To Doc

[mstcraig]

Hey Doc. I saw this morning on the Audio Asylum page a post from you regarding Keith Johnson and his fabulous analog tape machine. It says that you will be meeting with him at CES time next year. I just wanted to tell you that I have thought much about his recorder these past few months, and how it would be a shame that, when he passes away, all the thinking and engineering that went into it would go with him. This makes me profoundly sad. I consider his focused gap analog recorder to be the singularly finest audio recorder ever conceived and built. Matter of fact, a few years back, I contacted Reference Recordings to see if he might modify my ReVox to his machine's standard. I was told he has been approached many times over the years to do just this, and has turned away all comers. Further, I feel his current digital recordings, while technically perfect, have lost something his analog recorder had in spades-an almost human quality, if you will. I'm not sure exactly how to put it, but somehow, in being slighty less than they could have been, they are definitely better sonically. This is the very beauty of analog in a nutshell, I guess. Perhaps, he can take you under his wing, so to speak, and teach you all he knows about this magnificent device. Then, you can spread the wealth that is his focused gap recorder (with tubes once again, of course!) for the rest of us to try to aspire to. On December 31, 2007, it will be exactly 50 years ago that he recorded The Forward Look by Red Norvo on his (then) tube-based analog recorder. I shall honor his achievement by playing that LP on New Years Eve this year. Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. Merry Christmas everyone. Craig

[docb]

Hi Craig,

First off I want to allay any fears that someone might have in reading your post that Keith is leaving this plane of existence anytime soon.

Keith has been very successful in turning his quite brilliant ideas into patented technology that provides him a living. I would never be so bold as to assume that Keith has any obligation to share anything he didn't feel comfortable sharing. The focused gap technology is very intriguing. If Keith ever wishes to share any thoughts about it with me, I will be honored. My motivation to learn about it would be along the lines of licensing his technology rather than trying to get him to pass on the knowledge freely.

[mstcraig]

My apologies. I was not clear on both those points. For me, his machinery is one of my life's great mysteries. Bottom line-I think VERY highly of it, and want to know how it works so I can understand it. Period. That's why I'm an audiophile.

[docb]

Hey Craig, sorry if I came on a little strong. I appreciate your enthusiasm!

[High and Outside]

Keith did license the focus-gap technology in the past. Some were manufactured by Gauss, which was a company he was involved in. The reel-to-reels weren't the company's main business, they primarily made high speed cassette duplicators. The focus-gap technology was used in the duplicators, and was considered a breakthrough at the time, allowing full bandwidth even at high speed. Fairchild also was a licensee and made a few focus-gap reel-to-reels. They are as scarce as hen's teeth--I personally have never seen one. But now that you know about them, Craig, maybe finding one could become your quest.

As far as making a new recorder using the focus-gap concept, hmm...

[mstcraig]

Doc says, "Hey Craig, sorry if I came on a little strong. I appreciate your enthusiasm!".

No problem there, Doc. I was typing so furiously fast because I was at work, and did not wish to get caught! That is why there was a lack of clarity on my part. As far as enthusiasm, and their associated ideas, I've got no shortages there, either. Once the ideas start to come in my head, it's like opening the Hoover Dam! I have had some ideas personally, and also read about ideas from others that could take analog recording well beyond ANYTHING digital could ever offer, let alone any other technology still to come. Ideas such as? Here are a few: 1) Film-type heads (built along the lines of an emulsion instead of using metal so wear is non-existent). Perfect for all your fragile, acetate, and sticky-shed tapes. 2) Multiple track fine line heads (imagine a super-thin track head such that you could pack 25 of these tracks within the space normally required for a regular 2-track head) This would then allow a 2-track recording to be "read" by 50 seperate tracks located within the space of those 2 tracks, regardless of tape width and format used! These heads are built with real-time electronic switching between them, so dropouts are a thing of the past and readability of information is assured and secure! 3) Contact-less heads, similar in design to what is used inside a VCR, but without all the drawbacks of such things. This would take too much explanation, so I won't. 4) Back-side playback head. This means playback has one head located on the front and also the back side of the tape. This additional head is used to a) eliminate hearing pre or post echo, b) to dig out information deep within the tape, extending bass response, and c) To reduce tape hiss levels. My ultimate fantasy machine, based on what technology is available in the here and now, would use either a 1) 3M Mincom transport, or a 2) Technics 15xx transport. The isolated loop concept is the common denominator. A Studer A-80 is my alternate for tricky tapes. For the electronics, the focus gap circuitry using an RF bias frequency at 5 MHz (!) co-built by Keith Johnson and Tim De Paravicini using tubes, of course. 
Lastly, regarding High and Outsides contention that the focus gap technology is licensed, well then, why isn't anyone else using it? It is clearly the way to go, IMHO. There must be something else to this story. Keith is a sharp guy to be sure, but nobody else has thought to use the technology in the past 50 years? Why not? I feel the time has come to show and prove, once and for all, analog is IT for sound quality. Period! Who's with me? Craig