Jump to content

Is Reel to Reel really that good?


Jim

Recommended Posts

Those things you mentioned as reasons to dislike DBX are amateur errors.  A correctly set DBX actually does NOTHING!  By that I mean the best setting is the one you can't hear except that the dynamic range is that of the original sound and the noise floor reduced.  I find not having DBX in use more objectionable by far that these complaints. 

 

Getting the right setting isn't rocket science but some seem to be unable to hear "just right."  I use a Re-equalizer post phono stage for 78s that allows adjustment for the varying curves used prior to RIAA standardization.  Same there.  You either hear "right" or you don't.  While there are tables for the various labels and years, I find using those mainly to get in the neighborhood best, then a quick adjustment or two to "tune in." 

 

Dave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mallette said:

Those things you mentioned as reasons to dislike DBX are amateur errors.  A correctly set DBX actually does NOTHING!  By that I mean the best setting is the one you can't hear except that the dynamic range is that of the original sound and the noise floor reduced.  I find not having DBX in use more objectionable by far that these complaints. 

 

Getting the right setting isn't rocket science but some seem to be unable to hear "just right."  I use a Re-equalizer post phono stage for 78s that allows adjustment for the varying curves used prior to RIAA standardization.  Same there.  You either hear "right" or you don't.  While there are tables for the various labels and years, I find using those mainly to get in the neighborhood best, then a quick adjustment or two to "tune in." 

 

Dave

Could not agree more!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to be obnoxious or rude but how old are you? I started in 1962 with "audio" and hence have seen and heard many changes over the years. Back in the day 70-73 was in the Army overseas at that time my main system was a Pioneer SX 1080 receiver a Pioneer PL 71 turntable, Pioneer CS 99A, and a Teac 2010 R-R. If you ever are so fortunate to hear a system even close to this vintage your questions would be answered!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Angryvet73 said:

Not to be obnoxious or rude but how old are you? I started in 1962 with "audio" and hence have seen and heard many changes over the years. Back in the day 70-73 was in the Army overseas at that time my main system was a Pioneer SX 1080 receiver a Pioneer PL 71 turntable, Pioneer CS 99A, and a Teac 2010 R-R. If you ever are so fortunate to hear a system even close to this vintage your questions would be answered!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Heard that... or not. I have tapes I made in the late '60s that have very minor hiss, recorded on an old Sony stereo recorder. Only had two heads, but you could record on one track at a time. Used to record guitar/vocals on one track and add another track with other parts. Since the record/playback head was the same, there wasn't a sync issue. Did have some issues where the bias freq. would deviate and have a momentary audible warble. I've still got those tapes.

 

My A-3340s was a great deck, which I still have, and I got an A-1500 a couple of years ago (for free). The A-3340s was purchased in '72, about the time you were 'overseas'. Were you on vacation in Southeast Asia? Thanks for your service. I believe Dave was there too.

 

What is bad is having to do the maintenance on them. The DAT recorder, on the other hand, has zero hiss and zero wow and flutter, which is pretty nice.

 

Bruce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Angryvet73 said:

Not to be obnoxious or rude but how old are you? I started in 1962 with "audio" and hence have seen and heard many changes over the years. Back in the day 70-73 was in the Army overseas at that time my main system was a Pioneer SX 1080 receiver a Pioneer PL 71 turntable, Pioneer CS 99A, and a Teac 2010 R-R. If you ever are so fortunate to hear a system even close to this vintage your questions would be answered!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Who are you asking? LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The simple answer to "Is Reel-to-Reel really that good..." is....if it WASN'T, then why do Neil Young and so many others still use it for their mastering?  Fidelity in R2R is all about quality tape, great tape recording and playback heads, and a dependable quality drive unit....COMBINED with high tape speed, and physical tape/head track width dimensions...PLUS making sure everything is adjusted properly.

 

It is the king of analog recording, the king of analog mixing, and the king of analog playback.  And for those who highly prize classics re-mixes, or re-mastered originals, from pre-digital days, then those re-mixes or re-masters come from tape masters, no matter whether the final output source YOU prefer is digital or not. So, that pretty much covers the answer in a nutshell.

 

Back when recordings were cut directly to the record itself was a VERY long time ago, but since then recordings were put on tape, and quite often put on synchronized multi-track tape machines in separate tracks depending on how many mic sources were used and how many overdubs would be needed to "assemble the music" for final use on two, or more tracked playback media, such as stereo, quad, etc.  The same thing is done digitally nowadays more often than not, but how can you possibly take a NON-digitally recorded media from back when digital had not even been invented (yet) and re-master or re-mix it without using the original tape masters to begin with, and still maintain FIDELITY?  Everybody has their own opinions of what they LIKE best, but this is about SOURCE material...and analog does NOT lose a thing that was recorded, providing the recorded media was high quality, recorded on the right equipment, and the work was done by somebody who knew what they were doing!

 

And yes, I still have my TEAC A-2340-R...and I still play tapes recorded back in the 1970's with it, although I play digital media much more often, simply because good tape is so much more expensive now.  And I have been using a DBX II model 124 ever since I bought the tape deck and it together in 1975!

 

Trust me, when you KNOW HOW to "run a party" using music, you can literally choreograph with that music when people will leave the dance floor, get another drink, or be romantic ON that dance floor (or off of it)...and having two or more hours of music on one tape, which YOU can record...and another two or three to follow that first one, can take you away from the DJ table and let you be a real party PARTICIPANT!...for quite some time!  So what do you tell a partier who keeps asking for a particular song request?  You simply tell them that "it is coming", or "you missed it, because you got here late!" because you know what you recorded, and about when it will pop up, if it hasn't already done so.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Helluva post, HDBR!  As mentioned above, having the privilege to transcribe recordings engineered by PWK in the early 50s that sound better than most of what was recorded last year I concur.  Incredible medium.  Granted, acetate after over half a century is as fragile as the Dead Sea Scrolls and each and every splice has to be replace with great care, and even then sometimes the stuff just parts and has to be repaired it doesn't lose a thing in the process.  Never thought I'd again need my trusty old Editall block or the skills I learned in the radio industry and Armed Forces RTV Network but they have proven essential in this task...and I am thankful for them! 

 

It is not now, nor was it from the acoustic days, about the medium.  It is, and always has been, about the engineering.  Edison did great recording with shear physical force on compliant materials with a very limited ability to handle the audio spectrum...but many still convey a sense of presence simply not found in recordings made with the latest technology. 

 

My personal opinion is that analog tape remains the pinnacle of recording technology as far as having the bulk of all great recordings originated on it that fully contain the audible spectrum.  As decades pass, that will change assuming current engineers return to the basics of PWK and others whose values were about striving for the closest our tools allow to preserving an acoustic space/time event. 

 

Dave

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, HDBRbuilder said:

The simple answer to "Is Reel-to-Reel really that good..." is....if it WASN'T, then why do Neil Young and so many others still use it for their mastering?  Fidelity in R2R is all about quality tape, great tape recording and playback heads, and a dependable quality drive unit....COMBINED with high tape speed, and physical tape/head track width dimensions...PLUS making sure everything is adjusted properly.

 

It is the king of analog recording, the king of analog mixing, and the king of analog playback.  And for those who highly prize classics re-mixes, or re-mastered originals, from pre-digital days, then those re-mixes or re-masters come from tape masters, no matter whether the final output source YOU prefer is digital or not. So, that pretty much covers the answer in a nutshell.

 

Back when recordings were cut directly to the record itself was a VERY long time ago, but since then recordings were put on tape, and quite often put on synchronized multi-track tape machines in separate tracks depending on how many mic sources were used and how many overdubs would be needed to "assemble the music" for final use on two, or more tracked playback media, such as stereo, quad, etc.  The same thing is done digitally nowadays more often than not, but how can you possibly take a NON-digitally recorded media from back when digital had not even been invented (yet) and re-master or re-mix it without using the original tape masters to begin with, and still maintain FIDELITY?  Everybody has their own opinions of what they LIKE best, but this is about SOURCE material...and analog does NOT lose a thing that was recorded, providing the recorded media was high quality, recorded on the right equipment, and the work was done by somebody who knew what they were doing!

 

And yes, I still have my TEAC A-2340-R...and I still play tapes recorded back in the 1970's with it, although I play digital media much more often, simply because good tape is so much more expensive now.  And I have been using a DBX II model 124 ever since I bought the tape deck and it together in 1975!

 

Trust me, when you KNOW HOW to "run a party" using music, you can literally choreograph with that music when people will leave the dance floor, get another drink, or be romantic ON that dance floor (or off of it)...and having two or more hours of music on one tape, which YOU can record...and another two or three to follow that first one, can take you away from the DJ table and let you be a real party PARTICIPANT!...for quite some time!  So what do you tell a partier who keeps asking for a particular song request?  You simply tell them that "it is coming", or "you missed it, because you got here late!" because you know what you recorded, and about when it will pop up, if it hasn't already done so.

 

Well said!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, back when I worked at Klipsch I put on a few parties at my little rent house out in the country south of Emmett, AR.  I used my old H/K 900+ receiver (32 wpc in quad mode) in those days (still have it!), and I would throw a pair of plant loaner LaScalas  backed up to the rear of the house so that they projected out across the back yard, where MOST of the partying was going on, and I had the Heresys in the living room, where the equipment was...Lascalas on speakers A- LF and RF, and Heresys on speakers A- LR and RR with the receiver in quad mode, with my TEAC A2340-R LF and RF outputs going into the H/K LF and RF inputs on quad tape-in, while the inputs for LR and RR on the same receiver input had the cassette deck (Technics R-676-AUS) R and L outputs in them.  This allowed me to have country music in the living room through the receiver's same tape monitor, and Rock going to the LaScalas outside at the same time...and all I had to do was raise or lower the joystick balance control and volume control on the receiver to crank more or less output into whichever pair of speakers needed it.  My turntable (Technics SL-1300) was used only while changing tapes...and lots of folks could NOT understand how I was doing it!  LOL!

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2016 at 1:08 PM, HDBRbuilder said:

BTW, back when I worked at Klipsch I put on a few parties at my little rent house out in the country south of Emmett, AR.  I used my old H/K 900+ receiver (32 wpc in quad mode) in those days (still have it!), and I would throw a pair of plant loaner LaScalas  backed up to the rear of the house so that they projected out across the back yard, where MOST of the partying was going on, and I had the Heresys in the living room, where the equipment was...Lascalas on speakers A- LF and RF, and Heresys on speakers A- LR and RR with the receiver in quad mode, with my TEAC A2340-R LF and RF outputs going into the H/K LF and RF inputs on quad tape-in, while the inputs for LR and RR on the same receiver input had the cassette deck (Technics R-676-AUS) R and L outputs in them.  This allowed me to have country music in the living room through the receiver's same tape monitor, and Rock going to the LaScalas outside at the same time...and all I had to do was raise or lower the joystick balance control and volume control on the receiver to crank more or less output into whichever pair of speakers needed it.  My turntable (Technics SL-1300) was used only while changing tapes...and lots of folks could NOT understand how I was dong it!  LOL!

 

NICE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2016 at 5:15 PM, BamaMike said:

GX-747

 

I once had that exact GX-747.  Decided I wasn't using it much anymore....gave it to a friend.  To give it to him, I loaded it into my car (along with all my tapes) and drive about 4 hours (one way) to deliver it to him.

 

Of all the things I've given away...  if I were to be offered any of them back, this is probably the one thing I'd accept.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Coytee said:

 

I once had that exact GX-747.  Decided I wasn't using it much anymore....gave it to a friend.  To give it to him, I loaded it into my car (along with all my tapes) and drive about 4 hours (one way) to deliver it to him.

 

Of all the things I've given away...  if I were to be offered any of them back, this is probably the one thing I'd accept.

 

 

Although I bough my GX77 new, my 747 is the king of my RTR's. Love this thing. I can't see myself parting with it. In fact, I would love to get my hands on one in BLACK. The only thing better than a RTR is TWO RTR's! LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, BamaMike said:

Although I bough my GX77 new, my 747 is the king of my RTR's. Love this thing. I can't see myself parting with it. In fact, I would love to get my hands on one in BLACK. The only thing better than a RTR is TWO RTR's! LOL

Agreed, that's why I have two of them!!! An Otari MX 5050 BII and a Studer A810, both fully modded to take the playback signal directly from the PB head bypassing all the internal electronics and sending the signal to my external tubed tape pre!!!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, canyonman said:

Agreed, that's why I have two of them!!! An Otari MX 5050 BII and a Studer A810, both fully modded to take the playback signal directly from the PB head bypassing all the internal electronics and sending the signal to my external tubed tape pre!!!

Very cool!

 

I had a 4 track TASCAM in my parents basement in 1978-1982 for a small recording studio.

 

With my small farm hobby I do not see having time to reinvigorate the RTR passion.

 

Congrats to you RTR guys!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Yes, it was that good!  Both my live recordings and dubs from an Ortofon/SME/Thorens phono system on Crown 1/2 track 15 ips were often better than CDs, SACDs, and DVD-As, and the equal of Blu-ray DTS HD Master (except in the bass in the sub 30 Hz area).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2015 at 1:19 AM, dwilawyer said:

I brought a still sealed reel of Kind of Blue to a little Klipsch gathering at LarryC's in Maryland which he played on his Revox, several people said it was the best version they had ever heard. There wasn't any hiss.

 

We'll have to do that again some time!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my younger days I had a Pioneer RT-707.....probably one of the coolest pieces of audio equipment I ever owned....the only problem nowadays with all the new digital devices and DAC's and what not....while they are still cool...they sure take up a lot of space....The only old school thing that I have gone back to is vinyl . But if I had the room. I would love to have my RT-707 back...The things you can do with an Iphone and a dragonfly sound pretty good....and you can take it with you.

 

G.E.M.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...