MS-16 or MSR-16?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Theo K
  • Start date Start date
T

Theo K

New member
Hey all,

It's been a while. I used to post here last year under a different name (bloomboy, it was a terrible band name, don't ask) but I've just been lurking for the last year because I've been so busy with school.

Anyhow... I've finally gotten to the point where my TSR-8 is the most limiting factor in my collection of equipment. I recently acquired an M-216 in great condition from the school, and I think it's time to move to 16 tracks. I've narrowed it down to either an MS-16 or MSR-16, but would really appreciate some input from anyone experienced with both decks (beck?)

Here are my questions/concerns:

-The MSR-16 has a few distinct advantages over the MS-16- the integrated dbx (which will be awesome if it's as good as on my tsr-8), the lower price (It's not uncommon to see them for 700-1000 dollars on craigslist, even factoring in another few hundred for maintenance that's still a good deal) and the fact that it uses 1/2" tape, which I already have a lot of.

-That said, I am a bit worried about the track width. If I'm used to working on a TSR-8, will there be a significant drop in quality? I have no intention of getting rid of my TSR-8, so it'll always be an option, but I still plan to do a lot of bouncing down on the 16 track (some of the pieces I'm writing now involve 40 or 50 instrumental parts)... will this be a problem?

-The dbx on my TSR-8 is great for some applications, but I prefer to leave it off most of the time (pretty much unless I'm doing a lot of bounces.) will I be able to do this at all on the MSR-16, or will the noisefloor just be too high? A little bit of noise doesn't bother me as long as the sound is good, which is what I love about the TSR- a little bit noisy but it has a wonderful, clear, depthy sound that older machines I've owned (38 and a 3440) just seemed to lack. Will that still be the case with the MSR-16?

Cost is not really an object here within reason... not that I have gobs of money just laying around, but I'm willing to wait a while for the right machine, and in the meantime there's still a lot I can do with the TSR-8.

Eagerly awaiting your opinions.

Thanks,
Theo
 
bloomboy, yes I remember you!:D

Ah, the MSR-16 and the MS-16......

The standard answer I'd give is to pick the one which is in better overall condition and not to even dream of having it shipped or buying sight unseen. Local only.

but.....

..as long as you already have plenty of 1/2" tape, I'd probably search out a nice MSR-16. The one issue I have is that you're effectively squeezing 16 tracks on 1/2" tape and while this is not necessarily a bad thing, it would, however, make it tougher not to use dbx. Hiss would be an issue [more so than with your TSR-8] but whether you mind it or not is totally subjective.

The MS-16, on the other hand, is the wider format but it'll get expensive, especially if you don't plan to reuse 1" tape. It's generally a more expensive format overall but a great machine, if you can find a nice one.

Whatever you do and whichever machine you get, buy only on condition [paying special attention to head and tape path wear] and local.

------
 
Theo K said:
but I still plan to do a lot of bouncing down on the 16 track (some of the pieces I'm writing now involve 40 or 50 instrumental parts)...
Click to expand...

wow, thats a lot of parts. what kind of music do you record? do u have any mp3s online?
 
cjacek, thanks for your response. I'm not too concerned about the cost of tape... I've learned to be pretty frugal with it. I work out project ideas on cassette and only record them on 1/2" when they're good and ready. So if I can only afford a reel maybe once a month that's OK. The track width really does concern me... I guess the only real way to tell is to hear it for myself, but it seems like bounces get exponentially worse with diminishing track width... for example bouncing 5 tracks down on the 1/2" 8 track still sounds very good, but bouncing down 2 tracks on a 4 track portastudio causes enough degradation that the track is totally unusable.

EDIT: another question I forgot to ask- about the quality of the electronics. Would you say the MSR-16 is comparable to the TSR-8 or 38? how about the MS-16? after getting both aligned and a relap for the 38, the TSR-8 still sounded significantly better... so does anyone know how the MS and MSR stack up next to one another in this regard? IMO better sound with a little more noise is preferable to a higher s/n ratio with lower quality sound.

You can hear some low-bitrate mp3s here:
www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=780551&content=music

"The El" and "Crooked Rails, pt. 2" have something like 30 and 60 tracks, respectively (I had two 1/2" machines when I recorded them)

Thanks,
Theo
 
Last edited:
Theo, this then sounds, especially with all the bouncing and loads of tracks that you use, like you might be happier with the MS-16 or just about any wider track format. In fact have you considered a 2" 24 track? Surprisingly, these can be bought, often, for less than some lesser format and tape, one pass or even new, sometimes sells for less than 1" and even 1/2". There are a lot of those machines around.

Electronics: Yes, this makes a difference, and I think, generally speaking, newer machines will have better, updated electronics and may indeed sound better. I think the MSR-16 and TSR-8 are of the same year [plus / minus] and can be compared as far as electronics but you really lose on the track width [on the MSR] and that's a bit of a problem. The MS-16, while older, is no slouch as far as electronics and it does have the track width so... The 38 is fine too but its design is like 6 years older than the TSR-8.

Actually, have you considered just getting another 1/2" 8 track and bouncing to and from? I'm still actually amazed at the track count that you're using!:eek:

Will give your songs a listen a bit later...

-----
 
I have thought about just biting the bullet and getting a 2" machine... it's gonna happen one of these days. My main concern right now is my mixer... even if I got a 2" 16 track, I have an M-216, which is a -10 dBu mixer. Still, if something comes my way I'm definitely not going to say no. 2" would be absolutely ideal for what I'm trying to do.
 
Last edited:
You could always get one of those 'level shifters' such as this one:
http://www.ebtechaudio.com/lls-2des.html

....but for 16 or more tracks it might get expensive, especially that you could probably find a smaller board capable of +4 and then there's the mods that people do, which may be a good idea [and cheaper] but that's way over my head.

Take a look here, for instance:
http://www.uneeda-audio.com/pads/

The above link [about 'building attenuator pads'] came from this thread:
https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=263854

----
 
I have an MSR-16 and am very happy with the quality. I used to own a TSR-8, and to my surprise, I could never hear a difference in quality between the two. However, you will always need to use the DBX on the MSR.

In regards to bouncing, I once did make a song that bounced a track 3 times. However, each time I was adding more and more effect (it was a creepy dialog track, a la Michael Jackson's "Thriller" that was over the music in the middle of a song). This track did not sound like it lost any quality.

Have you considered the MSR-24? Since you're using so many tracks, that might be the best machine for you in considering the number of tracks vs. track width.

-MD
 
I have two ms16s (one for parts) and LOVE them. Tape is an issue though. Unused 1" Quantagy 456 type tape is not easy to find and buying used "one pass" can be dodgy (look for the Tapetape thread). The only problem that I have had are some rec/play cards going bad. That's why I have the parts machine. That said, the thing is a total work horse and I see them around for $900-$1500. They are also much bigger than the msr.
 
Thanks for the info, everyone. I think I'm going to go with a 1" machine (if I can find one, that is.) I'm sure the MSR is a great-sounding machine- too many informed people like it for it not to be- but somehow the prospect of never being able to turn off DBX worries me.

Much appreciated.

theo
 
I don’t have any hands on with the 1” MS-16, but I had the pleasure of using the ½” MSR-16 many years ago and was very impressed with it. This was the original model with dbx NR.

The MRS-16 has similar electronics to the TSR-8, but has more features. The TSR/MSR series represent about the best of the semi-pro species before digital became all the rage. In fact Tascam packed in some pretty advanced features not found in older classic machines many times the price.

If I should need more analog tracks in the future I’ll be moving to the MSR-16 or the Fostex G16. I’m determined to stay with half-inch tape at this point since it is so versatile and somewhat affordable compared to wider formats.

The MSR-16 sounds great and the dbx NR is well integrated into the system. You can disable it in blocks of 8, but it’s a bit hissy for my tastes. I use dbx with no apologies. In fact if it wasn’t for advances in noise reduction 16 on ½” would have been impossible. Even 24 on 2” is pushing it without noise reduction

I have never had problems with dbx or Dolby A and C NR. I rarely record without NR… you just have to learn how to use it correctly, which I have been doing since about 1980 with no regrets.

:)
 
beck, what exactly is the correct way to use noise reduction? When I've used it on my TSR-8 it certainly hasn't sounded 'bad' in any way, it just seems to impart a slightly different character to the recorded sound.
 
Beck said:
I have never had problems with dbx or Dolby A and C NR. I rarely record without NR… you just have to learn how to use it correctly, which I have been doing since about 1980 with no regrets.

:)
Click to expand...

I first used tape when I recently recorded radio mixes for 2 singles off my CD back in January. 2" 24 track and was I blown away. So I thought I'd try 1/2" and got a great deal on a TSR-8 to wet my teeth so to speak. Well, with a properly calibrated deck and good rec levels, and maybe a bit of high shelf eq at the end of it, the recording quality off this deck is every bit as good as the 2" while using the DBX. Not exactly the same, but not "oh that's too bad" difference either. JMHO.
 
Theo K said:
beck, what exactly is the correct way to use noise reduction? When I've used it on my TSR-8 it certainly hasn't sounded 'bad' in any way, it just seems to impart a slightly different character to the recorded sound.
Click to expand...

Yeah, all types of NR change the sound to some degree, even Dolby SR. The key with these older decks is to make sure the dbx hasn't drifted out of spec... have it serviced or do it yourself if you have the service manual and are so inclined. A lot of complaints about NR are due to misalignment.

As far as recording, when using dbx I keep peak levels at 0 VU, almost like recording with a digital format. Since the noise floor is so low pushing levels with dbx on has no real benefit. You want to keep sizzling signals such as hi hat under control as well because they distort at lower levels with or without dbx. Same thing with snare. Without dbx you can get some saturation that can enhance the snare, but with dbx on it doesn’t work that way. Percussive peaks that are too hot will produce artifacts.

The TSR-8 was designed to produce a nice clean recording and it works as advertised if the NR is properly calibrated and levels aren’t pushed too far into the red. If you regularly use NR you just get used to it and learn to adjust so that the deck reproduces what you had in mind. It works that way for me anyway. :) I don't care for hiss too much and have always used NR of one kind or another.

mamm7215 said:
I first used tape when I recently recorded radio mixes for 2 singles off my CD back in January. 2" 24 track and was I blown away. So I thought I'd try 1/2" and got a great deal on a TSR-8 to wet my teeth so to speak. Well, with a properly calibrated deck and good rec levels, and maybe a bit of high shelf eq at the end of it, the recording quality off this deck is every bit as good as the 2" while using the DBX. Not exactly the same, but not "oh that's too bad" difference either. JMHO.
Click to expand...

Not surprising. The track width for 1/2" 8-track is virtually the same as 2" 24-track... about 0.40 inch. And the electronics in the TSR are first rate. Very impressive for a machine that retailed for $3495.00

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top