Studio Master?

[Bruce B]

Ampex AT-102: +0/-4 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Sony APR-5000: +1.5/-8 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Studer A820: +1.5/-7 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Otari MX-5050: +2/-9 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Otari MX-80: +2/-4 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
MCI 2-inch: +2/-7 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Otari MTR-100: +1/-8 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Otari MTR-90: +2/-9 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Studer A820: +1.5/-? dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Studer A827: +1/-5 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Studer A80 Mk II: +2/-3 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Tascam MS-16: +2/-9 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Tascam ATR60-16: +1.5/-8 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Ampex MM1200: +-4 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz
Otari MX-80: +1.5/-2 dB 20 Hz - 20 KHz.

So you want to put forth facts? Which Studer A820 is it? I see you have 2 there, but there were many versions.... same with the A80MkII... is that the VU or RC or QC or what?? I have clearly bested these figures in my testing of these machines. I have the graphs to prove it posted somewhere on this forum.

I think Mike has you on this. Anyone can look up specs, which is clearly where you got these from. I have run tests on the actual machines and have posted my measurements.... have you. On top of that, I have worked with these machines for decades, listening critically to each one.
I was also the first (and only) mastering studio in the PNW to use DSD, so I'm not anti analog or digital.
Julf, we appreciate you participating in the forum, but unless you have worked with both formats on a daily basis, all you bring in anecdotal evidence. Hardware technology changes almost weekly and unless you're constantly keeping track of this and using it in your own system, your ship many have sailed! Even hardware builders listen/tweak their products beyond specifications!

 

[Julf]

Anyone can look up specs, which is clearly where you got these from.

No, I got them from the document posted by Myles. I was simply pointing out that instead of proving his point, it actually supported my point.

I have run tests on the actual machines and have posted my measurements.... have you.

No, I haven't. What is the best SNR you have seen out of a 1/4" tape unit?

Julf, we appreciate you participating in the forum, but unless you have worked with both formats on a daily basis, all you bring in anecdotal evidence. Hardware technology changes almost weekly and unless you're constantly keeping track of this and using it in your own system, your ship many have sailed! Even hardware builders listen/tweak their products beyond specifications!

How much has analog tape technology changed over the last 10 years? I am definitely aware of the fact that I haven't done much anything with analog tape since the 90's. Still have a couple of decent decks, but they don't get much use any more.

 

[Bruce B]

No, I haven't. What is the best SNR you have seen out of a 1/4" tape unit?
How much has analog tape technology changed over the last 10 years? I am definitely aware of the fact that I haven't done much anything with analog tape since the 90's. Still have a couple of decent decks, but they don't get much use any more.

I've gotten almost 91dB with the new tape units using the new formulation of RMGI SM900 tape.
There have been several companies that have produced new tape pre units. I have some of the quietest made (Doshi Audio). Charlie King has a great pre as well and there are other manufacturers coming on line with new tape units.
Tape formulations have improved greatly since the 90's.

 

[Julf]

unless you have worked with both formats on a daily basis, all you bring in anecdotal evidence.

Even if you have worked with both formats on a daily basis, unless you provide independently verified measurement results or references to verified sources, it is still technically "anecdotal evidence", as in "because I say so (based on my daily work experience)".

 

[Julf]

I've gotten almost 91dB with the new tape units using the new formulation of RMGI SM900 tape.

That is an excellent result - only 6 dB from that of un-dithered 16 bit digital.

Tape formulations have improved greatly since the 90's.

Good to know! Thanks!

 

[Bruce B]

Even if you have worked with both formats on a daily basis, unless you provide independently verified measurement results or references to verified sources, it is still technically "anecdotal evidence", as in "because I say so (based on my daily work experience)".

The tests and mastering work I do is heard and scrutinized by hundreds of thousands of folks everyday. I see and hear the comments of my work on forums (CA ring a bell?), at shows and by reviewers all the time!

 

[Julf]

The tests and mastering work I do is heard and scrutinized by hundreds of thousands of folks everyday. I see and hear the comments of my work on forums (CA ring a bell?), at shows and by reviewers all the time!

I don't think anyone here has any doubts about the quality of your mastering work. But when you say "I've gotten almost 91dB with the new tape units using the new formulation of RMGI SM900 tape", there is no practical way we can verify that independently without measuring it ourselves. Don't get me wrong - I am definitely not doubting your statements, but purely formally, your statement is still "anecdotal evidence", in the sense of "information passed along by word-of-mouth but not documented scientifically".

 

[Bruce B]

I don't think anyone here has any doubts about the quality of your mastering work. But when you say "I've gotten almost 91dB with the new tape units using the new formulation of RMGI SM900 tape", there is no practical way we can verify that independently without measuring it ourselves. Don't get me wrong - I am definitely not doubting your statements, but purely formally, your statement is still "anecdotal evidence", in the sense of "information passed along by word-of-mouth but not documented scientifically".

I've posted tests here I've done with these machines and it has been scrutinized by EE's, so it's clearly not "anecdotal evidence". Short of sending the machines to a certified calibration house, which I don't think one even exists, the tests I do are more than sufficient!

 

[Julf]

I've posted tests here I've done with these machines and it has been scrutinized by EE's, so it's clearly not "anecdotal evidence".

I agree - in that case it is definitely more than just anecdotal evidence. I was referring to the case where you simply made a statement about the SNR. I was not aware you had posted the test results. On the other hand, the frequency deviation values I posted were also from posted results, and they were actually re-posted here by Myles, not me.

 

[NorthStar]

...
Whatever my gear is, it will probably in any case be a cause for that old argument of "ah, see, your equipment isn't resolving enough for you to hear a difference".

...

That is a valid argument. :b

 

[Julf]

That is a valid argument. :b

Just not sure for what :b

 

[rockitman]

That is a valid argument. :b

That can be a valid argument and so to can be the opposite.

 

[NorthStar]

Well, if one's system isn't resolving enough; time to clear the space for the one who can. :b

 

[MylesBAstor]

Thanks for proving my point.

And thanks for proving mine that you're incapable of reading a post.

Not only that, your Starmax-er -infinity at what 13 or 15K? We do know what happened in that era when designers decided to bandwidth limit gear too.

Technically no, despite posting actual technical facts on an audiophile forum might be regarded as a sign to the contrary.

Well you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of what goes into the reviewing process.

 

[Julf]

And thanks for proving mine that you're incapable of reading a post.

Clearly. Would you mind explaining how so?

Not only that, your Starmax-er -infinity at what 13 or 15K?

I don't know how you read that chart - the way I read it, it is still +-0 at 15 K. Maybe you could explain what makes you think otherwise.

Well you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of what goes into the reviewing process.

Indeed. I have to judge it by the results.