Which to Choose?

[bblue]

I want to upgrade my R2R playback which for 15ips is currently a high speed PR99 Mk3 and a Technics RS1500U (the Technics needs some mechanical work so is OOC right now).

Are any of the transports such as PR99 (modified to monitor out and IEC), Otari MX5050 B2 & B3, MX55, Sony/MCI, etc., able with internal mods to produce a quality audio output, compared to an external preamp such as the Cello/King or Bottlehead Repro? Or asked another way, which one might come the closest if the closest was reasonable quality-wise? I know Studer A810's and up are pretty much ok OOTB, but they're also quite a bit more expensive, even at the low end (so I understand, anyway), and LARGE.

For my studio tapes I've always thought the PR99 modified as I have it did a very good job, at least compared to what's on the tapes. It's certainly better than what I heard in the studios.

--Bill

 

[flez007]

I am not familiar with all of them,but both the Otari and the Technics have a large set of parts available and some companies can work on the mdification you want in order to use an external preamp. My understanding is that the ReVox units are not that easy to convert.

 

[steve williams]

I am not familiar with all of them,but both the Otari and the Technics have a large set of parts available and some companies can work on the mdification you want in order to use an external preamp. My understanding is that the ReVox units are not that easy to convert.

Unless he goes with the new Sonorus which is built on a Revox frame

 

[mep]

Unless he goes with the new Sonorus which is built on a Revox frame

But that cost mega-bucks. I can say that the Otari MX-55 is an outstanding deck if you buy a good one and the price was far below its true value.

 

[stellavox]

Bill,

I have owned and worked on both the PR99 and Technics 1500. From a transport perspective, while the PR99 is a very good machine, I think the 1500 beats it hands down. From a head perspective, the Revox sounds better, but you can fit a Nortronics head into the 1500 headblock.

Where they both fall down is in the playback electronics. I think it is safe to say that neither stock electronics comes close CLOSE to what can be obtained by using something good outboard.

Perhaps Myles can also comment on the Technics.

Charles

 

[bblue]

Thanks everyone, for the replies.

I have owned and worked on both the PR99 and Technics 1500. From a transport perspective, while the PR99 is a very good machine, I think the 1500 beats it hands down. From a head perspective, the Revox sounds better, but you can fit a Nortronics head into the 1500 headblock.

Where they both fall down is in the playback electronics. I think it is safe to say that neither stock electronics comes close CLOSE to what can be obtained by using something good outboard.

I used the RS1500 heavily before I got any of the PR99's. My biggest objection to it is that the tape path is a bit rough on older tapes and splices due to the extreme bends. I'm sure it's a more stable path sonically, it's just hard on some tape.

So the next question refers to recording. The Revox's seem to have a bad rep for the recording circuity. Are any of the machines listed in my original posting capable of great quality record?

Thanks.

--Bill

 

[MylesBAstor]

Bill,

I have owned and worked on both the PR99 and Technics 1500. From a transport perspective, while the PR99 is a very good machine, I think the 1500 beats it hands down. From a head perspective, the Revox sounds better, but you can fit a Nortronics head into the 1500 headblock.

Where they both fall down is in the playback electronics. I think it is safe to say that neither stock electronics comes close CLOSE to what can be obtained by using something good outboard.

Perhaps Myles can also comment on the Technics.

Charles

I was thinking what more I can add to Charlie's comments 'Bout the only thing can contribute is that with the new Nortronics heads and outboard electronics, the main limiting factor now is the quality of the tapes. Now I can't speak as to the tape handling issue but I've never had an issue with older tapes. But obviously tape handling is a concern and it can be more of a concern with the Pro machines.

 

[steve williams]

Myles

Not sure I understand your last comment re handling and pro machines

 

[MylesBAstor]

Myles

Not sure I understand your last comment re handling and pro machines

Rich or Charlie may correct me but as I understand it, the Ampex's aren't the gentlest tape handlers. Make a mistake and snap!

 

[steve williams]

Got it. I thought you were referring to people as tape handlers

 

[Ki Choi]

Rich or Charlie may correct me but as I understand it, the Ampex's aren't the gentlest tape handlers. Make a mistake and snap!

Although I have not had personal experience with more modern Ampex machines but the 351/350 transport can be brutal on tapes if you don't have the touch... It's like driving a 56 Chevy stick shift with no power steering, IMHO.

 

[Ki Choi]

Are any of the transports such as PR99 (modified to monitor out and IEC), Otari MX5050 B2 & B3, MX55, Sony/MCI, etc., Studer A810's .

--Bill

From the list above, my choice would be

1) Sony APR-5003 (it doesn't get much deserved respect in the market place but it's a fine machine both in sonics and in tape handling)
2) Studer A810 (if its transport is working properly)
3) Otari MX5050 B3
4) Otari MX5050 B2 (can't go wrong for the beginners)

As others had mentioned, all the above machines could be disasters if purchased untested and with unknown history in general. I think finding barely used pro machines for a song (like what Steve managed with his A810) - those days are long gone...unfortunately.

Lastly, it is wise, in my opinion, to pay extra $$$ for machines with performance assurance than to save some $$$ but pay more later on agonizing repairs and shipping sagas...

Ki

 

[steve williams]

From the list above, my choice would be

1) Sony APR-5003 (it doesn't get much deserved respect in the market place but it's a fine machine both in sonics and in tape handling)
2) Studer A810 (if its transport is working properly)
3) Otari MX5050 B3
4) Otari MX5050 B2 (can't go wrong for the beginners)

As others had mentioned, all the above machines could be disasters if purchased untested and with unknown history in general. I think finding barely used pro machines for a song (like what Steve managed with his A810) - those days are long gone...unfortunately.

Lastly, it is wise, in my opinion, to pay extra $$$ for machines with performance assurance than to save some $$$ but pay more later on agonizing repairs and shipping sagas...

Ki

I found my Studer A810 in a library in Switzerland with 12 hours in the heads. What I got it for I am certain could not be done again

 

[microstrip]

I found my Studer A810 in a library in Switzerland with 12 hours in the heads. What I got it for I am certain could not be done again

One of the good points of Studer machines is the liberal use of ball bearings. You can get a well used, even abused machine, with good cosmetics and working. Then you fit with new bearings, a new or relapped head, a new pinch roller and new band breaks - none of them really expensive and easily available - and you get a new machine. All service manuals are available at the ftp Studer site. .

Remember - if you decide to do it yourself you will not have free time for a long period!

 

[Ki Choi]

One of the good points of Studer machines is the liberal use of ball bearings.

Easy for you to say.. ;-) Unlike where you are in Europe, it is rather difficult to obtain ABEC 5 or 7 (never so far) quality metric size ball bearings in US, unforturnately.

 

[RogerD]

Easy for you to say.. ;-) Unlike where you are in Europe, it is rather difficult to obtain ABEC 5 or 7 (never so far) quality metric size ball bearings in US, unforturnately.

This is true because all these OEM ABEC 7 bearings are now obsolete. They can be found though and if the original specs called for this class bearing you do not want to substitute a lower spec. Just finished rebuilding the Ampex MR70 motors and they had class 7 bearings.....it now purrs like a kitten.

Fafnir or Barden made them and Applied Industrial in Seattle should be able to source them.

4021 6th Avenue South Seattle, WA 98108-5202
(206) 223-5255

 

[MylesBAstor]

Got it. I thought you were referring to people as tape handlers

OK see how it may have been confusing

 

[flez007]

Thanks everyone, for the replies.

I used the RS1500 heavily before I got any of the PR99's. My biggest objection to it is that the tape path is a bit rough on older tapes and splices due to the extreme bends. I'm sure it's a more stable path sonically, it's just hard on some tape.

So the next question refers to recording. The Revox's seem to have a bad rep for the recording circuity. Are any of the machines listed in my original posting capable of great quality record?

Thanks.

--Bill

Bill - some modifications that are mentioned above might limit the recording capabilities of some specific machines, what I have found is people having a playback unit modified as mentioned, and maybe another deck for recording purposes.

Are you looking to record live events or from other media such as turntable or digital?

 

[Fast/Forward]

Hi Bill
I don't know if you ultimately want to use your deck as playback only so...
About a year before I heard of the Tape Project I had my Technics !500 internally modified on the output path only. Premium caps, resistors, solid silver wire and WBT Next Gen silver output connectors with the work done at the Parts Connexion. Sound wise it was hard to believe that it was the same machine.
After the upgrade I took the deck elsewhere for a tune up. The tech swore he never heard such deep bass from his test tape. Though now the deck is used as a transport only it still has capability to playback through my tube Repro or to be reconfigured for solid state internal playback. So you can have your cake and eat it to!
I have been using a RS 1700 since @ 1980 and have never seen it or the 1500 ruin a tape. Speed stability is such that you can hear tape stretching on some of the used reels I have bought.
As for owners of the Technics decks if you still have the original 10 cent output jacks UPGRADE!!!

 

[bblue]

Bill - some modifications that are mentioned above might limit the recording capabilities of some specific machines, what I have found is people having a playback unit modified as mentioned, and maybe another deck for recording purposes.

Are you looking to record live events or from other media such as turntable or digital?

I only need to be able to dub existing tapes of master quality to two track 15ips. I supposed a vinyl dub might be desirable occasionally, but that's about it. Anything live I would use either DSD or 192k/24 PCM.

--Bill