Pardon my ignorance: RtR tape types?!?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lo.fi.love
  • Start date Start date
lo.fi.love

lo.fi.love

Functionally obsessed.
I recently bought an OK-quality reel-to-reel deck that I want to use for mix-downs / masters for my cassette project. I'm interested in buying new tape manufactured by RMGI.

Quoted from US Recording's website:

Quantegy/AMPEX 456 >>>>>>>>>>RMGI SM911 or SM468
Quantegy/AMPEX 457 >>>>>>>>>>RMGI LPR35
Quantegy/AMPEX 499/GP9>>>>>>>RMGI SM900 or ATR Master Tape
Quantegy/AMPEX 480 >>>>>>>>>>RMGI SM468​

I'm totally clueless. I don't know why one would prefer one tape over another. Ostensibly, one would choose one particular tape type/make because of its unique properties. I don't have a reference point here, though.

Is there anywhere on the Web where I can find out more about this? Or, does anyone here have their own opinions / knowledge on what the differences between these tapes are?

I'm really eager to get some help on this. Thanks in advance!!
 
Most decks were designed or specified for Ampex (later Quantegy) tape. The manual will recommend 456 or something. Quantegy no longer exists as a manufacturer (though rumour has it they may yet return), and RMGI is considered the main tape manufacturer at the moment. Hence the conversion guide above.

Now, as for why there are different tape types (as opposed to different manufacturers), basically tape has been continually improving in quality since the 1940s, by introducing new formulations and also rival companies have had their own specific formulations which are not the same.

The long and of it is that each specific tape formula requires a different driving level to energise it correctly (i.e. a different bias level). Changing that radically means re-aligning the machine and some of the very high output tapes will simply require too much energy to be driven properly.

In a nutshell, most semi-pro machines (e.g. TASCAM, Fostex) are designed for 406 or 456. Later high-end machines (Studer, the TASCAM BR20) are designed for higher output tape like 499 or GP7.

The exceptions (where Ampex/Quantegy) are concerned is that some tape types are the same but different thickness - 456 and 457 are identical stuff, but the 457 is thinner and only available in 7" spools. Likewise, 406 and 407.

Does that help?
 
jpmorris said:
Does that help?
Click to expand...

Tremendously.

I have an early-1970s AKAI home-system deck, so I'm guessing that RMGI SM911 is the best for me. I picked up a reel of SM911 when I was at my local audio boutique to buy cable + connectors. I taped a couple songs off an LP to test it and the sound was remarkably accurate.

Does it sound like I'm on the right track?
 
lo.fi.love said:
Tremendously.
I have an early-1970s AKAI home-system deck, so I'm guessing that RMGI SM911 is the best for me. I picked up a reel of SM911 when I was at my local audio boutique to buy cable + connectors. I taped a couple songs off an LP to test it and the sound was remarkably accurate.
Does it sound like I'm on the right track?
Click to expand...

An early 70s machine would be intended for something more like 406, I think and 407 would probably be easier on the machine if you can find some. The snag is, there isn't really an equivalent from RMGI. SM911 will probably work at a pinch, though it may wear the heads more quickly - unless you've got one the GX series, in which case it's less of a concern.
As a rule, the higher output the tape, the more abrasive it becomes.

Zonal do make a 406-compatible tape (820 I think) but their stuff only seems to be available in the UK.
 
The two biggest factors are the tape's "headroom" (that's the +3, +6, +9 factor...basically how hot a signal the tape will handle before reaching a given level of distortion, typically 3%), and different tape deck's amplifier and bias electronics were designed around a particular type of tape; designed to mate with a particular tape's signal level capacity. That's exactly what jpmorris is saying here:

The long and [short] of it is that each specific tape formula requires a different driving level to energise it correctly (i.e. a different bias level). Changing that radically means re-aligning the machine and some of the very high output tapes will simply require too much energy to be driven properly.
Click to expand...

Very well stated. Your Akai deck was likely designed around a +3 tape like 406/407. The difference between 406 and 407 is the thickness of the tape...that's the second main defining factor.

The "longer play" tape is longer play because it is thinner base material, and the lower output tape (+3 vs. +6) requires less oxide because of the lower outout, so the oxide coating is typically thinner as well. Thinner tape can be more gentle on your tape path, but a tape path was designed around a specific tape stock too.

My 2p (to add to what has already been said): You should find out what type of tape your machine was designed for and then try whatever is the closest equivalent to that available today. Do you have the manual, and does it refer to any specific tape in it? My guess is that LPR35 from RMGI is going to be the closest. That is a thinner stock like 407/457, and according to the spec sheets has a lower output than 456/457 (more like 406/407), higher than +3 but lower than +6.

I hope that helps. Oodles of info on the RMGI tapes can be found here.
 
lo.fi.love said:
Quoted from US Recording's website:

Quantegy/AMPEX 456 >>>>>>>>>>RMGI SM911 or SM468
​
Click to expand...

Actually, SM468 has a higher coercivity as compared to 456 / 911 and so is not really a direct drop in replacement for the said tapes, as it requires a higher bias level. US Recording has this bit wrong.

Brilliant info from jpmorris and sweetbeats, btw. :)

--
 
Actually, SM468 has a higher coercivity as compared to 456 / 911 and so is not really a direct drop in replacement for the said tapes, as it requires a higher bias level. US Recording has this bit wrong.
Click to expand...

Okay...yeah. I didn't look through the spec pages really close but I was confused with the intermingling of the 911 and 468.

Thanks for catching/pointing that out.

911 = 456
LPR35 = 457

Right?
 
Look online and eBay for Zonal tape!!!

Hey, Zonal tape is still available if you look around online and on Ebay.

Zonal tape like the 818 and 820 is equivalent to Ampex 406, also you can easily find this on eBay new or used, I have bought from tapeandtape on eBay allot of the Zonal 818 and 820 one pass, with no problems/dropouts etc. It is by far one of the most accurate sounding and professionally slit, as well as smooth play/rewinding tapes I have come across for use on the older 70's reel to reel machines like Teac/Tascam. I think it sounds better than Ampex/Quantegy but about the same as 3M 986.

If you can still find it 3M 986 (equivalent to Ampex 456/499) is awesome sounding on the older Teac/Tascam reel deck and is as good or better than the quality from Zonal tape. Very smooth tape, beautifully slit/cut and sounds perfecto'. However 3m 996 is awesome as well, but, and but, you need a great machine to record this hot of a tape, truely smokin' in terms of higher than CD dynamics!!! Way better than even 24 bit digital, I can blow a 24 bit digital recorder out of the Universe with 996 tape.

Also what works well is Ampex/Quantegy 406, 480 and believe it or not also 499 sounds almost identical to 456 but louder, because they all have similar bias compatibilities with each other. Even though 499 tape is hotter it is still close to 456 in terms of bias sound quality.

You don't always have to re-bias for every tape, please experiment yourself, I have also used 3m 986/996, Basf SM468 (SM468 is equivalent to 406 and 480 Ampex) to record on older machines with good results without re-biasing my reel machines, I just use the tape bias switches on the front and record eq switches to adjust for best sound with excellent results! Although I am the least impressed with SM468 sound quality out of all the tapes here mentioned.

It is True some reel tape machines just need to be re-biased by a good technician or yourself, if you know how, for the very best results with a particular model of high output tape like 996 and 499 etc. But of course you will not get the true dynamics out of high output tape unless you have the best quality and newer reel machines, good luck on your pocket book.

By the way Ampex/Quantegy 480 is also equivalent to 406 and sounds excellent on older machines as well and you still can find it for cheap!!! It was made to run on NAGRA machines, it is excellent mastering tape so try some.........

Now I don't recommend buying all older tape or all older new tape stock, rather you should support RMGI, ATR and a few other tape manufactures and keep these companies in business.

Who knows, someone probably will start manufacturing a new reel to reel machine soon. The demands is only going to rise, and companies need to see that demand again and respond with more new stuff, a new reel tape machine please!!!
 
Last edited:
I know what you are thinking? TapeandTape???

Yea', I guess some do not care for TapeandTape, but if you know what one pass tape works well and is good to use for your machine, and avoid the ones with stick goo shed syndrome like: 407,456,457,226,227,806,807,808,809,469,Q-15, you can have a good experience with used tape. I never had a problem with most of them, I have always gotten a good deal from TapeandTape and around $5 dollars a tape.
I even bought some new stuff that is excellent. Although sometimes "I don't always get want I want', but I always get what I need".

Bill from TapeandTape was out of stock on some other reel tapes I usually buy at one time so he gave me some 3M 996 reel tape for same price as one pass tape, this is the best tape ever produced in my opinion and longest lasting, smooth as silk on my reel machines. You have to bias your machine for it for best results.

As the economy get worse, music studios are shutting down so one pass reel tapes wil be more available on the market now, so you might as well take advantage of it, it is a hell of lot cheaper than new, but if you need new then buy new.

Tape and Tape ain't perfect, who is? But compared to the rest of this crooked world, it ain't all that bad, I have been highly satisfied with their tapes. Just steer clear away from the risky reel tape brands mentioned above, you could try them, but it is a risk. Don't blame TapeandTape, they will replace the bad tape for you, but choose wisely a tape for replacement.

One pass tape works for me, maybe you or others don't want to experiment with different brands or deal with TapeandTape, so please buy new tape, no big deal, whatever works for you'.:D
 
The problem is that there is really no way to verify how many passes a tape has had, unless you trust the source who tells you so.
 
..also, once a tape is opened, you never really know if what's wound on there is the actual tape that you think you're buying, unless, again, you trust the source of that tape.
 
Or unless you buy tape marked, like Agfa 468 that is marked in the backcoated.

I've buyed tens and tens and tens of used tape and in most cases the satisfaction was good.
 
Just a quick update: Yes, I have the manual for this deck and it unfortunately does not recommend any particular tape. My guess would be that LPR35 is the best I can do for this deck, thanks to sweetbeats' suggestion.
 
lo.fi...yeah, its kind of a crap shoot, but your deck is a "consumer" deck (quotes to denote public opinion, not performance, okay?), and decks of that era "typically" were designed around the 1mil base...LPR35...good tape...SM911, 1.5mil tape, will work also. You decide, use what is more cost effective. Both are +6 tape, okay?
 
used tape that you can find relatively cheaply (on eBay etc) is Scotch 207 ... this would basically be perfect for your machine. this tape is usually free of sticky-shed in my experience. this is 1 mil, +3 tape, which is want your deck was designed for (presumably)

that said, i run 911 on a teac 2300, which is a similar consumer-grade machine and it runs fine and sounds better than the 207 in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top