Comments like this make me wonder what people are really hearing with tape. I have very little experience with 15 ips 1/2-tracks like The Tape Project and some of Bruce B's tapes that he plays at shows (just at shows, in fact), but I have a huge amount of listening time with 7.5 ips 1/4- and 1/2-tracks. First, few if any of those old commercially recorded tapes from the '60's (and very early '70's) sound very good. They were all high-speed dupes on mediocre tape stock and sound like it. It's actually a little surprising that these tapes aren't full of dropouts and edgewarps, but if they aren't now they probably will be after a few more plays. Second, even well recorded 7.5 1/2-tracks recorded on a Nagra IV or Sony 770 don't tax the capabilities of good 24/96 digital (much less 24/192 or DSD) to make indistinguishable copies. There was even a small company in the late '80's and '90's doing 1:1 dupes of their own master tapes at 7.5 ips; not SOTA sound even then, although it was kind of fun!
The United Home Audio, Phase 11, Reel-to-Reel Review- world's best source component
- Thread starter Peter Breuninger
- Start date
Comments like this make me wonder what people are really hearing with tape. I have very little experience with 15 ips 1/2-tracks like The Tape Project and some of Bruce B's tapes that he plays at shows (just at shows, in fact), but I have a huge amount of listening time with 7.5 ips 1/4- and 1/2-tracks. First, few if any of those old commercially recorded tapes from the '60's (and very early '70's) sound very good. They were all high-speed dupes on mediocre tape stock and sound like it. It's actually a little surprising that these tapes aren't full of dropouts and edgewarps, but if they aren't now they probably will be after a few more plays. Second, even well recorded 7.5 1/2-tracks recorded on a Nagra IV or Sony 770 don't tax the capabilities of good 24/96 digital (much less 24/192 or DSD) to make indistinguishable copies. There was even a small company in the late '80's and '90's doing 1:1 dupes of their own master tapes at 7.5 ips; not SOTA sound even then, although it was kind of fun!
I bet it surpasses any stock Studer deck unless the head is wired out to a Doshi for example.
Sorry for the late reply. If I recall total was just south of 7K. Caveat: At the time I got the deck from Jeff Jacobs, was just as the R2R craze was starting to get some momentum. I suspect a new deck from Jeff now would be double what I paid before the mods.
My comment was not to say that I think the 7 1/2 inch Mercs and RCAs I have are as good as my LP rig. My comments were directed at the commercially available 15 ips/10.5" reels from places like the Tape Project, Yarlung, UltraAnalogue...[et al]. I also have a digital rig that does DSD and I have digital files of some of my Tape Project titles and I can tell you that at least in the case of Exotic Dances From the Ballet from Reference Recordings, the tape runs rings around the HiRez file which is also very good. As a frame of reference, I also have the LP of this recording and the experience of the LP played back on my TT vs the tape playback are very close - but both are better (to my ears) than the digital file. Of course, as always, YMMV.
Not sure if everyone realizes the 2 track Merc tapes are a gen closer to the master tape than the LPs.
Why do you say that? Isn't the LP made from the master tape (admittedly with all the mother/stamper translations added)? The 7.5 ips reels have at least one more tape gen added to that (the 7.5 ips "copy master").
Sorry, Joe; the way you phrased your reply I thought you were classifying those old reels as part of the "other-worldly experience".
Not in this case. For instance, a copy of the master is sent for mastering. nfo comes directly from Tom Fine.
Hi Christian,
The reel-to-reel transport is vitally important to me...I like the Stephens transport, too.
I have confidence in the Studers
Hi Christian,
The reel-to-reel transport is vitally important to me...I like the Stephens transport, too.
I have confidence in the Studers
No doubt the ruggedness of the Tascam transport mechanism is not up to the task in the long haul versus the Studers, ATR's, ect. It's a consumer platform versus a pro. My comment is related more to the ultimate repro fidelity.
I have no personal experience with the Tascam transport used for the UHA decks, and have only heard the UHA at shows. OTOH I did own a fully tweaked (transport, heads and output electronics) de Paravicini (EAR) Technics RS-1700 which I did play extensively compared to my Studer A-820 and my Ampex ATR-102.
it is at least debatable whether the dPV work might be superior to the UHA. Tim's work is respected as standard setting for lots of mastering work for sure. and the Tascam is in the same category as the Technics as a starting point.
in that comparison between my stock Studer A-820 (refurbished by Fred Thal), and my stock ATR-102 (completely rebuilt by Jeff Gillman) and the dPV Technics, the two master recorders had clear performance advantages. then when I added the King-Cello repro to the Studer the gap widened considerably.
I do not claim any special knowledge of transports and have experience limited to my system and room. but top level, competently set-up master recorders seem to have advantages over any prosumer/broadcast machines to my ears. I've not heard anything anywhere that has caused me to think any other way.
all that said I agree that the UHA likely is the most trouble free way to get top level tape performance. but there is more performance should you want badly enough to find it. I do agree with Bruce that buying a master recorder such as the Studer A-820 without knowing it's condition is a bad idea. you can spend 5 figures fixing one of those if you want it really right. or you could get really lucky.....but the odds are not good for that.
as far as Lps and tape, there are so many levels of performance for each format that it's hard to generalize. I have used my RTR decks as my reference for improving the level of my vinyl performance. and at this point my better Lp pressings do compete head to head with my better 15 ips 1/4" tapes. 1/2" 15 ips is still another matter, however.
in my system 7 and 1/2 ips 1/4" 4-track tape is not competitive with my vinyl, so I sold it all.
it is at least debatable whether the dPV work might be superior to the UHA. Tim's work is respected as standard setting for lots of mastering work for sure. and the Tascam is in the same category as the Technics as a starting point.
in that comparison between my stock Studer A-820 (refurbished by Fred Thal), and my stock ATR-102 (completely rebuilt by Jeff Gillman) and the dPV Technics, the two master recorders had clear performance advantages. then when I added the King-Cello repro to the Studer the gap widened considerably.
I do not claim any special knowledge of transports and have experience limited to my system and room. but top level, competently set-up master recorders seem to have advantages over any prosumer/broadcast machines to my ears. I've not heard anything anywhere that has caused me to think any other way.
all that said I agree that the UHA likely is the most trouble free way to get top level tape performance. but there is more performance should you want badly enough to find it. I do agree with Bruce that buying a master recorder such as the Studer A-820 without knowing it's condition is a bad idea. you can spend 5 figures fixing one of those if you want it really right. or you could get really lucky.....but the odds are not good for that.
as far as Lps and tape, there are so many levels of performance for each format that it's hard to generalize. I have used my RTR decks as my reference for improving the level of my vinyl performance. and at this point my better Lp pressings do compete head to head with my better 15 ips 1/4" tapes. 1/2" 15 ips is still another matter, however.
in my system 7 and 1/2 ips 1/4" 4-track tape is not competitive with my vinyl, so I sold it all.
Last edited:
A modified Tascam BR-20 is a nice semi-pro platform,but I don't know how you can get 5 figures into one. I just can't imagine.
I am picking up tomorrow a De Paravicini recorder. Now that I can get excited about,but not a Tascam, sorry.
I'm with Mike L.....Fred Thal has A80's for sale. Of course I like the Ampex studio decks....MR70's,350's,351's,440's and I have have some one of a kind specials....now that is exciting.
Carry on....just my opinion.
I am picking up tomorrow a De Paravicini recorder. Now that I can get excited about,but not a Tascam, sorry.
I'm with Mike L.....Fred Thal has A80's for sale. Of course I like the Ampex studio decks....MR70's,350's,351's,440's and I have have some one of a kind specials....now that is exciting.
Carry on....just my opinion.
Last edited:
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
The UHA has been pretty much gutted so any facsimile is just a coincidence. My friend Andrew listened to and compared all of Mike's decks and preferred the de Paravicini, so he bought it. I have heard a lot of my transfers through Greg's deck so I know what the source sounds like. I can get more excited over a Tascam than a Technics.
I still believe the A80/820 are better than the UHA, but not by much. It's not night/day. Greg has done an awesome job with this project and should be commended. I'd much rather spend $20k on his deck than $20k on an ATR-102
I still believe the A80/820 are better than the UHA, but not by much. It's not night/day. Greg has done an awesome job with this project and should be commended. I'd much rather spend $20k on his deck than $20k on an ATR-102
no doubt the dPV is an excellent RTR deck and Andrew did like it. but we'll have to disagree about how it exactly went during the comparison at my home (4 years ago now). and I did quite a bit more comparing those decks than just when Andrew was there.
I think you may be confused about when U47 brought over the King Cello (last year) and my old stock Technics (I had bought from J-Corder 5 years ago) to Andrew's home when Andrew preferred his dPV to that combo.
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
That's right Mike.... I'm confused..
I do agree that the UHA is the real deal and a top performer....and a safe way to go for many.
like vinyl there is the law of diminishing returns for your dollars and risk as you rise up the food chain of RTR performance.
or if you are a prepper...a tape prepper that is...Both pro versions with outboard electronics and this UHA make perfect sense. My near future is A80RC2/Doshi the A80 is on the way...and probably a UHA at some point. Great for the vacation home option.
No worries. I wasn't very clear in my response. I will say that my Mercury tapes sound better than I expected them to. Both the Mercs and the RCA tapes came out of the house of a chain smoker, and the boxes were brown from the smoke over the years. I had to bake them to stabilize them, add new leader, and scrub the boxes. One of the tapes is a 2 track B-C Lt. Kiji Reiner/Chicago that sounds very very good. Of course, that is compared to my original LP pressing that has a lot of noise on it. I still prefer my Chesky reissue LP, of the three.
Similar threads
