Tape Trail

Reel to reel, cassette and other analogue tape formats.

Return to Tape Trail

Tape Project review PF

67.161.42.137
Posted on November 1, 2009 at 13:00:22
ironbut
Audiophile

Posts: 1115
Location: no california
Joined: February 21, 2004
 Myles Astor has just posted a nice write up on the Tape Project over on Positive Feedback Online.

It has a couple of minor inaccuracies but what review doesn't?

It does give a pretty nice overview of what it's all about and an account of his personal journey with magnetic tape.

Great job Myles!
RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 2, 2009 at 17:38:00
joeljoel1947
Audiophile

Posts: 920
Location: MICHIGAN
Joined: October 16, 2004
 Hi Steve,
How are you? The article was great from Myles (even though I STRONGLY disagree with his broad sweeping generalization of commercial 2 and 4 track 7.5 ips tapes, as I'm sure you do my BC brother! ;)) and I can tell he put a LOT of effort into that. He did make, what I presume, a major mistake here:

In the Malcom Arnold section as I read---is this (I hope) a typo??:

"In contrast to the Evans or Suite Espanola releases where sound of the LP compares favorably to the sound of The Tape Project release, the original Reference Recording's LP is totally blitzed by the 15-ips tape."


??? I have compared several LP copies of Evans to the tape and even on one of my STOCK Otari's, the TP tape crushes the LP!

Regards,
Joel
RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 2, 2009 at 19:00:08
Myles B. Astor
Reviewer

Posts: 147
Location: New York City, NY
Joined: April 12, 2000
 Hi Joel,

Knew some of you would disagree 'bout the commercial r2r releases -- but I tried not to be sweeping :)

As far as the Arnold recording goes. First, of course the TP tape is better than the LPs (though don't know what pressing and table/arm/cartridge you used for comparison. The Decca was a WB/ED2 or 3 if I remember correctly.)

Next, what I meant is that the tape to disc transfer for the 45 rpm Evans and original Decca WB (ED3) Suite Espanola LPs are reasonable efforts and are similar to the tape in regards to tonality, imaging, frequency response, etc. For instance, I have a 15 ips copy of the Weavers at Carnegie Hall that also makes mincemeat of the LP. Vanguard totally emasculated the low end on the LP. Don't think the cutters could have hacked it. In fact, the more I listen to the tapes, the more I feel in many cases that the engineers (or lathes) rolled off the lower octaves. In other words, a reasonable transfer effort. I also think I made some of the differences clear between the tape and LPs though. Not so for the Arnold. I don't feel the tape to disc transfer did justice to the Arnold.

The same goes for dynamics. You can hear on the Bruch LP (as do many of the Deccas)the heavy handed compression and gain riding. Not so with the tape!




Myles B. Astor
RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 5, 2009 at 20:21:09
Spendor Harbeth
Audiophile

Posts: 601
Location: Left Coast
Joined: May 15, 2009
 I enjoyed your Taper Project write up. Thank you.

I roll with a Revox A77.

Spen Har

RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 6, 2009 at 08:05:48
Myles B. Astor
Reviewer

Posts: 147
Location: New York City, NY
Joined: April 12, 2000
 Thanks! Glad to hear you enjoyed it (and your Revox A77!)

TPP is a venture well worth supporting. It's surprising how few folks have heard R2R decks -- and just how good a master tape -- or something like the 15 ips 1 1/2 gen TP tapes, really are.
Myles B. Astor
RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 6, 2009 at 08:27:44
Spendor Harbeth
Audiophile

Posts: 601
Location: Left Coast
Joined: May 15, 2009
 I agree. It's just there is quite a bit of expense involved.

I heard a demo by Dave Wilson, he brought CDR dubs of first gen EMI studio master tapes and it was just incredible.

Contrary to what some may believe on this forum, I love analog, just not vinyl, which I think is an inferior delivery method for the end result.

My A77 is will be here long after I'm gone!

RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 4, 2009 at 09:58:24
Botanico92007
Audiophile

Posts: 273
Location: San Diego
Joined: March 15, 2006
 Hi Myles:

An excellent article. I am sharing a subscription, so I only received the Arnold and the Suite Espaņola in the first series. I am in agreement on the quality of these two tapes and your ranking. I too was never as enthralled about the quality of Suite Espaņola as other audiophiles. Nevertheless I love the music and performance.

I am not completely sure, but I believe the Suite was recorded after Decca switched to solid state equipment, while the Hindemith was recorded with tube equipment at the end of Decca's "golden age" period. This may account for the some of the differences. I haven't heard the Hindemith tape, so I can't compare the tapes, but I do have the LPs, including a Spanish Discos Columbia pressing of the Suite. Frühbeck de Burgos made a lot of excellent recordings for the Spanish company that Decca never released. On LP I always thought the Hindemith a better recording than the Suite.

No doubt that the tapes are superior to the LPs. There is more of everything. I am getting the Respighi and the Nojima in Series Two. I hope I don't have to wait too long.

Jerry S.
RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 4, 2009 at 14:42:44
Myles B. Astor
 Hi Jerry,

Thanks for the feedback!

As far as the Deccas go, there was obviously a switch to solid-state, changes in the mastering from if I remember correctly, 1/2 speed, and also changes in the mikes from directional mikes originally used with the operas and early Ansermet. The change in mikes was supposedly due to Decca wanting to capture more hall sound.

I'm looking forward to Series two too-and future series!!!

Bruch/Hindemith, posted on November 3, 2009 at 07:32:07
TGR
Audiophile

Posts: 1101
Location: No. California
Joined: March 22, 2004
 Myles, I was a little surprised that you chose the Bruch/Hindemith recording as one of your top recordings (in fact, the top, correct?) to the exclusion of a few others. The transfer is an excellent rendering of the master tape, I believe (this was played at Paul and Michael's studio a couple of weekends back on the 1 inch deck through their highly tuned system) but the heavy spotlighting in the master of Oistrakh's violin made for some odd perspectives. The orchesral was very well recorded, although from a balcony standpoint, but Oistrakh's violin had a mike right on it, so it felt like Oistrakh was right in front of us, but the orchestra was well back, not a natural perspective at at all. In contrast, the Arnold overtures sounded as though the orchestra was perfectly placed, from a seat about 10-12 rows back. The Arnold has the best sound, I think, of the classical releases, so I eagerly anticipate the "Church Windows" to be release in series 2.

My informal poll shows that the Dave Alvin tape "Blackjack David" is the single most popular release, for what it's worth. "Waltz for Debby" might be number two.

Anyway, a very fine article. My biggest problem when starting out was figuring out what gear to buy. Right now I am using an unmodded Technics RS1520, which supports the IEC curve natively, but am planning an upgrade to it, which will include Bottlehead's new Eros unit, which is priced between the Seduction and the Repro.
RE: Bruch/Hindemith, posted on November 3, 2009 at 09:16:47
Myles B. Astor
Reviewer

Posts: 147
Location: New York City, NY
Joined: April 12, 2000
 Thanks for your comments! Don't think that two audiophiles can ever agree on anything :)

Here goes. The reason for my picking the Bruch may rest in what faults we're able to forgive or listen through. When push comes to shove, there's not a classical recording with solo artist that I listen to that isn't spotlit. Heifitz. Starker. Oistrakh. Rubinstein (the worst offender). You name it. So I really can listen through that quality while you can't. Pick your poison :)


Why I really liked the Bruch. Stupendous dynamic range. Superlative tonality esp. strings from high to low. A sense of hall second to none. So in the end, to me when you added up the plusses and minuses, I really thought the Wilkinson captured almost all of the essential ingredients that make up a classical concert.

On the other hand, the Arnold to me still sounds too lean and slightly to the cool side (some my say like Spectral gear) of neutral.

Myles B. Astor
RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 3, 2009 at 04:30:16
joeljoel1947
Audiophile

Posts: 920
Location: MICHIGAN
Joined: October 16, 2004
 Thanks for the follow-up Myles. I'm still lost however. When someone states in a review, "Evans or Suite Espanola releases where sound of the LP compares favorably to the sound of The Tape Project release" I take that to literally mean the LP was better then the tape version in both cases!

Somehow though, that is not what you meant? I just find it a very confusing statement myself because when I read the Evans and Suite sections in your article, it reads to me like you preferred the tape version both times to the LP! So the quote above then throws me for a "loop". ;)

As for the 7.5 ips 2/4 track releases of commercial tapes, I agree comparisons can be difficult. But when the tape is several magnitudes above the LP version, there is no doubt that it is indeed "better", and at that point has little to do with the hardware involved (as long as we are talking "decent" equipment for both platforms---tape and LP). 3 right off the top of my head are from Miles Davis: KOB, Sketches of Spain, and Miles Smiles. I would say the commercial 2 and 4 track tapes are far better then the original LP's, perhaps even TWICE as good! So, to me, who cares what (if any) original source differences were to make those tapes sound better then the LP versions---if its better then its better! Buy the tape version!! ;)

Overall, great article though! Nice job there!!
Regards,
Joel
RE: Tape Project review PF, posted on November 2, 2009 at 18:48:28
ironbut
Audiophile

Posts: 1115
Location: no california
Joined: February 21, 2004
 To be fair to Myles, he can't come off as a fanboy (like me!) or his credibility as a reviewer comes into question. I think when he says "favorably", I think that he's slightly misusing the word which would be saying that it sounds better. Earlier in the review he states that

" Although the recent and superb sounding 45 rpm Analogue Productions reissue of Waltz for Debby is by no means embarrassed by the 15-ips tape version, The Tape Project release simply sounds more realistic. Evans' piano in particular sounds far less mechanical on the tape compared to the LP version,..".

I've heard the Evans 45rpm sound mighty nice in a well tweaked phono system. All things being equal, "Waltz,.." comes much closer than the other TP releases simply because the 45 reissue is so darn good but in the final analysis, I much prefer the tape.

One of the reasons that I'm not real fond of doing format comparisons is there are just too many variables involved. When it comes down to it, most vinyl enthusiasts have spent hundreds of hours and untold wealth tweaking their systems.
So, comparisons are just that for me. It doesn't tell me a whole lot about the media used since I can't separate the media from the system.

All I "need" to know is I enjoy these tapes more than anything short of being there. Listening to them still feels like a "special occasion" to me.

Page processed in 0.036 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ] [ Go Green ] [ Take5 ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]