Molasar
New member
Tascam BR-20 and Tascam 32 overhauls here:
http://velvetdreamstudios.spaces.live.com/blog/
Might need to scroll down...
Cheers!
http://velvetdreamstudios.spaces.live.com/blog/
Might need to scroll down...
Cheers!
Tascam BR-20T Story...
- Thread starter sweetbeats
- Start date
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Who WOULDN'T want to pass audio through a tape deck???
Okay...I feel even more stoopider saying this, but true confessions of an obsessive technical fixer-upper guy...I recorded something tonight with the BR-20T.
Now, keep in mind that I got back into this analog thing several years ago basically on a hunch that it was what I needed to achieve the results I was hearing in my mind but kept running into walls with digital.
Aside from some test tracking on my old 58 and some play time with the kids on the 388, my analog tracking experience is pretty limited...very limited. I know how to fix a lot of stuff and I'm really comfortable finding my way around the controls and guts of a machine, but I've been fixing these machines up on something of a hunch.
MAN!!
WHY do people swear digital is better?????
I DO NOT want to get into a digital vs. analog pissing match here. Stupid waste of time but everybody must hear what I heard tonight.
I am setting up for a tracking session tomorrow...overdubs. No analog decks being used, but I thought it would be fun since I'm cross-connecting so much stuff for the session to hook up the BR-20T and see how the record and repro functions work.
I took a rough mix off the DAW and had it and the return from the BR-20T into the EXT inputs on the Tascam M-__ mixer. I thought this was a fair way to do a real-time A/B test; being able to push a couple buttons and be listening straight off the DAW, or off the repro head while tracking. Tape sounded too good to be true and I realized that the true A/B test would be switching between input and repro on he deck. I just can't believe what the tape is doing...night and day to my ears. More natural, dynamic and open for sure...like somebody opened the windows. The soundstage just pops out...cymbals sound like I'm back at the tracking session...EVERYTHING sounds drastically better. My hunch was way right...this is incredible...
And the BR hasn't been calibrated or biased for the SM900 I'm running on it.
Okay...I feel even more stoopider saying this, but true confessions of an obsessive technical fixer-upper guy...I recorded something tonight with the BR-20T.
Now, keep in mind that I got back into this analog thing several years ago basically on a hunch that it was what I needed to achieve the results I was hearing in my mind but kept running into walls with digital.
Aside from some test tracking on my old 58 and some play time with the kids on the 388, my analog tracking experience is pretty limited...very limited. I know how to fix a lot of stuff and I'm really comfortable finding my way around the controls and guts of a machine, but I've been fixing these machines up on something of a hunch.
MAN!!
WHY do people swear digital is better?????
I DO NOT want to get into a digital vs. analog pissing match here. Stupid waste of time but everybody must hear what I heard tonight.
I am setting up for a tracking session tomorrow...overdubs. No analog decks being used, but I thought it would be fun since I'm cross-connecting so much stuff for the session to hook up the BR-20T and see how the record and repro functions work.
I took a rough mix off the DAW and had it and the return from the BR-20T into the EXT inputs on the Tascam M-__ mixer. I thought this was a fair way to do a real-time A/B test; being able to push a couple buttons and be listening straight off the DAW, or off the repro head while tracking. Tape sounded too good to be true and I realized that the true A/B test would be switching between input and repro on he deck. I just can't believe what the tape is doing...night and day to my ears. More natural, dynamic and open for sure...like somebody opened the windows. The soundstage just pops out...cymbals sound like I'm back at the tracking session...EVERYTHING sounds drastically better. My hunch was way right...this is incredible...
And the BR hasn't been calibrated or biased for the SM900 I'm running on it.
The Great Cobb
New member
tape
Oh im sure everyone knows that tape is better. The problem is like 1 out of 50 guys with tape machines has one that works 100 percent.
Oh im sure everyone knows that tape is better. The problem is like 1 out of 50 guys with tape machines has one that works 100 percent.
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
I can't believe what this thing does with sound...
Working on compiling tracks for a project I'm involved in. Its an all digital project but I'm totally getting addicted to putting the stereo sum of the mixer through the BR-20 and monitoring off the repro head in REC rather than monitor straight off the board.
Its...incredible. I guess I'm finally getting indoctrinated into what you all are nuts about. I've been nuts about this analog stuff because of hunches and logical assumptions, and nuts over the aesthetics and the theory...and the mechanics. Those that know me through this forum know that I'm definitely an analog tape-o-phile, so can you imagine how I'm feeling now that I'm experiencing the best part? The sound???
I don't mean to keep going on but I listened to all sorts of stuff through it tonight...stuff I'd mastered, stuff other people have done...16/44.1 stuff, 128kbit mp3's...everything sounds wider and closer, deeper and more clear, more sparkle to it but a soft, natural sparkle...how does it do that?
Its literally like pulling a wool blanket off the monitors. I tried for days and days on digital mixes to get that sound and I thought I had it and *boom* it comes off that repro head just like that. And I'm hearing this in direct comparison between the input and repro...switching while tape is rolling.
I'm not kidding...at one point I thought I was going to cry it sounded so good.
Its incredible.
I need to put some A/B comparison up here.
BTW I thought I had a bad card, relay or some other problem as the right channel kept going out coming off the deck. Its just a touchy cable.
Also keep in mind all the good sound is on a deck with some significant head wear and it hasn't been biased or calibrated.
ALSO...again...this thing handles tape so beautifully...effortlessly. I couldn't get over how awesome the tape pack looked from even a fast-wind...looked as good as the spool-speed packs used to look on my 58.
I have an Ampex 440C in storage ready for a refurb someday but I'm really falling for this BR...
Working on compiling tracks for a project I'm involved in. Its an all digital project but I'm totally getting addicted to putting the stereo sum of the mixer through the BR-20 and monitoring off the repro head in REC rather than monitor straight off the board.
Its...incredible. I guess I'm finally getting indoctrinated into what you all are nuts about. I've been nuts about this analog stuff because of hunches and logical assumptions, and nuts over the aesthetics and the theory...and the mechanics. Those that know me through this forum know that I'm definitely an analog tape-o-phile, so can you imagine how I'm feeling now that I'm experiencing the best part? The sound???
I don't mean to keep going on but I listened to all sorts of stuff through it tonight...stuff I'd mastered, stuff other people have done...16/44.1 stuff, 128kbit mp3's...everything sounds wider and closer, deeper and more clear, more sparkle to it but a soft, natural sparkle...how does it do that?
Its literally like pulling a wool blanket off the monitors. I tried for days and days on digital mixes to get that sound and I thought I had it and *boom* it comes off that repro head just like that. And I'm hearing this in direct comparison between the input and repro...switching while tape is rolling.
I'm not kidding...at one point I thought I was going to cry it sounded so good.
Its incredible.
I need to put some A/B comparison up here.
BTW I thought I had a bad card, relay or some other problem as the right channel kept going out coming off the deck. Its just a touchy cable.
Also keep in mind all the good sound is on a deck with some significant head wear and it hasn't been biased or calibrated.
ALSO...again...this thing handles tape so beautifully...effortlessly. I couldn't get over how awesome the tape pack looked from even a fast-wind...looked as good as the spool-speed packs used to look on my 58.
I have an Ampex 440C in storage ready for a refurb someday but I'm really falling for this BR...
P
pianodano
Guest
I can't believe what this thing does with sound...
Working on compiling tracks for a project I'm involved in. Its an all digital project but I'm totally getting addicted to putting the stereo sum of the mixer through the BR-20 and monitoring off the repro head in REC rather than monitor straight off the board.
Its...incredible. I guess I'm finally getting indoctrinated into what you all are nuts about. I've been nuts about this analog stuff because of hunches and logical assumptions, and nuts over the aesthetics and the theory...and the mechanics. Those that know me through this forum know that I'm definitely an analog tape-o-phile, so can you imagine how I'm feeling now that I'm experiencing the best part? The sound???
I don't mean to keep going on but I listened to all sorts of stuff through it tonight...stuff I'd mastered, stuff other people have done...16/44.1 stuff, 128kbit mp3's...everything sounds wider and closer, deeper and more clear, more sparkle to it but a soft, natural sparkle...how does it do that?
Its literally like pulling a wool blanket off the monitors. I tried for days and days on digital mixes to get that sound and I thought I had it and *boom* it comes off that repro head just like that. And I'm hearing this in direct comparison between the input and repro...switching while tape is rolling.
I'm not kidding...at one point I thought I was going to cry it sounded so good.
Its incredible.
I need to put some A/B comparison up here.
BTW I thought I had a bad card, relay or some other problem as the right channel kept going out coming off the deck. Its just a touchy cable.
Also keep in mind all the good sound is on a deck with some significant head wear and it hasn't been biased or calibrated.
ALSO...again...this thing handles tape so beautifully...effortlessly. I couldn't get over how awesome the tape pack looked from even a fast-wind...looked as good as the spool-speed packs used to look on my 58.
I have an Ampex 440C in storage ready for a refurb someday but I'm really falling for this BR...
Cory,
Congratulations on your discovery and new understanding of how good music can sound. That's why this stuff sold for (costed ?) what it did.
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
I'm thinking I need to re-label the two-track return switch in the monitor section of my mixer to "awesome" or "nice" or something like that because that's pretty much how it makes stereo digital program material sound.
Its just astounding.
I think I'm done ever participating in any digital vs. analog debates. It just has to be heard. I suppose my question, if ever I do participate in such a discussion, would be "Have you ever done realtime A/B comparison of playback of digital program material and then took the same playback, in realtime, and monitored off the repro head of a high-speed (i.e. 15ips) mastering recorder (i.e. halftrack 1/4 inch or better) that is in good repair while recording?"
There's just no debate. It takes that digital material and opens up the mix and softens the edge and livens up the low frequencies...it just can't be described. Sold. Done.
Its also valuable to be able to push the input level and hear how the deck reponds to increased levels.
I'm going to have to recal the peak LED's on the BR's VU's because even when they are going nuts the material coming off the repro is still clean. I'll do that when I get around to doing a complete cal on the BR. BTW I'm using fresh SM-900.
Its just astounding.
I think I'm done ever participating in any digital vs. analog debates. It just has to be heard. I suppose my question, if ever I do participate in such a discussion, would be "Have you ever done realtime A/B comparison of playback of digital program material and then took the same playback, in realtime, and monitored off the repro head of a high-speed (i.e. 15ips) mastering recorder (i.e. halftrack 1/4 inch or better) that is in good repair while recording?"
There's just no debate. It takes that digital material and opens up the mix and softens the edge and livens up the low frequencies...it just can't be described. Sold. Done.
Its also valuable to be able to push the input level and hear how the deck reponds to increased levels.
I'm going to have to recal the peak LED's on the BR's VU's because even when they are going nuts the material coming off the repro is still clean. I'll do that when I get around to doing a complete cal on the BR. BTW I'm using fresh SM-900.
P
pianodano
Guest
There you go. How about ASTOUNDING SOUNDING ??
Well, there's a sucker born every minute. And what is the use in arguing with someone, anyone, that claims to be into music and that tries to convince others that dig is better. Might have something to do with the whys and howcomes that most music today sucks. But maybe it's plain ignorance. Who knows. Perhaps they should consider a career in politics. That field is full of ______. (Fill in the blank).
If you figure out EXACTLY how to do that, please let me know. I think my MS16 peak leds are supposed to light at somewhere around 15 dB over (can't remember what voltage). I never could figure out why I couldn't get them right.
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Heheheh...yeah...might be a bit tight there to screen that in on the dress panel but...
...excellent idea, Danny. 
Check and see but I betcha its trim pot R210 on the amp cards. Ethan or others can confirm, but your amp cards are the same as what I had in my 58 and that was R210. You see the row of 3 trim pots that are back behind the first two rows? R210 is the one in the middle of that back row. Its possible to get to it without an extender card but its a bit of a bear.
Attachments
evm1024
New member
Yes, that is correct. And it is a PITA to get them all triggering at the same time.
Your best bet (this is how I do it) is to make a cable that splits your signal generator output into 16 RCA (or 8 for an 8 track) plugs so that you can send the same signal to all inputs at the same time. If your generator does not have the power to drive that many inputs you can run the signal into a small power amp and then to all the inputs.
Monitor the signal voltage at the point that you split it and adjust it to the value speced in the manual. In theory all inputs now have that same voltage (use the same cable and cable length to the inputs, yes that is ober kill but ...)
The peak led circuit is a voltage comparitor which has hysterisis which means that it turns on the LED at (oh say) 1 volt and turns it off at 0.95 volts. What this means is that you should set the voltage that just turns the LED on and if you go to far then turn is most of the way back and try again. But I digress.
OK, with the desired voltage going to all inputs you adjust the pots little by little until the LED just turn on. It does not hurt to take a few tries on each channel. Then once you have them all where you want them you change the voltage from the generator to be less that peak and slowly increase the voltage to see how close you got them to each other. Don't worry id some are way off the others.
At this point I mark the ones that are too far from the others and reset the input voltage to be where half of the led are lit (excluding the ones that I'm going to readjust) and then adjust those that need it to just come on.
Then recheck by changing the voltage to be sure that they all light at hear the same time. I can get a little anal about it in trying to get them all to the same "on" point but generally you don't have to go overboard here. If they are within 1 dB of each other they are quite close. Or if they are all on at the on spec voltage and all off at the off spec voltage youu are golden.
Regards, Ethan
Your best bet (this is how I do it) is to make a cable that splits your signal generator output into 16 RCA (or 8 for an 8 track) plugs so that you can send the same signal to all inputs at the same time. If your generator does not have the power to drive that many inputs you can run the signal into a small power amp and then to all the inputs.
Monitor the signal voltage at the point that you split it and adjust it to the value speced in the manual. In theory all inputs now have that same voltage (use the same cable and cable length to the inputs, yes that is ober kill but ...)
The peak led circuit is a voltage comparitor which has hysterisis which means that it turns on the LED at (oh say) 1 volt and turns it off at 0.95 volts. What this means is that you should set the voltage that just turns the LED on and if you go to far then turn is most of the way back and try again. But I digress.
OK, with the desired voltage going to all inputs you adjust the pots little by little until the LED just turn on. It does not hurt to take a few tries on each channel. Then once you have them all where you want them you change the voltage from the generator to be less that peak and slowly increase the voltage to see how close you got them to each other. Don't worry id some are way off the others.
At this point I mark the ones that are too far from the others and reset the input voltage to be where half of the led are lit (excluding the ones that I'm going to readjust) and then adjust those that need it to just come on.
Then recheck by changing the voltage to be sure that they all light at hear the same time. I can get a little anal about it in trying to get them all to the same "on" point but generally you don't have to go overboard here. If they are within 1 dB of each other they are quite close. Or if they are all on at the on spec voltage and all off at the off spec voltage youu are golden.
Regards, Ethan
P
pianodano
Guest
Ethan,
Thank you for the very detailed reply. Yes, that is why I had given up on trying to get the peak lights to operate as intended. For certain the manual gives a procedure, but I found it just didn't work to well. But I'll bet the method you have described will do the job. Thanks again.
Regards,
Danny
Thank you for the very detailed reply. Yes, that is why I had given up on trying to get the peak lights to operate as intended. For certain the manual gives a procedure, but I found it just didn't work to well. But I'll bet the method you have described will do the job. Thanks again.
Regards,
Danny
evm1024
New member
Glad to be of help. Nice to know that such a long post is useful. I was worried about that.
--Ethan
--Ethan
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
hybrid portastudio...
I now have the BR-20T racked with essential mastering processors, preamps, DAW I/O, the computer and synchronizer. This makes it a useful and more mobile multipurpose rig since I lack a permanent space for stuff to be setup.
With this I can track two-track analog stuff, track multitrack digital projects direct to disk (18 in, 18 out), master to halftrack from the DAW, or build digital multitrack projects that are tracked to analog first by tracking to the BR and then dumping to digital and using the synchronizer and SMPTE offset to be able to keep all the analog tracks sequentially on tape, but build them as a simultaneous project in the DAW.
Any spaces I DO use are cramped so having the open rack on wheels is really great for getting behind it and such. The whole thing has gotta weigh in at close to 200lbs. I'm really pleased with how sturdy the rack is. Doesn't even flinch at the weight and rolls really nice.
So without further ado, my hybrid portastudio:
The fact that the TimeLine Microlynx synchronizer is powered up is a happy thing for me. The PSU was hosed and they are totally unobtanium. I wasn't sure what to do at first because the original PSU uses a DIN-5 cable (aka MIDI cable) for power interconnect and it carries two grounds and +5 and +/-12VDC rails. Well, a standard ATX computer power supply has those rails. I just had to figure out how to hack the supply so it would turn on when not connected to a computer motherboard, splice in the DIN cable, fab some output protection (thanks gain for the help coming up with that, Ethan), and put some rubber feet on it. Voila, benchtop aftermarket Microlynx PSU, and fan cooled at that:
Nice fringe benefit of using a computer PSU: the power is really clean.
So I still need to make the sync cable for the BR but I have all the parts. Won't be too terrible a project...and I want to make up some audio cable harnesses for the rack too. But at least I got things in place.
This will work great for the stand-alone applications listed above or it is ready to slide up next to the 388 OR the M-__/MM-1000 combo for expanded analog multitracking/summing features.
Still need to cal the BR...
...and I think I need to talk to Ethan about lifter sleeves. The grooves in the lifters are making a mess of things. The tape that grooved them MUST have been ever so slightly more narrow...
I now have the BR-20T racked with essential mastering processors, preamps, DAW I/O, the computer and synchronizer. This makes it a useful and more mobile multipurpose rig since I lack a permanent space for stuff to be setup.
With this I can track two-track analog stuff, track multitrack digital projects direct to disk (18 in, 18 out), master to halftrack from the DAW, or build digital multitrack projects that are tracked to analog first by tracking to the BR and then dumping to digital and using the synchronizer and SMPTE offset to be able to keep all the analog tracks sequentially on tape, but build them as a simultaneous project in the DAW.
Any spaces I DO use are cramped so having the open rack on wheels is really great for getting behind it and such. The whole thing has gotta weigh in at close to 200lbs. I'm really pleased with how sturdy the rack is. Doesn't even flinch at the weight and rolls really nice.
So without further ado, my hybrid portastudio:
The fact that the TimeLine Microlynx synchronizer is powered up is a happy thing for me. The PSU was hosed and they are totally unobtanium. I wasn't sure what to do at first because the original PSU uses a DIN-5 cable (aka MIDI cable) for power interconnect and it carries two grounds and +5 and +/-12VDC rails. Well, a standard ATX computer power supply has those rails. I just had to figure out how to hack the supply so it would turn on when not connected to a computer motherboard, splice in the DIN cable, fab some output protection (thanks gain for the help coming up with that, Ethan), and put some rubber feet on it. Voila, benchtop aftermarket Microlynx PSU, and fan cooled at that:
Nice fringe benefit of using a computer PSU: the power is really clean.
So I still need to make the sync cable for the BR but I have all the parts. Won't be too terrible a project...and I want to make up some audio cable harnesses for the rack too. But at least I got things in place.
This will work great for the stand-alone applications listed above or it is ready to slide up next to the 388 OR the M-__/MM-1000 combo for expanded analog multitracking/summing features.
Still need to cal the BR...
...and I think I need to talk to Ethan about lifter sleeves. The grooves in the lifters are making a mess of things. The tape that grooved them MUST have been ever so slightly more narrow...
timkroeger
Custom Title User
Awesome rig, Cory! That is just... awesome. And portable. Just wow. I really like it! It is a really nice example of how you can integrate analog and digital and have a really versatile setup.
So, on fabricating the sync cable, do you have a source for those 40 pin sockets? I still need to build the sync cable for the ATR-60 and haven't been able to find them.
On a sidenote, I have been looking for a 2-track deck myself but I am unsure what to get. I was thinking of a 52 since really like the omega transport/tape path and I suppose parts may be more readily available? I know you own(ed) the 42, 52 and the BR-20T and I'd consider all three of them candidates so what do you think.
Nice work using the ATX PSU for your MicroLynx! I was just thinking, if you only need your MicroLynx for syncing with the computer you might as well power the synchronizer off the computer's PSU, after checking that it can handle the additional load. No need to mod the PSU for powering on without the PC then, just an additional cable, as the unit would only be used in combination with the DAW. Then you wouldn't have the PSU lying around and the setup would be even more compact and portable. Still a good thing to have the additional unit for backup, when you want to sync with something other than the DAW.
Cheers
Tim
So, on fabricating the sync cable, do you have a source for those 40 pin sockets? I still need to build the sync cable for the ATR-60 and haven't been able to find them.
On a sidenote, I have been looking for a 2-track deck myself but I am unsure what to get. I was thinking of a 52 since really like the omega transport/tape path and I suppose parts may be more readily available? I know you own(ed) the 42, 52 and the BR-20T and I'd consider all three of them candidates so what do you think.
Nice work using the ATX PSU for your MicroLynx! I was just thinking, if you only need your MicroLynx for syncing with the computer you might as well power the synchronizer off the computer's PSU, after checking that it can handle the additional load. No need to mod the PSU for powering on without the PC then, just an additional cable, as the unit would only be used in combination with the DAW. Then you wouldn't have the PSU lying around and the setup would be even more compact and portable. Still a good thing to have the additional unit for backup, when you want to sync with something other than the DAW.
Cheers
Tim
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Hey, thanks, Tim! 
40-pin connectors...welll, here's the thing. I haven't nailed down the exact solution because for the time being one of my Microlynx systems came with a TimeLine brand sync cable with the proper Microlynx end on it. The other end is for a Studer deck but I have the 37-pin dsub connector and hood for the Tascam, so before long I'll have my proper cable.
What I DO know though is that the pin spacing on the 40-pin connector is the same as a standard IDE interface cable so worst-case-scenario you can use a standard IDE ribbon cable, though it won't lock into those nice lock tabs on the Microlynx system unit connectors (those are 3M by the way and I DID find some of those PCB-mount connectors at my local electronics shop for spares). I also have found 40-pin socket housings that take cable-mount pins like the Microlynx connectors. The local electronics shop has those housings and cable mount pins but the housings don't have a mating hood. So I'm still looking for that but I haven't looked hard yet, and when I look hard I (so far) find what I'm looking for, like the mixer end power umbilical for my prototype Tascam mixer, or even the parts for the M-520 power umbilical. If you need some of those housings and pins let me know and I'll pick some up for you, and certainly when it comes time to make a sync cable for the 388 I'll be taking a deeper look.
Also, I believe Fostex sync boxes used the same connector so you can keep your eye out for Fostex sync cables.
Speaking of the 388, just to clarify, the Microlynx won't be exclusively used with just the computer, but eventully the 388 as well. The Microlynx is great that way as even in its most basic form it'll slave two slave capable machines to MTC, and I even have the optional 3rd machine card so I could theoretically slave three slave capable machines to MTC. Can't imagine when or why I would ever do that, but it is fun to think about watching three sets of reels rocking into chase-lock.
Hm. I never even considered tapping off the Dell's PSU. That's something to think about, though the Microlynx's PSU perches nicely on the back of the Yamaha i88x, which is, like, 14 inches deep so it makes a nice shelf there. Plus, though I *think* the Dell PSU could handle it, its an older system with a 220W supply, and of course because its a smaller form factor the case of the supply isn't standard ATX. I knew I was compromising some things by setting up using the smaller case but I like the compactness and it was super-cheap. I have a really nice hot-rodded computer that i've used for a few years but my priorities have been drastically shifting and that has become the family PC...I'm hardly ever in the studio and it was just wrong to have that powerhouse sitting nearly all the time. The Dell in the rack was super cheap and I used available spares to beef up the RAM and I've got a dual 2.5 inch SATA RAID drive enclosure that fits in the space of a 3.5 inch bay for the audio tracking drive and then (since there is only one SATA port) I'm using the IDE port for the ATA-133 system drive and the optical drive. The smaller system is nice in this case because there are less hardware IRQ's needed. I know the XP platform manages the IRQ's much better than past MS OS's but I still run into issues with laptops that always seem to lump the GPU and cardbus and USB channels together. With the OS tweaked the way it is I'm only using 126Mb of RAM with the Yamaha mLAN drivers and Cubase running. And data transfer rate, in theory (as measured by diagnostic software) to the RAID array could handle over 40 simultaneous tracks at 24/48...well over double my inputs so that's good data bandwidth...and even though the processor is a P4, I did a test song with 4 virtual instruments running (all long sustain ambient pad-type VI's) and some effects and a complex mastering plugin and I just started to get some dropouts with the buffers set to 4ms latency throughput so totally adequate for my needs. Pretty good for an old P4 box. Anyway, the Dell is running pretty fully loaded so who knows how the supply would tolerate driving the Microlynx, but thanks for opening up the idea. May come in handy.
Back to more analog audio related subject matter...
42, 52, BR-20...I didn't have a 42 or a 52...had a 48 and a 58 BUT that gives me a pretty good knowledge of the 2 track variants. They're all great. I love having the center timecode track capability which you will ONLY find in the BR-20 series as far as the three decks in question. The BR has the latest and best transport logic. The 40 series has really neatly engineered layout...may not matter to you but one inconvenience is that the card access is from the bottom. 52 has that Omega transport, front card access and the hurkiest transport of the three, maybe the most robust amp electronics too...I dunno about that because I haven't really done much comparative study of the three, and my ability to go deep on that is pretty limited. They are all very nice decks but I'm *really* sold on my BR...it handles tape the nicest out of any of them though they all are nice but it is just so gentle on the tape and *I can't believe the tape packs* on the BR...they look like a solid disc on the reel even when packing in fast REW...can't imagine what they'd be like in SPOOL mode...and this is on a deck that has some mileage, has had no recent setup to speak of. It is a thing of beauty to watch. Parts for the BR will be the most readily available as it was in production at least a decade later than the other two. But I have a friend and it would be wrong to name drop but he is a definitive resource for me on what's good and what's not so good...he'd not be one to tout the Japanese stuff but he was recently exposed to the ATR and BR series decks and as far as the transports he was really, genuinely impressed. He said they sounded quite good too and that if his livelihood and rep wasn't built on a certain brand he'd likely have a number of ATR series decks and a BR or two in the operation. He mentioned the ATR60-4HS in particular for its head design...cjacek's got one of those.
I hope that gives some insight but I can't see ever switching to a 40 or 50 series deck for my halftrack...I love my BR. That's not a cut on those with a 42 or 52...they're awesome and anybody should feel proud to have one but for what I want to be able to do the BR-20T's got it in spades.
40-pin connectors...welll, here's the thing. I haven't nailed down the exact solution because for the time being one of my Microlynx systems came with a TimeLine brand sync cable with the proper Microlynx end on it. The other end is for a Studer deck but I have the 37-pin dsub connector and hood for the Tascam, so before long I'll have my proper cable.
What I DO know though is that the pin spacing on the 40-pin connector is the same as a standard IDE interface cable so worst-case-scenario you can use a standard IDE ribbon cable, though it won't lock into those nice lock tabs on the Microlynx system unit connectors (those are 3M by the way and I DID find some of those PCB-mount connectors at my local electronics shop for spares). I also have found 40-pin socket housings that take cable-mount pins like the Microlynx connectors. The local electronics shop has those housings and cable mount pins but the housings don't have a mating hood. So I'm still looking for that but I haven't looked hard yet, and when I look hard I (so far) find what I'm looking for, like the mixer end power umbilical for my prototype Tascam mixer, or even the parts for the M-520 power umbilical. If you need some of those housings and pins let me know and I'll pick some up for you, and certainly when it comes time to make a sync cable for the 388 I'll be taking a deeper look.
Also, I believe Fostex sync boxes used the same connector so you can keep your eye out for Fostex sync cables.
Speaking of the 388, just to clarify, the Microlynx won't be exclusively used with just the computer, but eventully the 388 as well. The Microlynx is great that way as even in its most basic form it'll slave two slave capable machines to MTC, and I even have the optional 3rd machine card so I could theoretically slave three slave capable machines to MTC. Can't imagine when or why I would ever do that, but it is fun to think about watching three sets of reels rocking into chase-lock.
Hm. I never even considered tapping off the Dell's PSU. That's something to think about, though the Microlynx's PSU perches nicely on the back of the Yamaha i88x, which is, like, 14 inches deep so it makes a nice shelf there. Plus, though I *think* the Dell PSU could handle it, its an older system with a 220W supply, and of course because its a smaller form factor the case of the supply isn't standard ATX. I knew I was compromising some things by setting up using the smaller case but I like the compactness and it was super-cheap. I have a really nice hot-rodded computer that i've used for a few years but my priorities have been drastically shifting and that has become the family PC...I'm hardly ever in the studio and it was just wrong to have that powerhouse sitting nearly all the time. The Dell in the rack was super cheap and I used available spares to beef up the RAM and I've got a dual 2.5 inch SATA RAID drive enclosure that fits in the space of a 3.5 inch bay for the audio tracking drive and then (since there is only one SATA port) I'm using the IDE port for the ATA-133 system drive and the optical drive. The smaller system is nice in this case because there are less hardware IRQ's needed. I know the XP platform manages the IRQ's much better than past MS OS's but I still run into issues with laptops that always seem to lump the GPU and cardbus and USB channels together. With the OS tweaked the way it is I'm only using 126Mb of RAM with the Yamaha mLAN drivers and Cubase running. And data transfer rate, in theory (as measured by diagnostic software) to the RAID array could handle over 40 simultaneous tracks at 24/48...well over double my inputs so that's good data bandwidth...and even though the processor is a P4, I did a test song with 4 virtual instruments running (all long sustain ambient pad-type VI's) and some effects and a complex mastering plugin and I just started to get some dropouts with the buffers set to 4ms latency throughput so totally adequate for my needs. Pretty good for an old P4 box. Anyway, the Dell is running pretty fully loaded so who knows how the supply would tolerate driving the Microlynx, but thanks for opening up the idea. May come in handy.
Back to more analog audio related subject matter...
42, 52, BR-20...I didn't have a 42 or a 52...had a 48 and a 58 BUT that gives me a pretty good knowledge of the 2 track variants. They're all great. I love having the center timecode track capability which you will ONLY find in the BR-20 series as far as the three decks in question. The BR has the latest and best transport logic. The 40 series has really neatly engineered layout...may not matter to you but one inconvenience is that the card access is from the bottom. 52 has that Omega transport, front card access and the hurkiest transport of the three, maybe the most robust amp electronics too...I dunno about that because I haven't really done much comparative study of the three, and my ability to go deep on that is pretty limited. They are all very nice decks but I'm *really* sold on my BR...it handles tape the nicest out of any of them though they all are nice but it is just so gentle on the tape and *I can't believe the tape packs* on the BR...they look like a solid disc on the reel even when packing in fast REW...can't imagine what they'd be like in SPOOL mode...and this is on a deck that has some mileage, has had no recent setup to speak of. It is a thing of beauty to watch. Parts for the BR will be the most readily available as it was in production at least a decade later than the other two. But I have a friend and it would be wrong to name drop but he is a definitive resource for me on what's good and what's not so good...he'd not be one to tout the Japanese stuff but he was recently exposed to the ATR and BR series decks and as far as the transports he was really, genuinely impressed. He said they sounded quite good too and that if his livelihood and rep wasn't built on a certain brand he'd likely have a number of ATR series decks and a BR or two in the operation. He mentioned the ATR60-4HS in particular for its head design...cjacek's got one of those.
I hope that gives some insight but I can't see ever switching to a 40 or 50 series deck for my halftrack...I love my BR. That's not a cut on those with a 42 or 52...they're awesome and anybody should feel proud to have one but for what I want to be able to do the BR-20T's got it in spades.
timkroeger
Custom Title User
Hey Cory, thanks for the input! Yeah I meant 40 and 50 type decks and I got confused with your 48 and 58. It's only a few days since I re-read those threads. It's good to have some spare time after a year of very hard work and they're great reads. I think maybe the ATR-60/2 may be a good choice, too. It features omega transport and the sync track just like the BR-20 and I like the way the ATR-60 handles the tape. So I'm thinking either BR-20T or ATR-60/2. Let's hope something comes up close enough for me to pick it up.
Regarding the connectors I might take you up on it. My MicroLynx was new in box and it came with a sync cable for Sony gear (9-pin). It has the proper 40 pin MicroLynx end, too but it just carries some 9 pins. So I'd need to come up with a source for those pins if I decide to "gut" the cable and then I'm all set. So far I haven't found a source for the cable mount pins but I'm still looking. Maybe I just haven't tried hard enough Cable and accessory connector are no problem.
Right now I'm running on a pretty standard PC myself and since it's working just fine with XP I won't change anything. I haven't heard anything good about successor operating systems, yet. I may be starting to build a real control room in a basement in about two years and I plan to upgrade the PC to a rack-mountable unit then but all in it's time. Planning is nice though.
Cheers
Tim
Regarding the connectors I might take you up on it. My MicroLynx was new in box and it came with a sync cable for Sony gear (9-pin). It has the proper 40 pin MicroLynx end, too but it just carries some 9 pins. So I'd need to come up with a source for those pins if I decide to "gut" the cable and then I'm all set. So far I haven't found a source for the cable mount pins but I'm still looking. Maybe I just haven't tried hard enough
Cable and accessory connector are no problem.Right now I'm running on a pretty standard PC myself and since it's working just fine with XP I won't change anything. I haven't heard anything good about successor operating systems, yet. I may be starting to build a real control room in a basement in about two years and I plan to upgrade the PC to a rack-mountable unit then but all in it's time. Planning is nice though.
Cheers
Tim
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Tim, does the Microlynx cable have 20 conductors in it (i.e. 10 twisted pair)?
If so, then yeah you just need some of the pins and you can configure that cable for just about any transport...PM me if interested.
Now, read on.............................................
If so, then yeah you just need some of the pins and you can configure that cable for just about any transport...PM me if interested.
Now, read on.............................................
timkroeger
Custom Title User
Hehe... no it just has 9 conductors, but I was planning to fit another cable. It's just the pins on the microlynx side that I'm missing. I have elco connectors with pins for the recorder side here.
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Oh man is this cool...
I am striping 30 drop-frame SMPTE timecode on the BR as I type...I got the sync cable made up tonight and after a little stumbling around on the Microlynx I figured out how to turn the TC generator on...the BR is working like a charm. Once I got the sync cable connected the BR-20T automatically switched to EXTernal control, the Microlynx automatically recognized the BR-20, and as soon as I got the generator turned on the TIMECODE light lit up (indicating the BR could "hear" the timecode), hit REC+PLAY and the Microlynx like immediately indicated a LOCK reference and the REC indicator on the keyboard lit up...
Danny, (pianodano) if you are reading, you were right. The Microlynx is THE tool for synchronization. My goodness, after all the headaches trying to use the Tascam ES-50/51 setup (not knocking it, just didn't work well for my application...the ES-50/51 is a rock-solid pro synchronizer), the Microlynx is totally dreamy. I browsed around in the menus a little bit. It is a SERIOUS unit. VERY comprehensive. Lovin' it.
Here are my parts as I prepared to make up the cable...partially torn apart Microlynx end in the right foreground, 37-pin dsub parts in the right background for the Tascam:
The Microlynx end required some reconfiguration of the pin locations and I had to add a jumper. I don't have the proper pins yet but I was able to steal some from an IBM compatible PC optical drive audio cable to make the jumper. Once those were all in place I put the hood back on...Microlynx end ready to go...
Then back to work, now on the Tascam end...I tell ya, I'd work on dsub connections all day instead of doing one more M-520 power umbilical...those Hirose connectors are nice, but they are a real PITA to solder up. Here is the 37-pin dsub ready for testing:
And how did testing go?? Aces...100% compliant with the pinout diagram.
And here it is:
I believe this cable would work for the TSR-8, MSR-16 and MSR-24 as well...hm...maybe the 238 and 688 too...do those have 37-pin dsub connectors for sync?
Anyway, like I said, striping timecode and then I can check the locate functions...then I'll figure out how to chase MTC...MAN! With the center timecode track and the Microlynx the BR-20T is a halftrack with the coolest remote! And the cool thing is that the keyboard controller connects to the system unit with a standard CAT5 cable so you can make up really long cables for that for cheap...hm...wonder how far I can go...I'll have to put ends on a spool of CAT5 and see...that could be really handy if the BR is out in the shop and I want to control it in the house...ZOWIE!!
Enough for tonight. Must go to bed.
I am striping 30 drop-frame SMPTE timecode on the BR as I type...I got the sync cable made up tonight and after a little stumbling around on the Microlynx I figured out how to turn the TC generator on...the BR is working like a charm. Once I got the sync cable connected the BR-20T automatically switched to EXTernal control, the Microlynx automatically recognized the BR-20, and as soon as I got the generator turned on the TIMECODE light lit up (indicating the BR could "hear" the timecode), hit REC+PLAY and the Microlynx like immediately indicated a LOCK reference and the REC indicator on the keyboard lit up...
Danny, (pianodano) if you are reading, you were right. The Microlynx is THE tool for synchronization. My goodness, after all the headaches trying to use the Tascam ES-50/51 setup (not knocking it, just didn't work well for my application...the ES-50/51 is a rock-solid pro synchronizer), the Microlynx is totally dreamy. I browsed around in the menus a little bit. It is a SERIOUS unit. VERY comprehensive. Lovin' it.
Here are my parts as I prepared to make up the cable...partially torn apart Microlynx end in the right foreground, 37-pin dsub parts in the right background for the Tascam:
The Microlynx end required some reconfiguration of the pin locations and I had to add a jumper. I don't have the proper pins yet but I was able to steal some from an IBM compatible PC optical drive audio cable to make the jumper. Once those were all in place I put the hood back on...Microlynx end ready to go...
Then back to work, now on the Tascam end...I tell ya, I'd work on dsub connections all day instead of doing one more M-520 power umbilical...those Hirose connectors are nice, but they are a real PITA to solder up. Here is the 37-pin dsub ready for testing:
And how did testing go?? Aces...100% compliant with the pinout diagram.
And here it is:
I believe this cable would work for the TSR-8, MSR-16 and MSR-24 as well...hm...maybe the 238 and 688 too...do those have 37-pin dsub connectors for sync?
Anyway, like I said, striping timecode and then I can check the locate functions...then I'll figure out how to chase MTC...MAN! With the center timecode track and the Microlynx the BR-20T is a halftrack with the coolest remote! And the cool thing is that the keyboard controller connects to the system unit with a standard CAT5 cable so you can make up really long cables for that for cheap...hm...wonder how far I can go...I'll have to put ends on a spool of CAT5 and see...that could be really handy if the BR is out in the shop and I want to control it in the house...ZOWIE!!
Enough for tonight. Must go to bed.
P
pianodano
Guest
Cory,
I am glad that you see the genius in the design of the Microlynx. I konw you'll be impressed and very happy when you see what it can do.
Sync to MTC is what it does natively and it's as simple as can be.
With the group lights flashing PRESS AND HOLD "GRP" and PRESS MIDI". While continuning
to hold the GRP BUTTON PRESS TC. CONTINUE TO HOLD GRP AND PRESS WHATEVER MACHINE YOU WANT ADDED TO THE GROUP.
The display should look something like -- M-t-a whereas M = Midi TC (notice it is a capital letter indicating it is the master - NOTE - you cannot set a offset on the master - it is the reference.) t = TC - (notice the lower case). So this is the smpte tc generated from MTC which is used to drive things downstream. "a" is machine a which is then being slaved to smpte TC relative to MTC + or - the offset entered for that machine. Get into the habit of always leaving about 5 seconds of empty measures at the head of your song on the DAW to give the system unit time to lock the system. You will see a > below each unit in the group as it LOCKS it to the reference.
Be sure to hit the solo button and initally solo each tape recorder (atr) so the system knows where they are re SPMTE tc on the tape on that machine. Then hit the GRP button and put them back in the group. BTW, I am fairly certain that you should be able to ARM tracks using the microlynx on the BR20. Unfortunately the 58 and MS-16 does not have that capabilty (parrallel). That why I have always tried to find the extension cable for the MS-16 function panel so that I could put it on the roll around stand with the Microlynx.
But you are gonna LOVE the fact that you won't even have to touch the Microlynx controller when NOT recording to tape and the atr machine is just chasing. The system will be controlled by the transport in your DAW. And if you ever get a DA-78, all they need is TC from the system unit and when you hit the chase buttom on the DA-78 it will happily follow along also.
I mention this because they have really nice convertors and have a wonderful sound - when they acutally work. But that's another story.
The Microlynx has some DEEEEEEP menus and it took me a looooooooong time to wrap my head around some of the features. I am sure there are a lot of things I am not aware of but it does what I need - flawlessly. The technical writer that wrote the manual definitely ASSUMED way too much as far as the end user interpeting correctly what he was trying to explain. I would love to have a properly written and cross referenced manual for the thing.
You're gonna love it.
Danny
I am glad that you see the genius in the design of the Microlynx. I konw you'll be impressed and very happy when you see what it can do.
Sync to MTC is what it does natively and it's as simple as can be.
With the group lights flashing PRESS AND HOLD "GRP" and PRESS MIDI". While continuning
to hold the GRP BUTTON PRESS TC. CONTINUE TO HOLD GRP AND PRESS WHATEVER MACHINE YOU WANT ADDED TO THE GROUP.
The display should look something like -- M-t-a whereas M = Midi TC (notice it is a capital letter indicating it is the master - NOTE - you cannot set a offset on the master - it is the reference.) t = TC - (notice the lower case). So this is the smpte tc generated from MTC which is used to drive things downstream. "a" is machine a which is then being slaved to smpte TC relative to MTC + or - the offset entered for that machine. Get into the habit of always leaving about 5 seconds of empty measures at the head of your song on the DAW to give the system unit time to lock the system. You will see a > below each unit in the group as it LOCKS it to the reference.
Be sure to hit the solo button and initally solo each tape recorder (atr) so the system knows where they are re SPMTE tc on the tape on that machine. Then hit the GRP button and put them back in the group. BTW, I am fairly certain that you should be able to ARM tracks using the microlynx on the BR20. Unfortunately the 58 and MS-16 does not have that capabilty (parrallel). That why I have always tried to find the extension cable for the MS-16 function panel so that I could put it on the roll around stand with the Microlynx.
But you are gonna LOVE the fact that you won't even have to touch the Microlynx controller when NOT recording to tape and the atr machine is just chasing. The system will be controlled by the transport in your DAW. And if you ever get a DA-78, all they need is TC from the system unit and when you hit the chase buttom on the DA-78 it will happily follow along also.
I mention this because they have really nice convertors and have a wonderful sound - when they acutally work. But that's another story.
The Microlynx has some DEEEEEEP menus and it took me a looooooooong time to wrap my head around some of the features. I am sure there are a lot of things I am not aware of but it does what I need - flawlessly. The technical writer that wrote the manual definitely ASSUMED way too much as far as the end user interpeting correctly what he was trying to explain. I would love to have a properly written and cross referenced manual for the thing.
You're gonna love it.
Danny
Last edited: