Thoughts on 8-track formats

O

ofajen

Daddy-O Daddy-O Baby
As I mentioned in another thread, I'm thinking of getting a multi-track recorder with at least 8 tracks. I sold my 3M 1" 8 track a few years ago because it is rather bigger and noisier (transport noise, not tape or electronic) than I wanted in my little studio and also because I despaired of the long-term possibility of replacing worn 1" tape path parts on a 3M, such as pinch rollers.

I prefer to not use noise reduction, and a 1" 8 track is clearly quiet enough, especially running IEC eq, for that. I have used an Otari 1/4" 4-track before and now have a Teac A-3340S of the same format. Those machines are OK as a "sketchbook" for me, but for some projects, 4 tracks isn't enough, and both those machines were just a tad noisy without NR. I mean, I noticed it more on the Otari, actually, but then I was younger, my hearing was better and my level practices less controlled! The Teac is really close to being OK for me as far as hiss goes.

I've given the 1/2" 8 track format relatively little thought until now, but now I'm wondering if it might be a good choice. I have a fair amount of viable 1/2" tape stock and a good IEC 15 ips MRL tape, so I'm ready to go with a 1/2" machine. The smaller track width should produce a loss of about 3 dB in S/N relative to a 1" machine, but my understanding is that all 8 track 1/2" machines use IEC1 eq at 15 ips, so that will help with the high frequency noise compared to my narrow track experiences with 1/4" 4-track machines running NAB eq.

So, I'm curious, does anyone here use the 1/2" 8 track format without noise reduction? There is a fellow not too far away from me who wants to sell a high-functioning Otari MX-5050 MK III in this format, and we could easily meet midway to transfer the machine and avoid 3rd party shipping.

The bottom line is I think I can work through the stupid ego issues of stepping "down" to a narrow track format for 8 track recording, but I am unlikely to ever change my preference to avoid noise reduction, so I want to make sure that won't become an issue. Thanks for any insights you can share! :)

Cheers,

Otto
 
I will possibly get a 1/2" 8-track at some point (if I don't step up from my 16-track to a 24-track 2")...and I will have no "ego issues" using the 1/2" format. :)
 
I can't answer your question directly, but I do have this to offer:

I have a Tascam MS-16, which is a 1" 16 track. I do not use any noise reduction and am very happy with the results. The amount of track width per track would be approximately the same, comparing this machine to a 1/2" 8 track. One difference would be that because there are fewer tracks, you'll have fewer channels of compounding hiss.

I also have an Otari MX-50 NII 1/4" 2 track machine and a Tascam 22-2 1/4" 2 track machine. In my opinion, as good as the Tascam 22-2 sounds, the Otari sounds better, even when playing back tapes originally recorded on the Tascam 22-2.

So, as I stated before, although I can't answer your question directly, I think you would really like the Otari 1/2" 8 track.

Best wishes,
MD
 
themaddog said:
I have a Tascam MS-16, which is a 1" 16 track. I do not use any noise reduction and am very happy with the results. The amount of track width per track would be approximately the same, comparing this machine to a 1/2" 8 track. One difference would be that because there are fewer tracks, you'll have fewer channels of compounding hiss.
Click to expand...

Thanks! You may well be right. Within mutual driving distance, there are both this Otari 1/2" machine and a very nice Otari MX-70 1" 8 track set up for conversion to 16 track (just add headstack and 8 audio cards). The prices are not very far apart.

One thing I noticed about the 1/2" machine is that all the electronic adjustments are in a sensibly-laid out, well labeled array on the back panel, BEHIND the meters. That strikes me as an annoying layout.

With all the other machines I've worked on (Ampex, 3M, Otari and Teac), the adjustments are done up front while you can look right at the meters. The MX-70 has that same arrangement, with meters in front and adjustments in front and just below the meters. Not necessarily a deal-breaker, but still I think it would be inconvenient.

Cheers,

Otto
 
ofajen said:
The smaller track width should produce a loss of about 3 dB in S/N relative to a 1" machine, but my understanding is that all 8 track 1/2" machines use IEC1 eq at 15 ips, so that will help with the high frequency noise compared to my narrow track experiences with 1/4" 4-track machines running NAB eq.
Click to expand...

I read this statement in MRL's "Choosing and Using" document about 1/2" 8-tracks using IEC1 at 15 ips, but it doesn't seem to be entirely true. The MX-5050 MK III, for one, has switches to go between NAB and IEC eq at both 7.5 and 15 ips.

Cheers,

Otto
 
Ok, I use a Tascam 38 and I do use DBX 150 noise reduction units but I don't really need them for most things. I like to have that option open to me if I chose to use it.
 
11111111". Yep, that looks about wide enough. Then again, you knew I'd say that Otto.:)
 
ofajen said:
One thing I noticed about the 1/2" machine is that all the electronic adjustments are in a sensibly-laid out, well labeled array on the back panel, BEHIND the meters. That strikes me as an annoying layout.
Click to expand...

Otto,

I repaired one of these not long ago and adjusting those those trimmers was a real pain. I kept losing my place as to which trimmer I was turning. Had to remove the adjuster each time.
I thought a solution might be a mirror placed in front of the machine, even though the meter faces would be reversed. At least you could keep your place.

I seem to remember adjusting pinch roller pressure was a bit of a pain too.

Cheers Tim
 
My Tascam 58 is great...meter panel comes forward kind of like a drawer front and then slides straight down exposing the trimmers on all the cards...everything is right in front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top