Tape Project Forum
Tape Machines => Reel to Reel Tape Machines => Topic started by: jcmusic on September 30, 2009, 02:49:30 AM
-
I have a Otari MX5050 BII that is modded to use the Bottlehead Seduction with relaped heads, I am considering getting a Studer A810. Would I be better off with the 810 or maybe upgradeing the Otari heads? Or something else, opinions please.
Jay
-
You mean to tell me that no one here has an opinion, or something to say on this!!! Unbelieveable!!!
Jay
-
You mean to tell me that no one here has an opinion, or something to say on this!!! Unbelieveable!!!
Jay
I could give you an opinion but I don't play in those leagues.
The Studer folks will say to do that. Tape Project folks are modding Otaris. They would say that their electronics would be better than the stock Studer ones, but probably more so with the tube repro than the seduction. They might also say the better heads would be better than the stock Studer ones. As to the modded transport, it might be better than the stock Studer in sound quality but the Studer would beat the stock Otari. All of this is from others opinions I have gathered on this forum. Perhaps, since you have the Otari already you would get more bang for the buck with upgrades to it.
-
Hey Steve,
Thanks so much for your opinion, seems like you are the only person here that is alive or feels like helping another out!!! Thanks again.
Jay
-
Jay my brother-Sorry I didn't see your post sooner or I would have posted my thoughts. In my opinion, I would rather have a Studer A810 than an Otari MX5050. I think the tape path is much better than the Otari MX5050. I think the Studer is just more of a professional deck than the Otari MX5050. Just my $.02 worth.
Mark
-
I am by no means an expert in the subject but I can tell you that since I decided that I'll go with tape all the way I ordered an ATR machine from Mike Spitz and a Tube repro from BH upgrading from a hot rodded Technics with a Seduction. I have a system with very decent resolution and I'm really expecting this to be a major sonic upgrade. Time will tell.
-
Well, now you are talking about a $10K machine vice a $3K machine.
-
Jay, my take on the mechanics is that the Studer in good shape is a fantastic machine. I have only worked with one B2, and that was significantly inferior to my B3 mechanically. I really didn't like the way one puts on the reels. Now this may have been specific to that machine. What I don't know is the electronics issue, whether the seduction is superior or inferior to the stock Studer. If you can bypass the Studer electronics for the BH Repro, that should be a clear winner. But that would also be true electronically with upgrading from the Seduction to the Repro. Ki is the 810 expert. I think he has more of them than all of the rest of us put together. Larry
-
This is to all who replyed in this thread thank you very much for your opinions and advice, I really do appreciate your time. I think most of us all are in agreement that the Studer is a better trasnsport, and for the electronics bypassing them would be the path for me; but a repro amp would be 10x what I have in the Seduction. I don't think I am going to hear an improvment of 10x better sound!!! So it would have to be the Seduction or Eros!!! Another thought would be to upgrade the Otari's heads to the Flux Magnetic's, that would be about half the cost of the Studer with the BH electronics. Need more info???
Jay
-
Jay-if money is the prime concern, you already have your answer. However, new heads won't make the Otari a Studer beater.
Mark
-
Jay-if money is the prime concern, you already have your answer. However, new heads won't make the Otari a Studer beater.
Mark
Hi Mark,
Not just new heads, but the ones the The TP is using for their mods on the RS1500's and the MX5050!!! They are suppose to be much better than the stock heads!!! It is not all about the money!!! It is the best sound that I am trying to find!!!
Jay
-
Best sound ... um that would be live. :-)
The only disadvantage I can see is damage to a deck
with freight carriers if you send out to be updated.
For me now - the best sound is upgrading my primary amp.
Since I use valve audio, I like to keep the older amp around
as a spare.
-
Hey Jay,
I've kinda stayed out of this since I believe you know my feelings regarding this (I think your money would be better spent upgrading).
I recently upgraded to the Flux Magnetics 1/2 track head so here are my impressions.
At 15 ips (which these heads are designed for) the bass is more textured and defined. The midrange is more detailed sounding from what I attribute to the lack of overhang by the bass. I find the differences to be most obvious with music with lots of bass content.
The high frequencies are very close to what I heard with the stock Technics head but I considered them to be just about unbeatable when properly adjusted. They may be a tad more open but I can't really say for sure.
Overall, I'm really pleased with the new head. If you're getting your tape path modified, I think at the price of adding the head, it's a no brainer. Maybe if it was $2k (like most mid rated phono cartridges) it would be something you'd need to consider carefully.
Bear in mind that these impressions are also the result of weeks of tweaking everything (tensions, pinch rollers, head adjustments, guide adjustments etc.). But, I am the poster boy for endless tweaking and I realize that this sort of activity is not realistic for most folks. But, that's one of the great benefits to having Doc work on your machine. The tweaking comes with the mods.
-
Well Steve I am kinda glad you decided to get into this one and give me your impressions of the Flux head, BTW did you only get the replay head? Also you are talking about your RS1500 right? I am talking about the MX5050!!! My point is this, do I get the Studer and mod with external electronis? Or do I get the Flux heads for my Otari? If upgrading the heads will give me the same sound that I would get from the Studer, than that would be the way to go!!! Now if the Studer with mods is going to sound alot better than the Otari with Flux heads than that is the way for me to go!!!
jay
-
If you can afford it, I'd opine that the Studer is the way to go - based on conversations with friends and the fact that I have one right now to play with. The Studer heads beat the Otari hands down and from reports, I believe they beat the Flux Magnetics also, so you'll save money by not having to change heads. Will see how they stack up against the Nortronics.
Charles
-
Hi Jay,
Yes, I'm talking about the upgrades I've done to my Technics. Which is one of the reasons I've stayed out of this but I just thought I'd let you know my thoughts on the Flux head.
Regarding the Otari and Studer,.. I don't know. You may have be the one to tell us.
-
Hi Jay,
Yes, I'm talking about the upgrades I've done to my Technics. Which is one of the reasons I've stayed out of this but I just thought I'd let you know my thoughts on the Flux head.
Regarding the Otari and Studer,.. I don't know. You may have be the one to tell us.
Well Steve,
That may happen real soon as my new Studer A810 is on the truck, and arriving tomorrow 10/27/09. I can not wait to check it out!!! I am pretty excited!!!
Jay
-
Cool!
Try and get some sleep and don't forget to eat!
Have fun!!!!
-
Cool Jay,
Will you use it with your Seduction or what electronics?
What was your source for the machine? When you say "new" what do you mean?
Thanks!
-
Cool!
Try and get some sleep and don't forget to eat!
Have fun!!!!
Steve,
Thanks for advice and I will get some sleep, have to get up early do a few things before it arrives!!!
Jay
-
Cool Jay,
Will you use it with your Seduction or what electronics?
What was your source for the machine? When you say "new" what do you mean?
Thanks!
Hi Xavier,
I mean new to me, I will use it as is for now. I have alot of listening test I would like to do before making any mods or anything else. I also want to compare how it records.
Jay
-
Update to my last post.
Spent a part of yesterday afternoon with a friend "auditioning" the Studer A810 heads (on that machine) versus the Nortronics pro (on my Stella). Used the Project "Dances" tape. I couldn't hear any difference between them tho my friend slightly preferred the Nortronics. Very good separation/resolution.
This has got me thinking - how do the heads on the A77/B77 compare - maybe they are just as good??? Are they (A and B) identical - anyone (able to) do(ne) some research?? If as good (or even close), could "open up" a new, inexpensive tape project machine prospect.
Someone able/want to send me a machine (with the heads wired out) so I could compare???
Charles
-
I think the so-so Studer electronics mask any differences.
My colleague can't wait to replace the A80 in the studio, calls it a "fog machine" and claims all the A series have sonically mediocre electronics in his experience
I'm trying to persuade him that a Stellavox SM8 with Lundahl transformers would make a good replacement.
It would certainly free up some space in a tight little control room that has become quite warm since the arrival of a full-track Ampex 300!
LOL
Brian.
-
I think the so-so Studer electronics mask any differences.
My colleague can't wait to replace the A80 in the studio, calls it a "fog machine" and claims all the A series have sonically mediocre electronics in his experience
I'm trying to persuade him that a Stellavox SM8 with Lundahl transformers would make a good replacement.
It would certainly free up some space in a tight little control room that has become quite warm since the arrival of a full-track Ampex 300!
LOL
Brian.
Brian,
Why do you say so so electronic's of the Studer's? This I find kinda interesting!!!
Jay
-
Brian,Why do you say so so electronic's of the Studer's? This I find kinda interesting!!!
Jay
The problem is likely due to Studer's adoption of 741-type chips in the line drive. I haven't got the A80/A810/A820 schematics to hand but my PR99 has cascaded ICs there. Hence Paul S's recommendation to take unbalanced output from earlier in the chain. In the studio this is not really an option.
Anyone out there replacing Studer output cards with discrete circuitry?
Brian.
-
Brian--
I have the schematics but am not too techy; however, I'm sure Ki can chime in later. In any event, I believe at least the A80 is a bit different and has no cascaded ICs. It is regarded as one of the nicer sounding Studers and there are many well-known albums that were mastered on one. Anyone else know more about this?
-
Brian,Why do you say so so electronic's of the Studer's? This I find kinda interesting!!!
Jay
The problem is likely due to Studer's adoption of 741-type chips in the line drive. I haven't got the A80/A810/A820 schematics to hand but my PR99 has cascaded ICs there. Hence Paul S's recommendation to take unbalanced output from earlier in the chain. In the studio this is not really an option.
Anyone out there replacing Studer output cards with discrete circuitry?
Brian.
Well I am only guessing, but I wouldn't think you could compare the PR99 to any of the A series machines. I also wouldn't think they used the same IC's.
Jay
-
I know my friend doesn't like the sound of the A series after 20+ years in studios, both sides of the glass. He much prefers the sound of the 3M M79 in comparison.
Just found this outfit that sells an "All discrete Studer A101 Opamp" replacement for the A80 "These are remakes using the original Fairchild Transistors and layout found in the original Studer A101."...
http://morrisaudioproduction.com/
Next time I'm at the studio (hopefully in the next week or two) I'll try and have a dekko at the Studer's output board to test my hypothesis in lieu of a schematic.
But I'm sure there are people here who know for sure.
Brian.
-
Brian,
regarding "I think the so-so Studer electronics mask any differences."
Just so we're clear here; with both decks, the heads are "wired out" and I'm using the same playback Cello electronics, so I'm trying to limit the differences to the heads.
Charles
-
Great thread guys!
Charles,
I'm sure you already have one planned, but we're all expecting a subjective and objective review of your findings.
Keep up the good work!
-
741's if used, will mask any changes, but you can buy op-amps that will plug straight in without resorting to really expensive stuff!
Regards
Dave
-
Just so we're clear here; with both decks, the heads are "wired out" and I'm using the same playback Cello electronics, so I'm trying to limit the differences to the heads.
Ah, didn't pick up on that so went marching blindly on. Not untypical of me I'm afraid.
Sorry Charles.
Brian.
-
Hi Brian:
I am a bit late to the party but Kip had sent me this thread so I am compelled to comment.
The 741 opamp is the very first operational amplifier to my knowledge - manufactured by Texas Instrument in the 70's and I have not seen one in any of the Studer A series tape machines, A807, A810, A80RC, A80VU, or the A820 that I own and have personally explored.
If your friend had experienced "foggy" sound from a Studer, I have to say that the machine might not have been in proper operating condition. Then, the term "foggy" is too subjective.
The most used signal opamp in Studers is the NE5532. Other than A80s, it is widely used in pre-preamps and preamp circuits both Record and Repro use. I have tried to source a more modern opamp as a replacement but wasn't successful (may be happy with its performance and didn't try hard enough ;-)).
The A80VU machines used now obsolete TDA941 amps. The replacement module Studer had created is NE5532 on a small circuit board in modified 8 pin configuration. The A80RC has no opamps in the audio circuit. The A101 opamp is made of all discrete transistors and passive component in a module form. Thus, it is not an IC.
On the other hand, there are general dislike for opamps in audiophile community. If one looks at the inner workings of an opamp like the NE5532, you will see it is made up of many transistors and other passive components in a small package. So in reallity, one can create the NE5532 with same number of acitive and passive componets and have it working the same way.
-
Thanks Ki. I subsequently got hold of the A80RC repro schematic and indeed there is just discrete devices on that board.
My friend is not alone in being critical of the A80RC sound and apparently it was not unknown for broadcasters & larger studios to make modifications to those cards. I have encouraged my friend not to be hasty in getting rid of the machine but discuss the matter with the technician, who is ex-Decca.
Currently the 2-track 1/4" A80RC sonics are noticeably inferior to that of the 8-track 1" 3M M79 that is its companion.
Both machines set up for 900.
BTW, I am only reporting on this. I have not heard the comparison for myself yet.
However, over time I have learned that my aural acuity is far inferior to that of my friend.
Brian.
-
The 741 opamp is the very first operational amplifier to my knowledge - manufactured by Texas Instrument in the 70's and I have not seen one in any of the Studer A series tape machines, A807, A810, A80RC, A80VU, or the A820 that I own and have personally explored.
Hi Ki,
The first monolithic opamp was the uA702 - several years before the 741. I have never seen one, but I have used the uA709, that also preceded the 741. The 741 was the first compensated opamp - it was easier to use, but perhaps sounds bad because of it!
Francisco
-
Hi Francisco:
Thanks for the info. I learn something everyday. I remember 741 vividly because it was used in one of my EE classes lecture and do remember professor raving about how many trasnsistors they stuffed in the tiny chip - back in 1975.
Hi Brian:
Your friend's 3M M79 must be one special machine. As for pure sonic comparison A80RC in properly working condition has to be one of the top choices but I would love to hear the 3M M79 someday - perhaps before I die...
BTW, as I read on the latest issue of Stereophile magzine that the Abbey Road studio engineers compared all available master recorders for their remastering of the Beatles work and had selected a Studer - my guess (and hope) is that it was a A80RC Mk II.
-
BTW, as I read on the latest issue of Stereophile magzine that the Abbey Road studio engineers compared all available master recorders for their remastering of the Beatles work and had selected a Studer - my guess (and hope) is that it was a A80RC Mk II.
here is a list of Studer RTR decks Abby Road Studios would choose from;
http://www.abbeyroad.co.uk/_static_files/pdf/Abbey_Road_Mastering_Room_Tech_Specs.pdf (http://www.abbeyroad.co.uk/_static_files/pdf/Abbey_Road_Mastering_Room_Tech_Specs.pdf)
-
Brian states, that his colleague states:
"I think the so-so Studer electronics mask any differences.
My colleague can't wait to replace the A80 in the studio, calls it a "fog machine" and claims all the A series have sonically mediocre electronics in his experience"
Humm, sounds like his A80 (is it an RC or VU??) was "rode hard and put-away wet" to use US cowboy parlance! Has the A80 been re-capped? These machines are notorious for needing all of their electrolytics replaced by this time. Also the transport condition matters! How's the capstan? Is in need of a rebuild? Is the capstan shaft all worn and shiny where the tape passes by? How are the transport bearings? Is it time for a major bearing replacement & overhaul? All these things will contribute to foggy sound. This is often the case with the A series Studers as the parts (& work) are very expensive, so very typically they do not get done, and the machine is just passed along, as such Studers will just keep on playing and playing in spite of the neglect. They are made to do that, but should not be judged sonically on that basis.
Imagine someone tells you that their Maserati is sluggish, with slow handling, compared to their DeLorean? Makes you wonder right?
Yes, the A80VU is ripe for audiophile electronics, 'cause the transport is that good. At least Mark Levinson thought so. (and I plot such schemes myself)
BUT, ah, that mine ear should be offended by nothing less than any model Studer in tip-top shape, ....then life would truly be very, very good indeed!
-cdw
-
Hi Mike:
After seeing the list of analog machines, I change my mind... Abbey Road must have used the 1/2" Studer A820 to remaster the Beatles CD set!
Hi Christopher:
Well said. I have learned that the Studer bearings will dry out even without use over long time. Sub-par bearings in the tape path would certainly smear the music.
The Mark Levinson ML5 is based on Studer A80RC.
-
Well folks, I have had an opportunity to "interrogate" my friend and think I can now discern why there is a disparity of opinion.
It is down to the philosophy of usage. The A80RC is indeed a faithful reproducer. HOWEVER from an artistic point of view its presentation is considered (we're into subjective semantics here) "bland" and "Germanic". My friend compares it to the EMT 930s turntable he used to use which he sold since he preferred the emotional involvement of a Garrard. He is not originally an engineer but a musician and producer.
It is from that 'community' that the criticism emerges. A community which seeks to maximize the emotional involvement of the listener.
Somehow the 3M is superior to the Studer in this respect. A clue lies in the fact that Bruce Swedein chose 3M machines to record Michael Jackson.
As in all human affairs there will always be at least two camps.
I'm sure I would be quite happy with an A80RC as a Tape Project playback machine purely on a sounding basis - but I have just bought a less visually assertive Stellavox for home replay ;o)
Brian.
-
Before anyone gets too excited about finding an M79 or one of the other 3M machines, I was considering that a few years back.
Unfortunately, from what I've been able to gather, it's a pretty high maintenance machine (at least in the condition that most will be found in today). Parts are non-existent and they're huge.
That's not to say that all the trouble of finding one and getting it up to good working condition wouldn't be worth it. One of these days, I might go for it.
I do know a lot more now than I did back then about what it would take to restore one of these puppies, but it would still be a daunting project.
I did have a chance to buy a working 4 track, 1/2 inch M79 for $400 but passed on it. If I'd had room, I might have bought it just for the hell of it. But, I have little doubt that anything would have been done to it by now.
For the time and money involved, I think I'd prefer to start out with something like an ATR102 and add my Repro,.. or something like this;
(http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/7011/atrmr70.jpg)
By ironbut (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/ironbut) at 2009-11-05
-
You wouldn't have to twist my arm too hard for an MR70 anyway and with an ATR transport ... :-) :-)
Too bad it is out of reach of we poor mortal humans.
-
Yep,
In true audiophile fashion, I don't know what that baby would sound like, but I sure would like to find out!
-
For a 3M guaranteed experienced tech support is mandatory, definitely not something for the home folks. Not to forget that we are only concerned with replay, not record, here.
However, re "guaranteed experienced tech support". It was with great shock and much sadness that I received an email this morning with the news that the UK's most experienced Nagra technician, David Lane, had died. The email was in reply to one I had sent Mr Lane yesterday as part of an ongoing dialogue.
A sobering reminder that there are no guarantees when it come to vintage machines.
Brian.
-
Ok guys I stared this thread in the hope that I would get some answers, well I did and the result is that I bought a Studer A810. Because of work I have had very limited time with it, but the early results are very positive!!! There will be more later with pic's.
Jay
-
Um,.. I guess we did get just a tiny bit off track there. Sorry Jay.
But hey, it sounds like you made your decision and we'll all be waiting for a full report.
Have fun!
-
Sorry I hijacked your thread somewhat but glad you have made your excellent choice Jay. Your adventure has begun!
Brian.