Check out the new Tape Project website at tapeproject.com, now with online ordering. Inventory is updated every week, so stop by often to see what we have in stock.

Author Topic: "EE" tapes  (Read 10989 times)

Offline Arnold_Layne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
"EE" tapes
« on: March 23, 2008, 07:23:23 AM »
I see these "EE" formulated tapes on ebay from time to time. Listings indicate they can only be used on a deck that had the "EE" setting. I believe the tapes are Chrome formulations. I know my Teac X700R has a setting for these tapes, but I wondered about decks that have user adjusable bias and EQ settings like my Otari 5050IIB. Are the adjustments on the Otari decks variable enough to use such tapes? What are the advantages to the "EE" formulations over tapes such as the extremely popular Ampex 456 formulations.

Steve

Offline cabraham

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: "EE" tapes
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2008, 04:05:00 PM »
The EE tapes were developed for improved low speed performance.  The mfrs of these EE tapes claimed freq resp & snr at 3.75 ips on par w/ normal tapes at 7.5 ips.  Several publications at the time (1980's) verified these claims.

These EE type tapes are the equivalent to CrO2 or ferricobalt formulations in cassettes known as "type 2".  They require more bias and utilize a different EQ curve.  Normal ferric oxide EQ is spec'd at 120 usec for 1.875 ips, 90 usec at 3.75 ips, 70/50 usec at 7.5 ips (IEC/NAB resp), and 35/50 usec (IEC/NAB) at 15 ips.

The EE type spec'd the EQ at 70/50/35/35 usec at 1.875/3.75/7.5/15 ips resp.  During the record mode, the EE type incurred more treble boost than the normal type.  Being type 2 tape, this could be done since type 2 can accept more signal, particularly hf, before saturating.  Then, upon playback, less treble boost was used (50 usec for EE vs. 90 usec for normal at 3.75 ips).  The result was an improvement in snr.  Also, due to type 2 formulation, the frequency response improved as well, particularly at low speeds.

But, this took place in the early and mid 1980's as an attempt to bolster rtr sales.  By then, however, rtr was pretty much a niche market.  The cassette was very strong, and digital adapters for VCR's that used PCM offered digital capability.  The EE tape was discontinued sometime in the late '80's or early '90's  IIRC.

At low speeds, especially 3.75 ips, EE should easily outperform non-EE by a big margin.  At 7.5 ips, EE wins by a lesser margin.  The EE particles are small and thin giving them good low speed capability.  The mastering tapes in pro use such as 3M 250 and Ampex 456 back at the time were optimized for 15 or 30 ips.  These tapes use a long particle and cannot perform well at less than 15 ips.

So, for a 3.75/7.5 ips tape deck, the EE is definitely an advantage.  But high speed and pro machines never offered EE capability.  Apparently the 250 and 456 formulations are great at 15/30 ips, but not at less than that.

Have I helped?  BR.