|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.37.141.65
How do these tape machines sound, for dubbing analog stereo vinyl, tapes to compact cassette (Philips) at 3.75 IPS ?I'd like to run them at 2X speed for more freq range, to archive old stereo recordings
anyone tried this ?
which one is better ? the 234 looks more industrial
or would I be better off with a Teac C-3X ? (consumer version of 122B)
Follow Ups:
Unless it's for transcribing a speech. Certainly no HI-FI is worth a damn at 3.75 IMHO!
"I take you as you are
And make of you what I will,
Skunk-bear, carcajou, bloodthirsty
Non-survivor.
Lord, let me die but not die out." THE LAST WOLVERINE by James Dickey
the specs on an Elcaset deck easily match/succeed 44/16 CD resolution, you're mistaken there. I recently bought one of these Elcaset EL-7 decks, and let me tell you, it puts my Pioneer SACD/DVD-A player to shame.here's a scan of the owners' manual I got with the unit
http://i17.tinypic.com/2hsb0ao.jpg
HOW DOES THIS GRAB YOU ??
15 HZ TO 27,000 HZ with Type II tapes (FeCr) (NAB)
15 HZ TO 25,000 HZ with Type I tapes (standard FeO2) (NAB)I don't know how they did it, but they DID it- this deck sounds as
good as/better than a reel to reel at 7.5 IPS- and the Elcaset does it with 3.75 IPS. It MUST be the FeCr tapes- and some really high-end circuits inside the unit.Specs at +/- 3 dB rating are somewhat less, but still quite impressive
for 1/4" 4-track analog tape at 3.75 IPS, again NAB:25 HZ TO 22,000 HZ TYPE II (FeCr)
25 HZ TO 20,000 HZ TYPE I (standard FeO2)Basically CD quality or better, from 1/4" tape in a cartridge, at only 3.75 IPS. With the FeCr tapes, a better top end than a CD- from a home-made cartridge tape format.
The TASCAM 122 and 234 decks have 3.75 IPS speed and match the performance of 25hz-20khz of the Elcaset deck and do it with thinner track cassette tape, but by using METAL tape.
these are both obscure formats I'll admit, but until you've tried it, don't knock it- the issue with Elcaset is, tapes are somewhat scarce- but metal compact cassettes at 3.75 IPS are plentiful, and these TASCAM decks are cheap- mint one on Ebay are below $200, and many are below $100
it's an audio bargain- and retains that analog warmth and coloration
tape head gap has everything to do with it- small gaps give excellent bandwidth and resolution, even at 3.75 IPS- so it depends on the quality of the machineI just dubbed 2 cassettes from vinyl to metal tape using an old BIC cassette deck at 3.75 IPS- it was like listening to the LP while monitoring it- almost zero degradation
how bad can 25hz-20khz resolution be ? seriously, think about what you're saying-
But I'm sure there are those nuts who try. Yes, there were attempts at making 3.750 usable. Marvin Camras and the cross field head but this was guided by economy rather than quality. Slowing the tape impacts the SN ratio. Dolby just psuchoacoustically masks the noise. It doesn't reduce it. And it attenuates dynamics after so much diode rectification-compression and expansion at the expense of this masking. The more you spread the signal out over more tape the better, the wider the track the better. Tracks just got so small and the noise so bad that they had to use some form of noise reduction. Take any master recorded between 1957 and 1967 without Dolby on wide tracks and you will hear much more dynamic information before than after Dolby. It, like most things in engineeriing, is a compromise. Personally I would rather hear the noise with the dynamics than risk loosing the dynamics.
"I take you as you are
And make of you what I will,
Skunk-bear, carcajou, bloodthirsty
Non-survivor.
Lord, let me die but not die out." THE LAST WOLVERINE by James Dickey
Dave
Later Gator,
Crank up your talking machine, grab a jar of your favorite "kick-back", sit down, relax, and let the good times roll.Eagles may soar, but weasels do not get sucked into jet engines.
You would think Elcaset decks are hard to find, they weren't for me. I found (2) EL-7 decks, and 30 tapes, on the net in a matter of 3 days. They aren't cheap, ranging $200-500 range, but they can be had.I agree, I don't use Dolby, to me it's basically like turning down the treble. The tapes sound better without it. I've dubbed about 10 FeCr 90 minute carts so far on the Elky, they are MARVELOUS.
The beauty of the ElCaset system is, the deck pulls the tape out and threads it along the 3 heads and dual capstans, much like a VHS or Beta video tape does. The deck is able to control azimuth much more accurately than on a compact cassette format. NAK does similar voodoo with tape handling, using dual capstans, 3 motors, and pushing the factory pressure pad away to handle the tape. That's why NAK is so good.
But I'd much rather see a compact cassette at 3.75 IPS than 1-7/8 IPS. I'm well aware of the track width/speed increase, and how it adds to fidelity, S/N and frequency range/dynamic range. I've taken recordings from compact cassette at 1-7/8 IPS, transferred them to Elcaset at 3.75 IPS, and it actually makes the recording sound BETTER by equalizing it, and adding strong bass and midrange, where there was none before. Also the fact the Elcaset tracks are twice as wide, being 4-track 1/4" compared- to 4 track 1/8" of the compact cassette
but getting back to the topic, if one put on a search on ebay, you could easily acquire 100 Elcaset blanks in a matter of a year, maybe sooner. I found 30 in 3 days. And I let 6 go to other buyers. If I had a "take no prisoners" approach ($$), I could have bought those as well.
I highly recommend that Elcaset format, everyone I know who has it raves about it, including myself- but I'd also like to investigate/experiment with the compact cassette at 3.75 IPS.
I've dubbed a few vinyl records to Type II at 3.75 IPS on a BIC T-3, the results are quite promising- not reel to reel/Elcaset quality, but pretty darn good. I want to get a deck that handles metal tape at 3.75 and see how that works.
Although the 234 would probably be fine, I'd go with the TASCAM 122 (with the high speed option) or any one of the TEAC C-series machines with high-speed recording. I have both the TASCAM 122 and the TEAC C-2x & the high-speed record quality with good tape stock is outstanding.The 234 was actually designed for musicians to do 4-track demos on. Quality-wise it's pretty comparable to the others, but not primarily designed as a standard recording deck. I don't think the 234 operates at the standard cassette speed at all. Only 3 3/4 IPS. So, you wouldn't have the option of using the normal speed with it. But you would with the 122 or the TEAC decks. That's one big reason I'd go with the 122 or the TEACs.
Cheers & good luck,
Bobbo :-)
to make stereo cassette tapes at 3.75 IPS- 4track- on the 234 deck
the few guys that do have 234, 122, or C-machines all love them. I've yet to hear a Tascam/Teac guy bitch those machines.You're right about the 234, it lacks the home-audio options. The only reason I considered it is, these units are now going for dirt cheap- many times a beat up 234 goes for less than a 122. The Teac C-machines are very rarely even for sale- which speaks volumes about their quality.
What's the actual difference between a 122 and C-deck ? It looks like the only diff is, the rack mount and lack of feet on the 122, and the color- am I right here ?
These machines with metal tape at 3.75 IPS, have specs like an older reel to reel at 7.5 IPS. Can't beat the compact cassette for storage either. The one downside is, 90 min tapes become 45 min. at 3.75
"What's the actual difference between a 122 and C-deck ? It looks like the only diff is, the rack mount and lack of feet on the 122, and the color- am I right here ?"Actually, not even that. The original TASCAM 122 is virtually identical to the TEAC C-series decks. The main difference is that user-tweakable bias & eq is standard on the 122, whereas on the TEAC decks, it's a plug-in card. That's about it.
what does that adjustable bias/eq actually do ?
The original TASCAM 122 is pictured here. The part encircled in red is a front-panel, user adjustable section for bias and eq with a preset that allows you to tweak the bias and eq to match the tape you're using. When you want to use that particular bias & eq setting, you press the "preset" button on the right to recall that setting.On the TEAC C-series machines, there's an optional plug-in card slot on the front of the deck. If you can find the card (a big if, they're scarce.) it'll give you the same feature as the 122.
have you ever set that yourself, if so, what's the procedure ?I just bought a C-3x Teac deck with that option in it
I'd imagine you have to tape onto the cassette in question with a built-in test tone, then adjust the little screws there ?
this one has that adjustable option, not a standard card with no adjustment
The link below should tell ya everything you need to know.Cheers,
Bobbo :-)
you have a very good point there...may as well keep the 1-7/8 IPS option open toowhat Teac machines have the 3.75 IPS speed ?
I noticed the Tascam 122B has a headphone volume knob, which I find very useful on my Sony Elcaset deck- that's a good option
does the TEAC C- decks have that ?
what are the frequency response ratings of these decks, with standard, chrome, and metal tapes ?
someone elsewhere told me, that NAK and Denon did more with 1-7/8 IPS, than Teac or Tascam did with 3.75 IPS, in upper freq response extension- but I find that hard to believe- although I've seen it on paper. I'd have to hear it for myself. Every time I upped the speed on my reel to reels, sound quality jumped dramatically.
I have a Nak that does make stunningly good recordings. The thing is, you have to play it back on a Nak to get the full benefit because of the difference in the head gap widths that Naks have.Of course, you're going to be tied to the same deck if you record at double-speed too, so it's a wash. I'd say the difference between a TASCAM or TEAC at double speed and a Nak at normal speed is minimal, in my experience.
The TEAC C-series don't have the headphone volume control. The TASCAM 122 does.
If you're looking for dubs that sound virtually identical to the original source and want compatibility, CDs are really the way to go in my opinion. The media's easier to get, cheaper, the sound is more accurate than what you can get from a cassette, and they don't wear out with progressive plays. Cheaper media can suffer from bit-rot, but it's not really an issue if you buy good media.
A Nak, other 3-head reference deck from Revox, Sony, Denon, etc. or one of the TEAC/TASCAM options above are about as good as a cassette option is probably going to get, though. Align your deck to a good quality tape type and stick with it for best results.
I've heard from a few NAK is good- but my intuition and common sense tell me, 1-7/8 IPS can only be so good- I hear a lot of people complain about reliability on the NAK decks. My tech tells me they are over-rated. Their specs are great on paper, but what about the sound in between that bandwidth. The Teac/Tascam stuff just looks more industrial to me, and I like the big VU meters- I've yet to hear one guy complain about them, everyone that dubbed to 3.75 IPS cassette said it sounded greatCD-R is a 2-edged sword- they advertise great bandwidth on that- but what they don't tell you, is the information that's missing in between that bandwidth. In other words, I'd rather get ALL the musical information from an analog tape deck at 40hz-16khz, than get lossy digital information at 20hz-20khz. My ears can tell the difference, that the standard CD at 44/16 is low-resolution digital. MP3 and home made WAV CD-R sounds even worse. They sound great until you have an analog tape format 1/4" at 3.75 or 7.5 IPS to compare them to- then the digital lure fades. Digital is basically a low-background noise, convenience format
In the case of the TASCAM/TEAC decks, the 234 is spec'd at 25hz-20khz, it must sound great. Posts I've read spec'd the 122 at 20khz with metal tape, less with chrome and standard- but even with chrome it was a 19 khz high end.
Now if they started selling plug and play SACD or DVD-A recorders for $150 new, that you could input a tape deck or phono into and record analog to digital at that higher resolution, then I'd be in line. But computer seat time to record music turns me off- IMO computers are for surfing the net and email and MS word, spreadsheets, message boards, EBay- while tape decks are for recording- growing up in the 70's dubbing vinyl top tape all the time, I'm stuck in my ways...to me the tape sounds better anyway, as long as it's at 3.75 IPS or faster- and metal tape (or at least chrome tape) on the cassette deck.
I've done quite a few analog to digital transfers using MusicMatch Jukebox at the maximum WAV resolution, and also a few MP3's. The machine I like the most though, is this new DVD-R with built in HDD, it records Dolby Digital 2.0 stereo in AC-3 format, just plug in your tape deck, hit record, and it records- I can fit 6 LP's on a blank DVD+R disk. It will also record vinyl if you put a preamp inline first. IMO it sounds better than MP3 and CD-R. I know that Dolby Digital AC-3 is lossy as heck, but somehow it ends up sounding ok. If I wanted to dub to digital, I'd use that- as easy as hitting record button on the remote.
Get a 3 head nak, get it tuned right and it will be awesome. My recommendation would be a 680 series.
Good Luck,
Ben
Where do you prefer your replys, here or in Vintage where you duplicate posted?
there were no answers in vintage
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: