Ampex MM-1000 Story...

sweetbeats said:
Here's a wrinkle though, the terminals on the backs of the heads are labeled "1" and "2", but that doesn't mean those connect to cores 1 and 2 as you count from top to bottom...since they are 2-track heads its possible that "1" is the first core at the top, and "2" *could* be the third core...that would explain why there are guard bands between the 1st, 2nd and 3rd cores of the erase head, but not between the 3rd and 4th cores. I would expect if the 1st and 2nd cores were the ones utilized there would only be a guard band between cores 1 and 2.

Also, I think it is reasonable to assume there used to be a play head mounted...there is a head can cover there for the play head on the gate, and burnishing of the machine marks of the mounting block where a head can was mounted. Plus the second scrape flutter idler is in place which really would be superfluous if there never was a play head mounted.

I think it should assumed there was a play head at some point.

Wish I knew of a way to test which terminals on the heads went to which cores...
Click to expand...

sweetbeats said:
Yeah, but its NOT a 1" 4-track setup. Its basically a 1" unidirectional quarter-track setup (i.e. half of a quarter-track setup for 1" tape).
Click to expand...

I think we're talking about the same thing with different terminology ... ('quarter-track' vs. '4-track') ... I always called it '4-track/2-channel' ...

But yeh there is no way to know if it was for cassette duplication or 1/4" consumer reel duplication without knowing whether it's 1 & 3 or 1 & 2. But based on the guard bands you noted, it sounds like it was a dupe machine for 1/4" consumer reels. They probably used 1" for higher quality, or to use the same machine for 8-track duplication as I mentioned above perhaps.

But they play head -- whether it was attached to the same deck, or another -- would have to be standard 1" 4-track for playback ... (one 'side' would play forward, while the other plays backwards, to transfer to the 1/4" consumer reels). They may have used the 1" deck just to prepare the original masters, then made duplication masters on 1/4".

Standard duplication for 8-track cartridge masters used 1" tape. Quad & 4-track (or quarter-track) consumer reels used 1/2" 4-track masters I think (probably for cassette duplication as well). So this seems unusual to use 1" 4-track for 1/4" open reel or cassette duplication ... but that looks like this is what it was for (can't think of anything else, unless it was some crazy custom setup).
 
Last edited:
Ahhhh okay...I gotcha...we were bantering over semantics. :)

Your theory sounds very plausible...a studio had an MM-1000 and had the opportunity to answer to some duplication business and diversify the utilization of their machine and couldn't afford or it made business sense to use the MM-1000 for dual purpose...had special heads made...*BOOM*...they went there.

Still wish there was a way to test what terminals connect to which core. If the terminals utilize cores 1 and 3 can you imagine the crosstalk spec on this thing for 1/2" mastering on 1" tape??

Now, would it be better to have 1" mastering instead of some non-conventional use of the non-conventional format I have before me? Sure. But I'm just trying to figure out how I can USE this thing!!

:D

Just for poops and giggles I have an email out to John French to see what a custom Flux ME play head would cost to mate with the existing erase and record heads, including install and setup.
 
Hm!

That's the kind of weird goofy thing a lot of poeple wouldn't do that I've gone ahead and done anyway...yeah its just epoxy resin...
 
sweetbeats said:
Ahhhh okay...I gotcha...we were bantering over semantics. :)

Your theory sounds very plausible...a studio had an MM-1000 and had the opportunity to answer to some duplication business and diversify the utilization of their machine and couldn't afford or it made business sense to use the MM-1000 for dual purpose...had special heads made...*BOOM*...they went there.

Still wish there was a way to test what terminals connect to which core. If the terminals utilize cores 1 and 3 can you imagine the crosstalk spec on this thing for 1/2" mastering on 1" tape??

Now, would it be better to have 1" mastering instead of some non-conventional use of the non-conventional format I have before me? Sure. But I'm just trying to figure out how I can USE this thing!!

:D

Just for poops and giggles I have an email out to John French to see what a custom Flux ME play head would cost to mate with the existing erase and record heads, including install and setup.
Click to expand...

hmm I can't think of any way to use it !!! (I thought I had something, but it wouldn't work ...)
 
Are you being serious? I'd use it for mastering digital multitrack projects or remastering digital masters...same format as 1/2" halftrack but with a HUGE guard band between the tracks if the cores utilized are #s 1 and 3 (for crazy low crosstalk specs which could be valuable since I'm using 499 and plan on setting the machine up at 355nWb/m)...or if the cores utilized are #s 1 and 2 then I get to use one reel of 1" tape for over 60 minutes of mastering by flipping the tape...
 
Cory, apply a signal from your signal generator to two of the terminals. Wind a couple hundred turns of small enameled wire around the shaft of a small screwdriver or even a nail :eek: and hook your scope to the ends of the wires. Youll find which track the terminals are hooked to PDQ.
 
sweetbeats said:
Are you being serious? I'd use it for mastering digital multitrack projects or remastering digital masters...same format as 1/2" halftrack but with a HUGE guard band between the tracks if the cores utilized are #s 1 and 3 (for crazy low crosstalk specs which could be valuable since I'm using 499 and plan on setting the machine up at 355nWb/m)...or if the cores utilized are #s 1 and 2 then I get to use one reel of 1" tape for over 60 minutes of mastering by flipping the tape...
Click to expand...

I wasn't thinking of digital integration, but I meant without the play head. I was thinking of ways to integrate it w/ 8-track record/playback ... can't think of anything practical. A play head w/ that format is probably pretty pricey !
 
Ohhhhh I get where you were coming from now! :D

Yah it is a fools errand for sure unless it is integrating with some other machine, digital or analog.

I'm sure a custom Flux ME head is $$$, but I'll find out from Mr. French.
 
You need a flux loop to check those heads. You can make your own easily. There also used to be a product where you could 'read' tracks on tape using fine iron filings in a viewer sort of like an eyepeice magnifier.
Also you could check out what you are getting by using the machine in sync. You can record and then play back in sync. It makes for slow machine alignment but its possible. Scully once made a 16 track (Model 100) with only erase and record/play head, it was a real dog to align!
 
Well this is pretty cool...finally got a lead on a set of manuals for the MM-1000. I've always had a hard copy and PDF scan of the manual set thanks to a couple fellow MM-1000 enthusiasts that had manuals and allowed me to borrow and scan, but I've always wanted my own manual set. Anyway, had an opportunity to get a set for the cost of shipping but sight unseen...didn't know condition, completeness or if the revision was even specific to my MM-1000 or a late version. Turns out the manual set is the October 1970 revision which IS the later version, but still highly applicable to my "early" MM-1000, and while the binders need some cleanup, I'm not even sure these manuals have been used! All the pages are there and are in EXCELLENT condition (no wrinkles, rips, tears, dog-ears, etc.), and not ONE markup! So, pretty nice.

:D

image.jpg
 
Or similarly my good friend cjacek always thought of the Ampex machines like LEGO building blocks...

:D
 
Hey Cory! :D I saw a photo of your studio setup (with Matilda) a few pages back (page 79 :D ) and also listened to some audio samples off the MM-1000... It was worth the wait. :) Really nice setup and I can sense that you're enjoying the fruits of your labor. Nice going, really. It's good to see that you haven't lost your passion for this stuff. Have you ever considered going for a "dub" sound using old dynamic mics and gritty sounding tape, from the late 60's, early 70's? Sometimes you can find nice Scotch 206 in wide format. It would sound awesome on your machine.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top