Topics

1

Raw Tape / Beta Testing The New 1mil ATR MDS-36

« on: February 06, 2016, 08:45:15 AM »

I was selected to Beta Test the new tape from ATR.  My reel of ATR MDS-36 arrived this morning and I wasted no time getting it ready for testing.  After unboxing the 10.5” metal reel I transferred half of it’s contents onto a 7” reel as I do not have the capacity to run 10.5” reels at this time.  However this is a true consumer test done on quality consumer ¼ track decks that are representative of the vast majority of consumer machines.  I am using the TR-3000 (TEAC X3) as the primary audio test rig since it is virtually in new condition and was recently serviced and rebelted.

Prior to getting the ATR I made test recordings of what I feel is a suitably universal quality recording that will be musically appealing to the most people.  The track is Bruce Hornsby’s Hot House Ball.  It features a selection of instruments and musical textures and is sophisticated enough in sound to give a good cross reference of how the tapes perform.  The tracks were recorded directly off of the heads during recording and all tapes were set to peak at +3db  The tapes used were Quantegy 457, Pyrol LPR-35, ATR Master Tape and ATR MDS-36.  The tracks have been given the same playback volume which did not vary appreciably.  Forced normalization was not employed.  The digital recording sample rate was 44/24 and the sample track was recorded from CD to tape to SONAR through a Focusrite Scarlett audio interface.

Accompanying the tape was a letter explaining the new tape and giving a very nice explanation for how the nomenclature of the tape was arrived at and   I agree 100% with it’s designation. 

Physically the tape has the finest surfaces I have ever seen on reel to reel tape.  The phenomenal quality of both the oxide surface and the back coat.surfaces rival and in some cases surpass high grade cassette tape! In fact when I first saw the sheen of the polished back coat I did a double take as I thought for a moment that the tape was not back coated!   In this age head wear and difficult replacement the quality of this tape comes at a most opportune time.  I had a conversation at length about the candling process with ATR this week BTW.  Right now as I type this my little studio is awash in the fragrance of the MDS-36.  It smells good a bit sweet and not at all like crayons the way RMGI 468 and AMPEX 357 can smell.  This tape is truly new and is a virtual started from scratch product.  In comparing it to the color of the tapes I tested it with I noticed the following.  ATR is the darkest least ruddy in color, followed by the MDS-36, followed by the Quantegy 457 followed by the Pyrol LPR-35.  After spooling the tape onto the smaller reel I snipped a bit and gave it a pull test.  The oxide and back coat stayed firmly in place in spite of the tape being heavily stretched.  I couldn’t do that with most of my older AMPEX now that is for certain.  After running the tape for the full side of the reel I swabbed the transport.  As expected it came up perfectly clean.  With tape candled this well there is little friction to create deposits.

Now as for the sound that speaks for itself.  But it is easily the equal to it’s “big brother”  ATR Master Tape and none of the tapes I tested it against had anything better going for them.  IMO the MDS-36 is like a fine studio microphone.  It gives you back exactly what

you put into it which is what great tape is supposed to do.  I didn’t include an example of how Quantey 407 performs against it because the 407 was decidedly not up to the
standard of the tapes I tested.  MDS-36 has been a long time coming and it’s pretty much surpasses everything in it’s class.





This youtube video  will let you hear the full ATR MDS-36 track and the full LPR-35 track.  The MDS-36 plays first followed by the LPR-35


https://youtu.be/qO3_YCewElM

2

Raw Tape / Lawson's Show No Mercy RMGI LPR-35 Test

« on: July 19, 2011, 08:12:55 PM »

At last I saw clear to run some tests on RMGI?s LPR-35.  The recent threads concerning some issues with it did indeed prompt me to run this test.  Now before I go into the test itself I will say that I have had an uneasy relationship with RMGI tape since my first purchases of it in 2009.  But that is water under the bridge at this point.

For the test I used a 5? reel with just under 300? feet spooled onto it.  This gives an actual test length of 600? for recording but as the tape is always being run through the transport all the tracks receive wear whether the tape is in record mode or not.  Leader was attached to both ends and for the most part the tape was recorded from side A to side B without rewinding but the recordings were monitored off of the heads as the recordings were made.  I used a variety of CD?s of various genres as a means to determine the character of the tape.  Sometimes the tape was stopped and playback was carefully listened to for quality and flaws.   I found that running the tape through three cycles of recording both sides was about the limit of my concentration to actually listen critically to the results.  So when I felt ear fatigue was setting in I took a break.  Whenever I went back and listened to the last playback the tape always sounded better than when I broke for rest but this is expected.

For the test I used my TEAC A-2300SD.  The machine was cleaned and demagnetized before starting the test.  Speed was set at 7.5ips and Dolby was engaged.  Both bias and EQ switches were set in the #1 positions.  A white piece of paper was placed below the transport to show up any shed or shaving particles.  Listening was done through Sennheiser HD 280 headphones.

The tape itself is a typical back coated type that is a deep rusty brown in color on the head side and a matt black on the backside.  Noticeable to me was the thinness of the LPR-35 as its 1 mil thick.  I?ve been working with 1.5 mil thick Ampex and RMGI for two years now.  When handling 1 mil tape it pays to be mindful that it?s much easier to damage it than its thicker counterparts.

The testing schedule went as follows.

Friday 7/1/11:  Five full passes of recording were achieved and one dedicated listening pass at the end of the fifth pass.  This totaled 3000? of tape travel.  Recorded music was Dion?s Son of Skip James.  All five recording passes were perfect.  Peak db was allowed to go as high as +4db without distortion of any type.  Upon dedicated listen pass the tape was confirmed to have recorded perfectly.  At session?s end the heads and transport were cleaned and showed what was minor and typical tape deposits.  There was no particle shedding and no edge shaving observed at all.

Saturday 7/2/11:  Taping began with Goo Goo Dolls Dizzy Up The Girl.  Specifically the tracks Slide, Broadway and Black Balloon.  This was followed by Marshall Crenshaw?s  Marshall Crenshaw CD and the tracks Cynical Girl, There She Goes and Rockin Around In NYC.  Next was Gin Blossoms New Miserable Experience and the tracks Lost Horizons, Hey Jealousy and Allison Road.  These selections were chosen for the bright jangley nature of the music. The recordings were and monitored directly off the heads in real time.  This amounted to 5,400? of tape travel through the transport for a total of 8,400? of tape travel.   The response and performance of the tape was perfect throughout and captured all of the intended  brightness of the selected tracks.  The heads and transport were swabbed with denatured alcohol using the same swab as I used in the beginning of the test.  Oxide and tape particulates were nil.  Overall impression was very positive in all respects.

Saturday 7/2/11 Second Session:  Anita Baker?s Rapture CD was chosen and was run without specifically selecting tracks due to the very ?signature? sound of this CD.   Next came Bruce Hornsby?s Hot House and the tracks Spider Fingers, Tango King and Hot House were chosen.  From there I  went to Patty Griffins Flaming Red and the tracks Mary, Tony and Peter Pan..  All selections were run through 3 recording passes.   These selections have a smooth rich texture with abundant little sonic details.  By sessions end the tape had acquired another 5,400? of travel for a total of 13,800 of travel and still no discernible drop off in sound quality and still no dropouts or physical signs of tape wear/failure.  I had the distinct impression that I could have continued the tests further with continued success but I sensed that it would be pointless at this stage.  So I prepared to conclude the test.

Sunday 7/3/11:  I used for the final session 3 selections of my own original music.  These tracks are mixed very brightly and feature lots of acoustic guitar.  I Degaussed the heads again and cleaned the transport.  Then I rolled tape.  The LPR-35 performed flawlessly and was still able to capture the intended brightness of  these tracks.  These recordings were taken directly off of the 96/24 SONAR digital master tracks and represent the most detailed and brightest recordings of the test which is why I saved them for last.  If anything the transfer to tape achieved the desirable effects of tape compression and analog warmth  while retaining the detail of the digital masters.   I was impressed, very impressed..

Now I had intended to make a lot more passes over this reel of tape and I may yet.  However I realized mid way through that I was running my TEAC harder than I?d ever run it before.    More importantly though I had run the RMGI LPR-35 harder than any tape I?d ever run.  While my intent was to run this reel to death it became clear as the test went on that I perhaps would have run my TEAC to death before making the tape quit.  The tape didn?t quit nor did it exhibit any weaknesses.

If I am to compare RMGI LPR-35 to the tapes I used when my TEAC was new I can say that it exceeds them all, some by a very wide margin too.  Granted that this is only a short section of a large pancake of tape but the potential is outstanding and I?ve reason to believe that the rest of the tape is as perfect as this section.  There for me only remains now the question of longevity.  But my LPR-35 seems to run clean, in fact cleaner than Ampex Grand Master that I used regularly when it was current.  So at last I think I?ve come home and will have my venerable A-2300SD  biased to accept LPR-35.  I have a pancake of ATR on the way but somehow I don?t think I?ll require it except as a the option of having choice.  But I firmly believe that at least on my TEAC the LPR-35 is going to be a tough act to follow.

3

Raw Tape / Petition For MAXELL To Reintroduce Reel To Reel Tape!

« on: December 15, 2010, 12:14:07 AM »

Tapeheads.net has started a petition for Maxell to reintroduce reel to reel tape.  Please support this effort!

http://www.tapeheads.net/petition.htm

Thanks
Lance

4

Reel to Reel Tape Machines / Hot Rodding TEAC RTR?

« on: August 14, 2009, 04:36:59 PM »

Years ago I had an inexpensive mono RTR that could run at 2 speeds.  I believe it was 3.5 and 7.50 ips.  The method of changing speed was quite novel and worked well all things considered.  To change from low to high speed you simply placed an engineered sleeve over the capstan which increased the diameter  of the capstan and increased the transport speed.

My TEAC A-2300 SD runs at 3.5 and 7.50 ips.  I'm considering having a friend who is an experimental machinist turn me a sleeve from brass that will slip over the capstan of my A-2300 to allow it to run a faster tape transport speed.  This in effect would turn the TEAC into a 4 speed machine.  While I'm not looking to run at 15ips as it only takes 7" reels I'm thinking that a speed of 10-12 ips would improve sound and still not be an absolute tape eater.  I'm not overly concerned that recordings made at 10-12ips would only be playable on my modified deck as I'm looking for a method of recording high quality 2 track live performances and perhaps some special digital to analog mastering.

Anybody know if this has been tired in modern times.  The little recorder I had with the speed sleeve was made in the very early 1960's and was not a major make.

5

Raw Tape / Shedding RMG. Is this excessive?

« on: July 30, 2009, 03:26:21 PM »

I've been running lots of test on my new RMG 468 and overall I like the sound.  However I set the machine up so that it would be on a white surface where shedding particles would show up easier.  What appears in the photo is about 2/3 of the total amount of shedding as I cleaned away the early accumulation.  I've run the tape about 20 times an re recorded over the 1st half of the 1st side about 10 times.  Recording on the heavily used section is getting poor but the lightly used sections sound fine.  The second side is un recorded on having just wiped the first side I'm planning to record on the second side.  In any event the amount of shed I feel is excessive but its been years since I've seriously worked with tape.  Any opinions?  Thanks!

6

Tape Tech / Bias settings on TEAC 2300SD using RMG 468

« on: July 24, 2009, 09:36:58 PM »

I just received my shipment of RMG 468 and 20 minute run through the machine did not produce any abnormal shedding or deposits.  However I haven't been able to locate my owners manual for my TEAC so I'm not sure how to set the bias switches.  Anyone up on the settngs?

7

Reel to Reel Tape Machines / 1979 TEAC A-2300 SD In Service Again.

« on: July 05, 2009, 07:35:23 PM »

This is my first post and I'm not sure where I should post this.  I purchased my TEAC A-2300 SD new in early 1979.  It saw considerable service for about 5 years in a variety of venues, from home demo recordings of mine to live theater recordings and some live audio performances.   I acquired a great many reels of late 70's early 80's tape and unfortunately many of those tapes are no longer playable.  However most of the important ones somehow survived.  In any event the TEAC was in dead storage for a decade and a half as I concentrated on putting together my home studio which is PC based.  However in spite of having some good very modern equipment the old TEAC was always in the back of my mind and one day I promised I'd put it back into service.  Well that day came.  The lion's share of making the TEAC servicable was simply cleaning it throughly both inside and out and servicing all of the switches and pots.  One nagging problem however was getting the pinch roller to engage as it had become very lazy.  A through cleaning and lubrication put it right.  After getting it sorted out I also dug out my Technics SU-7300 amplifer purchased within a month of the TEAC.  For a listening medium I located the pristine reel to reel copy of Bob Dylan's Blonde On Blonde that I made on the then brand new TEAC from a brand new only been played once (for that recording)  LP original pressing.  The listening was sublime simply out of this world.  After being in a virtually 100% digital audio domain for over a decade coming back to first rate quality analog tape was a revelation.  Now if I can only find some tape......