When Doc B comes over to your house for the party, please ask him to bring the IEC cal tape in 1/2" format as well. I'll see about crashing the party earlier and can make sure both 1/4" and 1/2" A820s are spot on in regards to IEC calibration for a fair fight!
When Doc B comes over to your house for the party, please ask him to bring the IEC cal tape in 1/2" format as well. I'll see about crashing the party earlier and can make sure both 1/4" and 1/2" A820s are spot on in regards to IEC calibration for a fair fight!
When Doc B comes over to your house for the party, please ask him to bring the IEC cal tape in 1/2" format as well. I'll see about crashing the party earlier and can make sure both 1/4" and 1/2" A820s are spot on in regards to IEC calibration for a fair fight!
if there are tones on the 1/2" demo tape is that good enough? or do we need an actual separate IEC calibration tape? i'm skeptical that Dan has one of those. i will email him and ask him to bring it if he has one.
i do have the TP cal tape, and yes, we've used it here.
i also have the MRL cal tape for 1/4" and another one for 1/2", NAB only. Ki used a conversion table with the 1/2" for IEC.
In my experiece, there are differences in frequency response part of the calibration tapes between Tape Project and MRL. I use TP cal tape as the default IEC EQ on all of my 1/4" machines instead of the MRL tape. The only IEC tapes I have are the TP tapes anyway.
Although having flat frequency responses from a recorder may not be the most important aspect, as I look at our crazy hobby where we do strange things to our gear in hopes of improving the sound, having the machine calibrated with proper calibration tape to get it as close to the machine that was used to recorder the master dub would be one of the most important preparation steps for comparing 1/4" TP tapes to the 1/2" same recordings DocB would bring.
I use TP cal tape as the default IEC EQ on all of my 1/4" machines instead of the MRL tape. The only IEC tapes I have are the TP tapes anyway.
...having the machine...as close to the machine that was used to recorder the master dub would be one of the most important preparation steps for comparing 1/4" TP tapes to the 1/2" same recordings DocB would bring.
Ki
I came across this thread on Gearslutz....pretty cool!
Fantastic info and history.
"Here's what I know after working at Capitol Studios for 15 years. Frank usually sang into a U47, although I have seen some pictures with a U67 and an M49. We still own and use these very same mics on a daily basis. The pre would have been whatever was in the custom Capitol desks with no compression or EQ, just fader rides by talented staff engineers (names escape me at the moment, but I can look it up later). The tape machines were all 1/2" 3 track. Every now and then we pull out the old tapes for reissues, and they sound like they were recorded yesterday, stunning."
I came across this thread on Gearslutz....pretty cool!
Fantastic info and history.
"Here's what I know after working at Capitol Studios for 15 years. Frank usually sang into a U47, although I have seen some pictures with a U67 and an M49. We still own and use these very same mics on a daily basis. The pre would have been whatever was in the custom Capitol desks with no compression or EQ, just fader rides by talented staff engineers (names escape me at the moment, but I can look it up later). The tape machines were all 1/2" 3 track. Every now and then we pull out the old tapes for reissues, and they sound like they were recorded yesterday, stunning."
Harry Weisfeld bought all of Bert Whyte's tape collection some years back and has now set up a three channel system to play back the original three track master tapes. Haven't heard it yet but intend on getting down there before the fall! Should be something spectacular to hear the tapes as they were originally recorded and intended to be heard.
That should be one heck of a listening experience.
Roger will like this: one of my unfinished projects is a 300 1/2" machine, which has been back-burnered as I only have a handful of playable 1/2" tapes. It was purchased as a 'parts' donor but came with all three electronics channels, only missing the three-track head assembly (a 4-track was installed as acquired). Original tag on transport rear identifies is as a 300-3.
I think someday it would like to be put back to a 300-3
That should be one heck of a listening experience.
Roger will like this: one of my unfinished projects is a 300 1/2" machine, which has been back-burnered as I only have a handful of playable 1/2" tapes. It was purchased as a 'parts' donor but came with all three electronics channels, only missing the three-track head assembly (a 4-track was installed as acquired). Original tag on transport rear identifies is as a 300-3.
I think someday it would like to be put back to a 300-3
At one time we had all four channels of 350 Electronics and I had a rare 4 track headstack also the rare Beyer up transformers .
I even had a Sel Sync unit was going to build it but found the Studer A820 1/2"
MKII .
We sold the Ampex parts to fund the Studer purchase not sorry because I still have the 350-2.
You were going to build a 300 four-track machine, or a 1/2" two track? I assumed the latter as 1/2" 4-trk is only interesting on the record end. Unless you meant a 350 1/2", but that animal does not actually exist, correct?
John does all of my head work, but in the case of the 300-3 the machine still sits, un-restored, with the 4-track heads still intact. It would be interesting, especially as I do not have a 1/2" machine, to restore the 300-3 and have JRF install both 3-trk and 2-trk repro heads. Of course, the chances of sourcing 3 track tapes is another issue.
The other issue with the tube electronics is the EQ curve, which is NAB by design. If TP decides to release 1/2" media it would likely be IEC.
You were going to build a 300 four-track machine, or a 1/2" two track? I assumed the latter as 1/2" 4-trk is only interesting on the record end. Unless you meant a 350 1/2", but that animal does not actually exist, correct?
John does all of my head work, but in the case of the 300-3 the machine still sits, un-restored, with the 4-track heads still intact. It would be interesting, especially as I do not have a 1/2" machine, to restore the 300-3 and have JRF install both 3-trk and 2-trk repro heads. Of course, the chances of sourcing 3 track tapes is another issue.
The other issue with the tube electronics is the EQ curve, which is NAB by design. If TP decides to release 1/2" media it would likely be IEC.
Tom I was going to build a 4 track half inch machine. Now I'm glad I sold it. I would much rather have my restored Ampex recorders even though technically my 350-2 is a frankenpex, but I don't especially care for the 350/351 transports. I'm not into museum pieces,the exception is my MR70,but I need to find some original Ampex heads or have JRF make me some ME's for it. That's probably the way I will have to go.
Tom I was going to build a 4 track half inch machine. Now I'm glad I sold it. I would much rather have my restored Ampex recorders even though technically my 350-2 is a frankenpex
Surprised you did not keep it and go 1/2" two-track, being an Ampex kind of guy. Guess you have your 1/2" needs covered with the Studer.......
but I don't especially care for the 350/351 transports.
I like to have at least one running 350 machine in my room, considering the vast amount of music that was originally recorded on those it's nice to play some of it back with the same equipment.
I'm not into museum pieces,the exception is my MR70,but I need to find some original Ampex heads or have JRF make me some ME's for it.
For the MR70, or any decent machine for that matter, a Flux ME head is a great investment. I doubt you'd dig up a (good) used 1/4" MR head anyways given the rarity of that transport configuration.
Do you play 1/2" tapes on your 440c? I've found that although the 440 series are capable of playing both 1/4" and 1/2", best performance is obtained when the transport is dedicated to one particular format. Speaking in terms of the B version; I've not used a C.
Do you play 1/2" tapes on your 440c? I've found that although the 440 series are capable of playing both 1/4" and 1/2", best performance is obtained when the transport is dedicated to one particular format. Speaking in terms of the B version; I've not used a C.
The only 1/2" deck currently is the A820 .The 440C is a 1/4" with the 4 position headstack allowing 2 & 4 track playback also 2 track record.
I have 2 of these setup one with "B" electronics and the other 350 electronics with a low impedance playback transformer which was a special order from Ampex in the day.This allows me to use the 440 playback 4 track head it has 2 track playback also but no record.
As far as 440C transports over the 440B I like it much better for superior tape handling . Just my experience.
