Jump to content

Is Reel to Reel really that good?


Jim

Recommended Posts

Tape Hiss!!! That's so funny, I have tapes here that I know for sure are quieter than any record in your collection plain and simple!!!

 

What exactly do you think Dolby was trying to get rid of?   B)

+++

 

FYI I have done some tape and record to .mpg recording, certainly not as much as Dave M or a lot of you other guys.  The computer software is unbelievable effective (and easy) for getting rid of tape hiss with no loss of audio information.  :)

Edited by wvu80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do a lot of music remastering nowadays and my experience is that I can see the added noise of analog tape recordings quite clearly in the spectrogram views--regardless of noise reducing technology used.  What varies from album to album is the noise floor level - with the best analog tape recordings being basically inaudible except for perhaps above 10 kHz and below 50 Hz.  The catch, of course, it that many here cannot hear much above 10 kHz, and only if the playback level is very high, and most noise below 50 Hz is masked by human hearing processes...albeit, that low frequency noise does add to the opaqueness of the sound and must be managed properly to limit its effects. 

 

I use that background analog recording noise (mostly from analog tape recordings) to help me find where to set my equalization across the track...using the background noise level vs. frequency to be smoothly varying or nearly constant (i.e., color in the spectrogram view).  It's an excellent way to verify that I'm arriving at a neutral unmastering EQ curve, and I use that effect in every analog-recorded track that I remaster. 

 

Digital recordings do not have that high level of background noise, so I must set gain of my spectrogram views to a more sensitive level to pick up the venue noise floor instead, which typically is a few tens of dB below analog recording levels.

 

Chris

Edited by Chris A
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tape is a magnetic media and after about 20 years the tape loses its charge.

No idea where you got that. I have tapes older than that. No problems. Actually, my oldest is a couple of 3" reels from my first battery machine, which would be a little over 50 years. Do they sound any worse? Well, that's problematic as they weren't exactly hifi to start with...but still quite clearly audible and understandable.

Dave

Good point. Though it's not RTR....in my opinion, it's worse....it's a Cassette.

Back in 1969 my dad took me to see Apollo 11 take off. He had a little hand held recorder and pretended somewhat to be a reporter during the several days that we were gone.

During the actual lift-off I turned the machine on and from 1-2 miles away, recorded the sound.

Somewhere around 2005, something like 45 years later he was cleaning some stuff out and found the old tape. He sent it to me so I could do with it what I wanted.

I sent it out to a restoration guy who copied it to a CD

You can still hear/feel the power of that Saturn V as it lit the candles.

Heck... I'll see if I can attach it as a WMA file

Nope, won't attach. Can send if anyone interested.

I am interested email taceymg@gmail.com Thank You!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tape is a magnetic media and after about 20 years the tape loses its charge.

No idea where you got that. I have tapes older than that. No problems. Actually, my oldest is a couple of 3" reels from my first battery machine, which would be a little over 50 years. Do they sound any worse? Well, that's problematic as they weren't exactly hifi to start with...but still quite clearly audible and understandable.

Dave

Good point. Though it's not RTR....in my opinion, it's worse....it's a Cassette.

Back in 1969 my dad took me to see Apollo 11 take off. He had a little hand held recorder and pretended somewhat to be a reporter during the several days that we were gone.

During the actual lift-off I turned the machine on and from 1-2 miles away, recorded the sound.

Somewhere around 2005, something like 45 years later he was cleaning some stuff out and found the old tape. He sent it to me so I could do with it what I wanted.

I sent it out to a restoration guy who copied it to a CD

You can still hear/feel the power of that Saturn V as it lit the candles.

Heck... I'll see if I can attach it as a WMA file

Nope, won't attach. Can send if anyone interested.

Keep in mind the viability life of cd's is also going to be short as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe a well maintained Teac RTR will work as sold way pass 40 years old. I own a Nakamichi 580 series (581) cassette recorder and I used great metal oxide tape, not Maxell, 20 to 20,000 +0/-0. The only tape I have lost was lower quality VHS recording of Dr Who (Jon Pertwee). It was lost because it separated at the end where it goes from clear to recordable tape which is the known loss of sticky...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two recorders with the same measured signal to noise ratio can produce a different amount of audible tape hiss.  I depends on the spectral characteristics of the hiss.  A hiss peak in the zone in which the ear is most sensitive means trouble. 

 

Virgin, unrecorded (is that redundant?) tape has practically no hiss.  Most of the hiss is put on recorded tape by the recorder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The entire thread I see no mention of digital tape recorders DTF/D.A.S.H.....which where the benchmark of studios by the late 80's.

 

Not related.  The recording methodology was the same as a CD recorder or HDD.  The only thing in common was the medium of tape as a storage device.  Output of a DAT deck could be stored on any digital media.  Not so with analog tape without transcoding either to another analog form like a record or a cassette deck involving a generation loss.  

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Keep in mind the viability life of cd's is also going to be short as well.

Why?
Money, what else. Notice what two long term media they reccomend in this article? Magnetic tape and optical disks, in cold storage.

Optical disks they are saying have a shelf life of 50 years.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomcoughlin/2014/06/29/keeping-data-for-a-long-time/

Edited by dwilawyer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Tape Hiss!!! That's so funny, I have tapes here that I know for sure are quieter than any record in your collection plain and simple!!!

 

What exactly do you think Dolby was trying to get rid of?   B)

+++

 

FYI I have done some tape and record to .mpg recording, certainly not as much as Dave M or a lot of you other guys.  The computer software is unbelievable effective (and easy) for getting rid of tape hiss with no loss of audio information.  :)

 

Listen to a Master tape or a Safety copy or even a direct copy made from either of those, you will not hear any tape hiss!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two recorders with the same measured signal to noise ratio can produce a different amount of audible tape hiss.  I depends on the spectral characteristics of the hiss.  A hiss peak in the zone in which the ear is most sensitive means trouble. 

 

Virgin, unrecorded (is that redundant?) tape has practically no hiss.  Most of the hiss is put on recorded tape by the recorder. 

If this is true than that's why there is no tape hiss on Master tapes, because of the recorder they used!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is true than that's why there is no tape hiss on Master tapes, because of the recorder they used!!!

 

That would be a pretty crappy set of electronics, IMHO. Tape signal is roughly equivalent to phono preamp and even way back better phono preamps produced no audible hiss.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly do you think Dolby was trying to get rid of?  
 

 

Dolby B was specifically designed to get rid of hiss on cassette tapes. Type C improved on that.

 

Dolby A was a quad band system for studios. Later, Dolby Labs came out with Dolby SR (spectral recording), which actually is still in use today. Especially for optical soundtracks on film releases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If this is true than that's why there is no tape hiss on Master tapes, because of the recorder they used!!!

 

That would be a pretty crappy set of electronics, IMHO. Tape signal is roughly equivalent to phono preamp and even way back better phono preamps produced no audible hiss.

 

Dave

 

Dave I am not sure what you mean by this, enlighten me please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave I am not sure what you mean by this, enlighten me please?

 

I paid 200.00 for my first R2R brand new.  It's electronics were well below audible noise and hiss.  Just saying I've never heard a deck of any quality at all in good working order that had any significant noise from the electronics or that raised the inherent noise floor of the tape.  Certainly the old acetate tape had a pronounced hiss...but even that wasn't so bad as to be objectionable.  Once better formulations and DBX came along, there was none.  Most high quality tapes, even without encoded noise reduction, have very low noise...and I get rid of that with a touch of variable DBX. 

 

Point is, tape hiss is a non-issue on most recordings of the past 40 years, and not objectionable on even older ones that were well made.  And electronic noise is a non-issue, period, unless something is wrong or the deck is really cheesy.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What exactly do you think Dolby was trying to get rid of?  
 

 

Dolby B was specifically designed to get rid of hiss on cassette tapes. Type C improved on that.

 

Dolby A was a quad band system for studios. Later, Dolby Labs came out with Dolby SR (spectral recording), which actually is still in use today. Especially for optical soundtracks on film releases.

 

 

Good point.  I think I am muddying the waters here as my complaints are about cassette tapes, which is the only tape with which I have experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not related. The recording methodology was the same as a CD recorder or HDD. The only thing in common was the medium of tape as a storage device. Output of a DAT deck could be stored on any digital media. Not so with analog tape without transcoding either to another analog form like a record or a cassette deck involving a generation loss.

Right. I just brought it up because often times people see slogans like, "sourced from the original master tape," or something along those lines and  it's all too easy to romanticize about some office-desk sized analog 24 track RTR  spinning uber wide tape at 15 ips which is very unlikely. Instead, the master tape is usually a digital archive stored on a handful of 8" reels or ADAT cassette.

 

Just explaining the distinction between what goes down in our house vs. what the studios (in particular the mastering folks) typically do.

Edited by Quiet_Hollow
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...