Reel to reel recommendations......

[lewiscohen]

I see reel to reel machines pop up on ebay for a couple of hundred quid from time to time and have been thinking about getting one as a change from recording straight into the digital realm. I know next to nothing about them, though.

Anyone got any recommendations as to makes/models to seek out (or avoid for that matter)...things to check before buying one, differences between quarter/half inch tape etc?

For the sorts of application I have in mind it would only need to be stereo, maybe even mono.

Any insights greatly appreciated!

LC

[Michael Messer]

Revox A77 is a superb machine. You can't go wrong with an A77. It is one of two or three absolute classic tape recorders. I would probably go for the A77 Mk3.

Some people prefer Studer machines. I agree that Studer are wonderful for mastering, but for straight to tape recording I prefer Revox. If you are interested in Studer...you would look for a Studer A80 master recorder. It is a very nice machine!

If you want portable reel to reel - NAGRA SN is the best.

Record with a pair of Octava ribbon Ml52 mics and a good valve preamp and you are pretty much there.

Lewis - make sure you buy from a reliable source. These machines are old now and you need to be very careful what you buy. Having said that - find a goodie and you won't regret it.

Interestingly, I have recently been recording with my Sony Professional cassette recorder from the eighties - and it is still a stunning professional quality recording machine. With a TDK metal tape it blows portable digital recorders away.

We were all sold a myth when the digital revolution started. Digital is convenient, quiet and quick, but the quality is nothing compared to any kind of reel of tape.

Shine On
Michael

[lewiscohen]

Thanks for the response, Michael. As it happens I spoke to John the amp man after I posted here and he said exactly the same thing - A77. They seem to be pretty cheap too, so that's nice.

So...the search begins!

Thanks again,

LC

[Deleted]

I don't know what's available in the UK or how useful any gear suggestions are from my end (different AC here) but I use an ancient Ampex 7000 from the mid-60s that runs on 1" tape. Like any reel-to-reel, it requires frequent cleaning and maintenance, and sometimes a good smack on its side.

I don't think digital recording technology is inherently "bad" - if you understand how analog gear works and why it colors the sound the way it does and produces the effect it does, it is possible to convincingly reproduce the sound with digital recordings. You can start by eliminating the extreme highest and lowest bands of EQ, analog doesn't "hear" them anyway. A great tube mic preamp and compressor will go a long way, tape has a certain sound of its own but this can be replicated accurately enough to fool even the most golden-eared listener. Also, analog tape is expensive...something to consider.

[SoloBill]

Hi,
Well Michael's pretty much answered the question.

I used a UHER portable at college that was good quality but it wasn't for music so I can't vouch for it in that context, reporters used them a lot I think.

I have an Akai 4000DS mk II which has a good reputation as a domestic HiFi component but Revox always had the name so if I was buying now I'd aim for that.

BTW they are quite heavy, 15/17 kg depending on which Revox. Also buy the best quality tape you can. I had some cheap stuff which now has nothing on it and some quality tape that has deteriorated over the past 40 years but the content is still recognisable.

Just check that everything works and everything is there that should be. For example on the Akai the speed is changed by adding a brass sleeve over the capstan, so that can go missing.

[blueshome]

Revox was the non-professional brand of Studer, both machines made in the same factory and some of the 1/4" machines are virtually identical.

You can generally find a usable 1/4" Studer B47 or Revox for £2-300. We have an ex-BBC B47 and it sounds great, although it has currently been demoted for use as a tape delay in our studio as the heads are getting a little worn.

If you go up the scale to an A80 or similar you will need to pay a lot more for a good one and remember that tape costs soar as the size increases - 1" is £60+ a reel at the moment. You will also need to source calibration tapes to set up correctly - these can sometimes be found second-hand, otherwise they are costly.

If you can find good 2 or 4-track A80 1/2" machine that could be a good way to go.

I would look for a machine that gives the cleanest "mastering" quality sounds - things can be warmed up by putting valves in the signal chain, mics and/or pre-amps.

Make sure that the heads on any machine you are thinking of buying are not too worn or you'll be into more expense getting them lapped or replaced.

Still. to get a decent sound that eats digital it's worth all the hassle and cost if you are serious about your recordings.

[steverino]

I really appreciate the high regard that analog tape recording has been shown in this thread, and Michael's mention of ribbon mics and a good valve preamp are icing on the cake. These are technologies that I've always found superior in the ways that matter to me. And no, it's not because they add some pleasant coloration, it is because they are more transparent to the source and sound more real.

[Michael Messer]

Lewis - Audio Gold in Crouch End are good people and worth talking to - www.audiogold.co.uk

Don't rush into buying it - make sure it is a good machine. Also, go to a specialist repairer to have it set up. London Sound (Mike Abrahams) is one name that springs to mind. Talk to Ron Smith, he has some good hifi connections (no pun intended).

The more digital the world of recording gets, the more convinced I am about analogue. It's not just me, even in the pop industry analogue studios are booming. Just look at Toe Rag Studio in London as an example.

To some extent I agree with Zak that lots of valves/tubes and a good pair of ears can get a digital recording sounding warm and analogue-ish, but in my experience it still doesn't sound as good as recording on to a reel of tape. It does not have the depth or transparancy. I have been making records for twenty five years and I am more convinced about it now than ever before.

Having said that, digital does have its place, especially for mobile recording. It is also a lot cheaper than analogue. Zak is correct about the cost of tape these days.

Luckily we all have our own opinions and hear things differently. Otherwise all our recordings would sound the same!

Shine On
Michael

[Deleted]

This is certainly turning into an interesting discussion.
I wonder how much of our predisposition to analog recording is a product of familiarity. I didn't own a CD player until '99, and frankly speaking early CD releases didn't sound very good to me. I still have a mid-90s "remastered" CD of Albert King's STAX material and frankly it sounds like frozen feces compared to my LP.
I think that those of us who grew up on LPs are attuned to that sound, but I don't know if I'd say there is more "transparency" in what we perceive as the "natural" sound of analog. Analog recording adds more coloration than digital. It is the uncolored neutrality of digital recording that frequently sounds "cold" or "sterile" and I think that a large pat of that is that the ART of recording is a vanishing one. One of the negative side effects of the predominance of digital recording is that people assume it to be "easier" and all imperfection can be addressed after the fact. Push a button, select a preset.
Personally I feel that recording to digital with a mixdown to tape can produce great results if it is done right. The reality is that there are many ways to attain great results...but as with tastes in music, tastes in production are subjective.

Michael, you mention Toe Rag studios.
They have produced some truly stellar "vintage" sounding recordings. I have a bunch of stuff that was recorded and it all sounds fantastic. Actually I think I am going to throw on my "Eddie Angel's Guitar Party" LP on right now.

In a month one of the bands I play in will be recording at an old RCA/Victor studio with all pre-1970 gear. I'm looking forward to it almost as much as my pocketbook is dreading the experience haha.

[lewiscohen]

And in another twist to the tale, I've been investigating some of the software plugins you can buy to emulate tape and valve gear when recording digitally. Having tried some of the demos I have to say they sound really good (especially the ones produced by DUY) .....but they cost about three times as much as the gear they're emulating! Seems more sensible to go straight for the real thing....that way you've got more cool looking toys in your studio into the bargain ;0)