Richard King
New member
By the way, the A-7300-2T also morphed into the Tascam 25-2.
MS-16 story
- Thread starter evm1024
- Start date
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Riiiight...right-right-right. Okay. Thanks for the reminder, Richard...and BTW, stop putting that picture up of the custom atr stands...it took me a week to recover from the last time you posted that. I've looked everywhere...stopped making them eons ago I suppose. I ask anytime I go into an audio equipment store and I get funny looks y'know? Same ones I get when I tell people I'm hoarding 25 year old gear...hm...come to think of it I get that look from my wife sometimes too, followed by a wistful concerned look and a pat on the head. You know, the wierd thing is if I insist long enough at the equipment stores they all arrive at the same exasperated piece of advice and that's to check out a furniture store...
...that is of course followed by the "request to leave the establishment", which sometimes, depending on whether or not I'm in a particular way, may be followed by the old "we're calling the Police" gag.Anyway, I know its vintage stuff but am I missing something about all this? I mean it is just wierd...wierd that they all tell me to go to a furniture store...they all do...like...they're all talking about it...talking about...me...together...apart from...them...
P
pianodano
Guest
I helped setup a local studio with a MS-16 in 1985 iirc. But it may have been late 84. Not sure anymore. The owner had used a part of his inheritance to buy it and he also went to England to buy a Allen and Heath Brennell System 8 which he flew back with. Sounded goregous. He also aquired a Compumix and a couple of those beautiful sounding and looking FOSTEX ribbon mics. Now that was something. Unfortunately, CBN was just about finished building their own world class studio here and no they longer had much use for outside studios.
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
I've had a secret love affair with the mini 8, at least from photos and from what I've been able to gather about it off the net. Can you just imagine 8 tracks on 1" tape, in one tasty little package.. Yum.
They're next to impossible to find though... at least around these parts.
--
Attachments
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Wow...Ethan...we just can't seem to help taking your thread everywhere.
I've never even heard of the mini 8...I want to know more...links to resources/photos/information?
Dano...'84~'85 does indeed sound more right...I was quoting a Tascam history page that cited the MS16 introduction to the market in '87...typo?
I've never even heard of the mini 8...I want to know more...links to resources/photos/information?
Dano...'84~'85 does indeed sound more right...I was quoting a Tascam history page that cited the MS16 introduction to the market in '87...typo?
Richard King
New member
Sure, that's a fine looking machine, but would it have fit in my custom studio stand??I've had a secret love affair with the mini 8, at least from photos and from what I've been able to gather about it off the net. Can you just imagine 8 tracks on 1" tape, in one tasty little package.. Yum.
They're next to impossible to find though... at least around these parts.
--
P
pianodano
Guest
Wow...Ethan...we just can't seem to help taking your thread everywhere.
I've never even heard of the mini 8...I want to know more...links to resources/photos/information?
Dano...'84~'85 does indeed sound more right...I was quoting a Tascam history page that cited the MS16 introduction to the market in '87...typo?
I don't know why they say 87. The friends studio I mentioned was offered to me for 18k in 86 after he closed up shop. I am pretty sure of that date because after that, I bought my first 38 and M308. But I'll check on that. But anyhow, he decided at the last minute to give it to a local church because about that time, the state had done an audit on him and made the decision that recording studios had to collect and remit sales tax. So they were trying to force him to pay tax on all his receipts since he had opened in around 1979. They also made hime pay sales tax all gear he had purchased out of state, much of which came from Washington Music in Maryland. It was the last straw. Consequently, he closed it and donated everything to the church. It was all nearly new at the time. He had some nice outboard and a fabulous AKG BX-10 reverb. Now that was nice. My brother sold his own a while back on Ebay and I couldn't get it.
I don't know what a mini 8 is. The system 8 was a 24 channel studio console with really sweet eq.
P
pianodano
Guest
Indeed, sorry for 'mini' hi-jack of your thread, Ethan...
Wow, 18K for an MS16 back it the mid 80's... That's like, what, maybe DOUBLE in todays money?!Kinda goes to show what a deal those machines are today.
--
18K for the entire studio. I think the MS-16 could have cost as much as 10 to 12K depending on options.
I'm sorry too.
cjacek
Analogue Enthusiast
Sorry, I thought you were referring to the Allen Heath Brennell Mini 8, which was 8 track, 1" recorder.
Here's a link for you and Cory
:http://www.brenelltape.co.uk/id5.html
(scroll down about half way).
>sorry again Ethan<
-
P
pianodano
Guest
No problem. Here's a link to a system 8. http://www.allen-heath.com/veterans/system8.htm
Hey folks,
Just read this entire thread. A lot of really great info here. Thanks Ethan and Sweetbeats and everyone else. I have a 58 that I've been using a lot. I recorded a whole album on it. I've aligned it many many times and know fairly well what it's capable of as is.
I realize it's been quite awhile since anyone posted on here. But I thought I might ask a couple questions anyway.
First is, at this point someone must have aligned/biased the ms16/58 for high output tape (with the bias cap mod etc)
In practice, did you find this to be a worthwhile endeavor? I really like the sound of 456. If I can continue to occasionally locate good reels of 456, I might just stick with that. SM911 is pretty good too which is the same level tape. My question is whether the electronics amps will crap out when attempting to use 499/ATR etc. My assumption is that they will because I notice my channels starting to clip even when aligned for +6 tape if I'm pushing it too much. Seems like with +9, this would be even more of an issue and one might not be able to even approach pleasing tape saturation.
I think I'll try upgrading U1/U2/U3 at some point to the chips that Ethan had experimented with a couple pages back. I'm guessing that perhaps these newer chips help in regards to higher headroom, allowing for the high output tapes to be used without clipping the channel amps?
Regardless, I still might stick with the levels I have going on here: 250nWb/+6 tape
What I'd really like to overcome is what I hear as a slight pokiness to some sounds. I think this is transients being distorted (not nicely by the tape) but as said by the clipping of the electronics. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that a chip upgrade will solve this issue.
Ethan, what say you to this? If you're still lurking around these parts? Did you ever put a scope on the new chips to verify that they don't need a cap?
Last question is, does anybody know the function of the big tubular relays on the (motherboard? daughterboard?) pcb that the channel cards plug into? I notice that there are 4 of them for 8 channels (in my 58) One went bad at one point, and I just bypassed it. Seems to work fine, but I'm wondering if I'm gonna fry a transistor at some point. Or a head, God forbid. ???
Anyway, thanks everybody for this thread way back in 07/08
We'll see if any of you are still around.
Just read this entire thread. A lot of really great info here. Thanks Ethan and Sweetbeats and everyone else. I have a 58 that I've been using a lot. I recorded a whole album on it. I've aligned it many many times and know fairly well what it's capable of as is.
I realize it's been quite awhile since anyone posted on here. But I thought I might ask a couple questions anyway.
First is, at this point someone must have aligned/biased the ms16/58 for high output tape (with the bias cap mod etc)
In practice, did you find this to be a worthwhile endeavor? I really like the sound of 456. If I can continue to occasionally locate good reels of 456, I might just stick with that. SM911 is pretty good too which is the same level tape. My question is whether the electronics amps will crap out when attempting to use 499/ATR etc. My assumption is that they will because I notice my channels starting to clip even when aligned for +6 tape if I'm pushing it too much. Seems like with +9, this would be even more of an issue and one might not be able to even approach pleasing tape saturation.
I think I'll try upgrading U1/U2/U3 at some point to the chips that Ethan had experimented with a couple pages back. I'm guessing that perhaps these newer chips help in regards to higher headroom, allowing for the high output tapes to be used without clipping the channel amps?
Regardless, I still might stick with the levels I have going on here: 250nWb/+6 tape
What I'd really like to overcome is what I hear as a slight pokiness to some sounds. I think this is transients being distorted (not nicely by the tape) but as said by the clipping of the electronics. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that a chip upgrade will solve this issue.
Ethan, what say you to this? If you're still lurking around these parts? Did you ever put a scope on the new chips to verify that they don't need a cap?
Last question is, does anybody know the function of the big tubular relays on the (motherboard? daughterboard?) pcb that the channel cards plug into? I notice that there are 4 of them for 8 channels (in my 58) One went bad at one point, and I just bypassed it. Seems to work fine, but I'm wondering if I'm gonna fry a transistor at some point. Or a head, God forbid. ???
Anyway, thanks everybody for this thread way back in 07/08
We'll see if any of you are still around.
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
I wouldn't expect the amps to clip, but it depends on the program material and your setup. Remember the meters are averaging, not peaking. The clip LEDs are peaking. I'm surprised you are experiencing clipping when the machine is setup at 250nWb/m. How did you confirm it is the amps in the deck that are clipping?
Newer chips will not increase your headroom. Headroom is a fixed function of the power rail amplitude. The *only* way you can increase the headroom is to increase the voltage of your power supply rails, which you aren't going to do unless you want to do an in depth analysis and follow up with the components on the assembly to determine if each one will handle higher power, and then of course there is the issue of implementing a new set of power rails.
IMO the only reason to use the +9 tape is if you are having trouble with the noise floor of the tape. Is the +6 tape too noisy? If so then that is a reason to try using the
+9 tape, so you can increase your level to tape affording greater sonic distance from the noise floor of the tape.
Again, how did you confirm it is the tape deck amps that are clipping? I would argue it is not your tape deck amps unless you put a scope on the output of the amps and saw distortion. And in your statement above you are saying the transients are being distorted (not nicely) "by the tape"...did you mean to say tape deck amps?
Are you talking about a power rail bypass cap? I would just do it whether or not Ethan tested for oscillation. It won't hurt a thing to bypass the power rails at the opamp with a small value C0G ceramic cap, and the opamps suggested by Ethan are certainly more "hot-rod" than the stock chips and it is recommended to put that bypass cap in.
Those are power mute relays to abate thumping in the outputs on power-up. Looks like bypassing is fine, you just may find it beneficial to mute your studio monitors when powering the deck.