Hi
In my quest for a good TT, I also landed on a Technics 1500 and can get to a Revox PR-99.. The price of the Technics was so low as to be obscene... The Revox is not in the greatest of shape but the Technics looks almost new and has been in storage for almost 20 years ...
let just say I consider Tape the ultimate form of analog medium. I should have tried to not provide any ammunition for a good old analog vs digital debate but my position is that the best of digital is the best we have come up within music reproduction .. yet I am intrigued by R2R and have in my possession about 100 tapes among them maybe 10 RCA Living Presence and a bevy of Decca London Phase 4 Stereo.. in decent to very good form ...
From what I understand the gold standard of tape machines is the Studer A800 series... My honest question: What makes a Tape Deck? I understand that the heads are like Phono Cartridge and it is rather easy to just wire these to a head preamp ... The machine is then truly a deck ... What then makes its performance? What makes a Studer A 800 better than a PR 99 or a Technics RS-1500. I hate to invoke the dreaded "knowledge-removed' test but without knowing is a RS-1500 that much different from a A-820 , if the same head are running into the same head preamp?
I have not performed such an experiment, I am asking if the differences between machines are that significant? For the record.. Differences between record players are very noticeable to me even in the case of same arm and cartridge... I am not about to start a Ki Choi (a Gentlemen by the way) sized-R2R collection .. I simply have a deck (maybe two ) and a bunch of Tapes I will play from time to time. I don't think I will invest in the the Tape Project software myself ... So it is as far as it will likely go, I am too invested and too interested in digital to go much further...
In my quest for a good TT, I also landed on a Technics 1500 and can get to a Revox PR-99.. The price of the Technics was so low as to be obscene... The Revox is not in the greatest of shape but the Technics looks almost new and has been in storage for almost 20 years ...
let just say I consider Tape the ultimate form of analog medium. I should have tried to not provide any ammunition for a good old analog vs digital debate but my position is that the best of digital is the best we have come up within music reproduction .. yet I am intrigued by R2R and have in my possession about 100 tapes among them maybe 10 RCA Living Presence and a bevy of Decca London Phase 4 Stereo.. in decent to very good form ...
From what I understand the gold standard of tape machines is the Studer A800 series... My honest question: What makes a Tape Deck? I understand that the heads are like Phono Cartridge and it is rather easy to just wire these to a head preamp ... The machine is then truly a deck ... What then makes its performance? What makes a Studer A 800 better than a PR 99 or a Technics RS-1500. I hate to invoke the dreaded "knowledge-removed' test but without knowing is a RS-1500 that much different from a A-820 , if the same head are running into the same head preamp?
I have not performed such an experiment, I am asking if the differences between machines are that significant? For the record.. Differences between record players are very noticeable to me even in the case of same arm and cartridge... I am not about to start a Ki Choi (a Gentlemen by the way) sized-R2R collection .. I simply have a deck (maybe two ) and a bunch of Tapes I will play from time to time. I don't think I will invest in the the Tape Project software myself ... So it is as far as it will likely go, I am too invested and too interested in digital to go much further...