Bruce B]

So I take it that the majority of the transfers are to DSD, and possibly a few in PCM?

--Bill

yes, the majority are into DSD128fs and DSD64fs. Most of the time there is also a parallel transfer with PCM. Sometimes you only get one take and redundancy is your friend!

 

[bblue]

Are you referring to the mechanics or to the electronics?

The PR99s are basically a B77 fitted with professional gimmicks. Used of the shelve they are good but not great machines, but if you want to tweak them they can become quite usable. As all motors are fed directly by the mains with a series controller element if your mains has some noise or distortion you should use a power re-generator, not a filter. It is not a constant tension machine as it does not have variable take-up spool torque. However with a few (many?) tweaks it can become a very nice sounding machine. Be aware that some of the replacement pinch rollers found in the market have poor wow and flutter performance. Also the usually found SKF standard ball bearings are unsuited for this machine.

The proof of the basic quality of the mechanics is that Sonorus Audio uses it as a chassis for its ATR10.
http://www.sonorusaudio.com/ATR10_FIF7.html

Of course, Sonorus makes the point of saying that power supplies, motor control circuitry and of course audio is completely reworked. I don't know how significant that statement really is, though.

I still own a PR99mk3. But after I got the Studer A80 it is idling most of the time. But I do not use the standard electronics - some people claim that the PR99 extra output stage used for balancing is very poor.

Are you saying you're not using the stock A80's output or the PR99's?

The balanced output on the PR99 is horrible, actually. The only way to get acceptable (barely) audio out of it is via the monitor out din connector on the chassis top. That comes out right after the reproducer board which connects to the head assembly. It's a medium impedance output, unbalanced, so you need to use good short, low capacity cabling with it. That's not so different than many other sources.

I have a mk3 and two mk2's and have done a series of modifications to the reproducer board to improve audio quality, but I'm not at all convinced that it couldn't be carried further.

Has anyone seen any docs describing updates to that board? I haven't, yet.

I have my eye on a Studer 807 but am not certain where it stacks up in the Studer line from an audio standpoint. Anyone know? I'm sure it's no A80, but it's not at an A80 price, either.

--Bill

 

[bblue]

I think that it's what Peter Lederman of Soundsmith told me as "stylus jitter". First time I heard that phrase was 3 years ago, when half an hour into him setting up the cartridge for me at RMAF, I asked him what he was doing, and he told me that he was trying to reduce stylus jitter as many line-contact styluses are not perfectly aligned on the cantilever.....

Did that happen to be on a VPI turntable/arm?

He used the same term in an email 'conversation' with me a few months back, but at the time was referring to the single pivot arm's tendency to wobble back and forth laterally (The JMW arms are especially bad for that) and a line contact type cartridge has particular problems with that type of motion because they depend on an intimate and non-wavering contact to the groove walls. An elliptical stylus is far less bothered by it, depending on the way it is cut. Soundsmith's Zephyr cartridge has a contoured elliptical shape, which allows this type of single pivot arm movement.

--Bill

 

[garylkoh]

Did that happen to be on a VPI turntable/arm?

It was on a SOTA turntable with SME arm.

He used the same term in an email 'conversation' with me a few months back, but at the time was referring to the single pivot arm's tendency to wobble back and forth laterally (The JMW arms are especially bad for that) and a line contact type cartridge has particular problems with that type of motion because they depend on an intimate and non-wavering contact to the groove walls. An elliptical stylus is far less bothered by it, depending on the way it is cut. Soundsmith's Zephyr cartridge has a contoured elliptical shape, which allows this type of single pivot arm movement.

--Bill

Yes, that's right. The Magic Diamond cartridge I use is modified by Peter with his cantilever and his stylus - which I thought was a contoured elliptical (I think that he calls it his "Optimized Line Contact".

 

[garylkoh]

The only way to get acceptable (barely) audio out of it

Hmmmm..... sounds like a lot of work! It's alright for a hobby, but not if I want to use it for demos..... and I don't know of any of my customers who own a R2R deck. May be I'll leave the loudspeaker market for R2R owners to others. My customers all seem to just want to enjoy their music, and not tweak with gear.

 

[tony ky ma]

Of course, Sonorus makes the point of saying that power supplies, motor control circuitry and of course audio is completely reworked. I don't know how significant that statement really is, though.

Are you saying you're not using the stock A80's output or the PR99's?

The balanced output on the PR99 is horrible, actually. The only way to get acceptable (barely) audio out of it is via the monitor out din connector on the chassis top. That comes out right after the reproducer board which connects to the head assembly. It's a medium impedance output, unbalanced, so you need to use good short, low capacity cabling with it. That's not so different than many other sources.

I have a mk3 and two mk2's and have done a series of modifications to the reproducer board to improve audio quality, but I'm not at all convinced that it couldn't be carried further.

Has anyone seen any docs describing updates to that board? I haven't, yet.

I have my eye on a Studer 807 but am not certain where it stacks up in the Studer line from an audio standpoint. Anyone know? I'm sure it's no A80, but it's not at an A80 price, either.

--Bill

Hi Bill
I did modification of my PR99 just changed all the coupling caps in repro amp also made the out put directly by pass the out put amp and all the switches and volume control , it sound much better than the stock ( pictures in this forum too) but I only use my A810 and A80 now, maybe in future change the head to 4 track for those pre recorded 7.5 tapes repro use, it will be quite good enough for them
tony ma

 

[microstrip]

(...) Are you saying you're not using the stock A80's output or the PR99's? (...)

--Bill

Yes. I have assembled a Eros Bottlehead Tape head tube preamplifier kit: I am currently considering improving the standard A80 boards with better quality electrolytic capacitors and some other components.

http://www.bottlehead.com/store.php?crn=223&rn=440&action=show_detail

OK, double factor of bias expectation - the product name and being DIY.

 

[c1ferrari]

Bill

...a spectrum analyzer capable of at least 80khz resolution. --Bill

Can you recommend a two-channel hardware spectrum analyzer?
I have access to a Tek 2467B and AP P1DD at the moment.

Thanks