New Analog Multitracks?

[cjacek]

I guarantee my already 40 year old Ampex MM-1000 will still be running in 20, 30 and 40 more years.

Yes it will be running but only because you are restoring it... keep in mind when you got it, it was in pieces and not running properly so it didn't last it's first 40 years.

The point here is not that a tape deck will run for 80 years without maintenance or restoration but that you can take a 40 year old recorder, in relatively sad shape, clean, replace, buff, use off shelf replacements parts and a skilled machinist, when needed, some knowledge and actually rebuild a machine to last another 40 years.

I'm not so sure tho that this can be accomplished so easily on a relatively modern machine, running on proprietary chips and software... I think it pays to get a relatively simple but well built deck, for long term reliability.

Can it be argued, for instance, that a simple as a door 60's Ampex stands a better chance of being resuscitated and alive for another hundred years than, say, a modern computer controlled 80's / 90's recorder?

 

[zorf]

Good point.
I guess it's like the ancient cars in Cuba.
If they had been modern cars, with all the chips and crappy plastic parts,
Maybe they would have been abandoned.

 

[Blue Jinn]

Can it be argued, for instance, that a simple as a door 60's Ampex stands a better chance of being resuscitated and alive for another hundred years than, say, a modern computer controlled 80's / 90's recorder?

I think so, as "computer controlled" isn't necessarily that complex. There are chips in them, but I am not so sure they are all that complex, e.g. AFAIK, the logic controller in the MX5050 just takes a voltage from the "play" button e.g. and sends out a control voltage somewhere else. It is simple logic circuitry on a chip, and I am pretty sure the chip is still being made. Some of the classic bucket brigade devices from teh 70s are now being re-manufactured.

Analog synths had a similar history. As I said in another thread, I couldn't give away a partially working ARP Odyssey in 1991. Now you can buy a new mini Moog, and there are a bunch of DIY modular synths out there as well.

You can even buy the slider caps for old ARPs now.

 

[Beck]

I disagree and I don't think the decks running today will be running in 20 or 30 years. Already some decks are orphans and others that had poor factory service backing are suffering. I don't think it'll be the mechanical parts that do them in. It'll be the electronic parts. For instance I own a mid 80's Japanese sports car that I've had from new. I drove it daily for 14 years then retired it as a daily driver. While the mechanical parts are great and the car runs wonderfully still many of it's 22 micro processors have quit and some of its digital instrument panel displays have died. These items can not be had new anymore and are very hard to find used if at all. Unfortunately making circuit boards from scratch is a specialist industrial process and unlikely to find its way into the cottage industry realm.

Your point about electronics is well taken. It’s good to keep in mind generally speaking. However, we know what the failure points are for various decks now. We have a history to go by. Electronics is way down on the list of things that will permanently take a machine out of commission. Capacitors are something to watch, but they don’t normally take logic circuits along with them. Simply replace the bad cap and everything comes back to life.

Electronics on most decks are more easily repaired by the hobbyist than mechanical parts. Experience has already vindicated Eddie’s statement from 2000. He wasn’t making a daring prediction at all, but stating something pretty obvious to those that had been at this for a long time. By the year 2000 we already had ancient tape decks that were (and still are) working away at it like they did when new.

Analog devotees wouldn’t exist without the decks that fuel the interest. Analog machines are everywhere in abundance. Most of what we have are now, “old ones.”

The alternative is digital and that is a true race into obsolescence. People spend fortunes in the long term keeping computer hardware, OS and programs up to date. My main mulitrack is 20 years old. That’s not very old for an analog deck, but it’s still outlasted countless digital trends in that 20 years. There aren’t any 20-year-old DAWs. Well, there may be a few among collectors, but nothing like analog.

 

[Blue Jinn]

There aren’t any 20-year-old DAWs. Well, there may be a few among collectors, but nothing like analog.

I have a 25 year old DAT deck, and a German A/D D/A built probably in 1996 or so....

My philosophy has been, if it sounded OK in 1990 it will sound OK in 2010. and most of the CD's released today w no dynamic range sound like CRAP anyway... I don't care if it was tracked at 768kHz with 64 bit resolution....

I figure, if it's going to wind up on a 16 bit CD anyway, what's the point? (OK flame wars a coming, "but you must record at 24/96 you must record at 32/192 blah blah blah....") Actually, I like the price of older digital gear too. Talk about obsolescence...

OK calm down, no need for an OT rant here....

 

[Lance Lawson]

I for one want to see more analog coming back in service. The more I work in analog again the more I appreciate the great sound.

That said new R2R decks could be very different from past decks. They'll be smaller, more energy efficient, have better motors and just about everything else. I'm certain that if a new generation of R2R decks were to be designed that we'd be seeing great new materials throughout the machines especially the heads. Its not hard to envision new generation ceramic heads and better belt and pinch roller materials too. Most likely the electronics will be superior too. Many quality amps and preamps today are mega quiet. In fact manufacturers could pretty much decide at will how mechanical or electronic everything will be. I wouldn't be surprised if new machines surpassed the current state of the art with tape driving research for better tapes forward too.

All that's really needed is a market willing to embrace them. If todays digital audio generation can be moved to appreciate the superior sound and elegant nature of R2R tape decks then we'll see it happen. The music/audio market is a strange place. Who would have ever thought in 2000 that vinyl record sales would be on the rise in 2010?

Lastly would I buy a new R2R deck if genuine new machines appeared (current Otari does not count since it employs vintage technology and design) and sold for $500-$700 for standard stereo and $700-$1000 for a 4 track I'd buy one right off assuming the sound is there.

My Teac is over 30 years old and still does its job but it feels a little like driving an old classic car or playing a vintage guitar. You're less comfortable pushing the envelope of either.

 

[Audiophallic]

I for one want to see more analog coming back in service. The more I work in analog again the more I appreciate the great sound.

That said new R2R decks could be very different from past decks. They'll be smaller, more energy efficient, have better motors and just about everything else. I'm certain that if a new generation of R2R decks were to be designed that we'd be seeing great new materials throughout the machines especially the heads. Its not hard to envision new generation ceramic heads and better belt and pinch roller materials too. Most likely the electronics will be superior too. Many quality amps and preamps today are mega quiet. In fact manufacturers could pretty much decide at will how mechanical or electronic everything will be. I wouldn't be surprised if new machines surpassed the current state of the art with tape driving research for better tapes forward too.

All that's really needed is a market willing to embrace them. If todays digital audio generation can be moved to appreciate the superior sound and elegant nature of R2R tape decks then we'll see it happen. The music/audio market is a strange place. Who would have ever thought in 2000 that vinyl record sales would be on the rise in 2010?

Lastly would I buy a new R2R deck if genuine new machines appeared (current Otari does not count since it employs vintage technology and design) and sold for $500-$700 for standard stereo and $700-$1000 for a 4 track I'd buy one right off assuming the sound is there.

My Teac is over 30 years old and still does its job but it feels a little like driving an old classic car or playing a vintage guitar. You're less comfortable pushing the envelope of either.

I'm with you there, but that's a lot of "ifs." I mean who wouldn't buy a brand-new (quality) reel to reel deck for $700.00? Unfortunately, for the deck you want, it would probably cost about ten times that, especially when you factor in R&D costs and new engineering, etc. If only Teac/Tascam or a few others brought back some of their old models for around that price...I mean when some douchebag in Colorado Springs expects to get $800.00 for his used Tascam 32....if only I could get a new one for that price...

 

[Lance Lawson]

I'm with you there, but that's a lot of "ifs." I mean who wouldn't buy a brand-new (quality) reel to reel deck for $700.00? Unfortunately, for the deck you want, it would probably cost about ten times that, especially when you factor in R&D costs and new engineering, etc. If only Teac/Tascam or a few others brought back some of their old models for around that price...I mean when some douchebag in Colorado Springs expects to get $800.00 for his used Tascam 32....if only I could get a new one for that price...

I wouldn't be too sure about new R2R's costing many thousands of dollars. The great Chinese microphones are a perfect example In another age a mic equal to let's say an MXL V67 G would have been $2000-$3000. Today it can be had for around $100. Another great example is Behringer gear. A Zynex 1202 mixer with phantom power and fine sound is considerably less than $100. A lot has changed with manufacturing on a lot of levels . Because Otari chooses to attach a super premium price to the 5050 does not really represent the potential market. Otari has no competition they are the last ones making R2R (well they've stopped now). But if Teac, Sony, and Pioneer were back in the game prices I feel would be as I quote.

 

[Blue Jinn]

I wouldn't be too sure about new R2R's costing many thousands of dollars. The great Chinese microphones are a perfect example In another age a mic equal to let's say an MXL V67 G would have been $2000-$3000. Today it can be had for around $100. Another great example is Behringer gear. A Zynex 1202 mixer with phantom power and fine sound is considerably less than $100. A lot has changed with manufacturing on a lot of levels . Because Otari chooses to attach a super premium price to the 5050 does not really represent the potential market. Otari has no competition they are the last ones making R2R (well they've stopped now). But if Teac, Sony, and Pioneer were back in the game prices I feel would be as I quote.

I'm no expert on mics, but I've been researching this a bit for a DIY project (that will be # 73 on the list of things to do....) But those $100 Chinese mics have a lot of shortcomings. However, many of those shortcomings are overcome by modifications by people like Oktavamod, Royer, etc;, so you have a decent mic for realistically $4-500 after you've done the mods.

I agree, I don't think the 5050 necessarily matches what could be done today, but then again, have you opened one of those up? That is a complex machine, with a lot of circuitry, big strong motors, and a big ass power transformer and a chassis that looks more like union iron workers put it together for a skyscraper.

 

[Lance Lawson]

I'm no expert on mics, but I've been researching this a bit for a DIY project (that will be # 73 on the list of things to do....) But those $100 Chinese mics have a lot of shortcomings. However, many of those shortcomings are overcome by modifications by people like Oktavamod, Royer, etc;, so you have a decent mic for realistically $4-500 after you've done the mods.

I agree, I don't think the 5050 necessarily matches what could be done today, but then again, have you opened one of those up? That is a complex machine, with a lot of circuitry, big strong motors, and a big ass power transformer and a chassis that looks more like union iron workers put it together for a skyscraper.

The $100 Chinese mic is mostly a talking point. But take a Rode NT1a for $300 and there's precious little that a $2000 mic can do detter. As the owner of a vintage Neumann U-67 and a Rode NT1a I've done some comparisons. Both mics are great.

The Otari I'm sure is a sophisticated machine and heavy construction is fine. Teacs are trucks too and that works very well for them. But consider the Otari and big old heavy Teacs as 60's muscle cars. Big heavy powerful and hard wearing. Then think of a new generation of R2R's as something like a 21st century performance car. Weighing half of the 60's cars, only 3/5's the size, 1/3 the engine displacement, better engines, equal or better power to weight ratio greater reliability and better performance. A classic case of getting more with less so to speak. Perhaps the Otari is something like a Nascar race car. It does what its supposed to do but it's doing it on technology that has since been eclipsed.

 

[Beck]

I figure, if it's going to wind up on a 16 bit CD anyway, what's the point?

Oh no Blue Jinn, you would have to say something like this. LOL

I’ve been trying to stamp out this misconception on news groups and web forums since I’ve been on the web.

Shity sound is cumulative. You never start out with an inferior medium simply because the end-user medium may be relatively shity. Shit is added to each phase, so that in the end the shit is greater than the some of its shity parts.

Think of your fans, because when you track, mix, master and distribute with shit formats… well, that’s when the shit really hits the fan.

And I’m not shitin’ you either.

 

[lonewhitefly]

i don't know if this is entirely relevant to this particular thread, but i thought i would add something ...

i was born in 1979 and have never worked with digital. i notice this is somewhat rare for people within my age range. i have always instinctively approached digital with skepticism. my gut instinct has proven to be correct many times over. i think the heart of the matter is that digital is STILL DEVELOPING in terms of sound quality. you can quite easily argue that analog (as a recording medium) reached its peak in terms of sound quality many years ago. some folks would say an Ampex 350 sounds better than any other machine, and that was also one of the earliest machines.

the drawback of analog (which is where digital took over in recording development) is flexibility. when you have two 24 track machines synced together, where can you go from there? digital came in.

i guess what i'm getting at is if there is a market for new tape machines, its gonna be for sound and workflow (not neccesarily sound quality, perhaps for true analog artifacts), not flexibility. this would take a real shift in how musicians approach recording, performance and the concept of how to make a record. right now, this is clearly a niche market (akin to 4-track cassette) but i do see this as being a market that has the potential to grow quite large in the future. the vinyl resurgance is a good example of a trend pointing in this direction.

 

[leddy]

Oh no Blue Jinn, you would have to say something like this. LOL

I’ve been trying to stamp out this misconception on news groups and web forums since I’ve been on the web.

Shity sound is cumulative. You never start out with an inferior medium simply because the end-user medium may be relatively shity. Shit is added to each phase, so that in the end the shit is greater than the some of its shity parts.

Think of your fans, because when you track, mix, master and distribute with shit formats… well, that’s when the shit really hits the fan.

And I’m not shitin’ you either.

And a bad recording of a Christian band is...

wait for it...





holy shit.

 

[leddy]

i guess what i'm getting at is if there is a market for new tape machines, its gonna be for sound and workflow (not neccesarily sound quality, perhaps for true analog artifacts), not flexibility. this would take a real shift in how musicians approach recording, performance and the concept of how to make a record. right now, this is clearly a niche market (akin to 4-track cassette) but i do see this as being a market that has the potential to grow quite large in the future. the vinyl resurgance is a good example of a trend pointing in this direction.

In order for there to be a re-newed interest in tape, all these kids who think they should not have to pay for their plug-ins, auto-tune, drum triggers, etc. will suddenly have to be happy to go out and buy additional outboard gear.

They will have to go from full automation (in the DAW) plus all the comps and EQ's they want, to nothing but tape and a cheap mixer - unless they want to really pony up some cash.

The generation that grew up on tape learned to work around the gear limitations by improving the performance and the other factors they could control - like mic placement. I don't believe many in the newer generations will be willing to take the harder path. Our culture is changing.

My conclusion is that analog will always be a cult of sorts.

 

[Blue Jinn]

Shit is added to each phase, so that in the end the shit is greater than the some of its shity parts.


And I’m not shitin’ you either.

I'm going to quote you on that.

I was being a little cheeky I know.

Part of that post is just my forcing the point. Part of it is a cost consideration on my part, e.g. I got an older 16 channel 20bit/48kHz interface for about a 1/4 the cost of a pair of Delta 1010s.

I do also have a 24/96 sound card. But then aren't I depending on whatever algorithm is used to dither down to 16/44.1 for a CD? So if I'm tracking to tape, mixing to tape, and then transfering tape to digital, I've just gone straight to a CD compatible bit depth/sample rate using the best converters I have (Or even mixed straight to DAT) rather than dithering.

 

[Beck]

I'm going to quote you on that.

I was being a little cheeky I know.

Part of that post is just my forcing the point. Part of it is a cost consideration on my part, e.g. I got an older 16 channel 20bit/48kHz interface for about a 1/4 the cost of a pair of Delta 1010s.

I do also have a 24/96 sound card. But then aren't I depending on whatever algorithm is used to dither down to 16/44.1 for a CD? So if I'm tracking to tape, mixing to tape, and then transfering tape to digital, I've just gone straight to a CD compatible bit depth/sample rate using the best converters I have (Or even mixed straight to DAT) rather than dithering.

I'm with you there my friend. That's how I do things when tracking and mixing in all analog. If the end medium is going to be CD there's no good reason to mix to a higher rez digital format beforehand. However when tracking to digital I normally work in 20/48 or 24/48, but I don't convert down to 16/44.1. I resample by recording to a stand-alone CD recorder. One of my fav Digital systems of all time is the Echo Layla20 (20-bit and 48kHz max). It just sounds great. It's about 10 years old, but no matter. It did the job then and still does.

Since I treat digital tracks the same as tape tracks I never take a hit through conversion. My digital and analog tracks go in sync through a mixing console to my analog half-track. And then the analog master goes to 16/44.1 Red book/Orange book. IMO it's the best way to preserve all the analog goodness possible.

For tracking in digital I'm more of a high rez guy, but IMO 24/96 isn't necessary when using the DAW for recording only. I don't use plugs or do editing in digital, so the sound remains basically unmolested by all that stuff.

 

[sweetbeats]

The $100 Chinese mic is mostly a talking point. But take a Rode NT1a for $300 and there's precious little that a $2000 mic can do detter. As the owner of a vintage Neumann U-67 and a Rode NT1a I've done some comparisons. Both mics are great.

The Otari I'm sure is a sophisticated machine and heavy construction is fine. Teacs are trucks too and that works very well for them. But consider the Otari and big old heavy Teacs as 60's muscle cars. Big heavy powerful and hard wearing. Then think of a new generation of R2R's as something like a 21st century performance car. Weighing half of the 60's cars, only 3/5's the size, 1/3 the engine displacement, better engines, equal or better power to weight ratio greater reliability and better performance. A classic case of getting more with less so to speak. Perhaps the Otari is something like a Nascar race car. It does what its supposed to do but it's doing it on technology that has since been eclipsed.

Honestly I think the old Ampex and 3M stuff was/is more like original muscle cars...there was pure power, simplicity but also elements race inspired...I used to think of the newer Teac stuff like that but after getting the MM-1000 my perception was shifted. And here's the thing. Yes, the newer cars are more efficient, run cleaner, are lighter, handle better, etc. etc. etc...but NOBODY is going to convince me that a newer care can better the muscle car on sheer style and presence...the muscle car can perform in a way that is unobtainable to the "pocket-rocket". I'm a fan of both...used to drive a modded 1981 VW Scirocco S and while not specifically what you are referring to, it was a nimble little GT with the suspension mods...had a 1984 Rabbit GTI too. Fun stuff. But then there was the day I got in my buddy's '63 (?) Nova SS...when a rocks around just from revving the motor...or my other friend's Pontiac Formula 400 (Trans AM)...part of the perfromance is the feeling of the thing...there's a depth to it. Has to be experienced and it has to be something that matters to you, but that's totally how it is with the MM-1000 for me, and there are results.

 

[sweetbeats]

Yes it will be running but only because you are restoring it... keep in mind when you got it, it was in pieces and not running properly so it didn't last it's first 40 years.

Wrong.

I'm just meticulous, but it was all there and with little more than re-seating some connections I could have already been using it.

Was it tip-top? No, but that's not a design issue...it was neglected. That has nothing to do with its longevity. You'll die an earlier death too if you don't take care of yourself. But in spite of that the solenoids worked, motors worked, I've done nothing to or for the electronics modules and they all work 100%. I'm spending a lot of time cleaning it up nice, redoing some stuff that wasn't done well by somebody along the way, replacing bearings, etc...but NONE of that makes or breaks it running and doing its thing.

Read my MM-1000 thread and show me where I'm wrong.

Still running after 40 years even after some neglect, and its got a lot of miles left...period.

Part of my job is domain administration for our business network of about 70 machines and 80 seats. We operate on slim resources so we don't have the luxery of aging machines out on a regular 3, 4 or 5 year schedule...We've got machines running XP and business apps that are over 10 years old. I've babied them. They'll HAVE to be aged out soon because of a looming need to align the network on a 64-bit field...our server we'll be getting this next budget year will have enough horsepower to run virtual servers so we'll be able to operate on 32 and 64-bit but eventually it will be advantageous from an administative standpoint to move everthing to 64-bit.

Now...there's some forced obsolesence for you, but even so I think its pretty rare to have 10, 11, 12 year old PC's chugging away. The problem is that when the micro stuff ages, and because it all operates on such low current, when something DOES finally go kaput the chances of that "something" taking out any number of nodes exists...I've got a boneyard of computers that have met their demise in that way. Hey...if a hard drive goes, no big...optical drive? No sweat. Bad RAM? Okay...can usually fish that out and recover unless it took a hit from a PSU failure...then usually there are "co-morbidities". But MOBO issues? Forget it...down it goes to the boneyard for surplus, and typically that happens well before 10 years. I'm talking hardware and not even software or OS obsolesence. Yes I'm focusing on PC's and a computer is not the only thing "digital" used for recording, but there is a common manufacturing genre there that differs from the "muscle car" recorder...

Does anybody think that a somewhat neglected computer will be running at ALL in 40 years?

 

[lonewhitefly]

Honestly I think the old Ampex and 3M stuff was/is more like original muscle cars...there was pure power, simplicity but also elements race inspired...I used to think of the newer Teac stuff like that but after getting the MM-1000 my perception was shifted. And here's the thing. Yes, the newer cars are more efficient, run cleaner, are lighter, handle better, etc. etc. etc...but NOBODY is going to convince me that a newer care can better the muscle car on sheer style and presence...the muscle car can perform in a way that is unobtainable to the "pocket-rocket". I'm a fan of both...used to drive a modded 1981 VW Scirocco S and while not specifically what you are referring to, it was a nimble little GT with the suspension mods...had a 1984 Rabbit GTI too. Fun stuff. But then there was the day I got in my buddy's '63 (?) Nova SS...when a rocks around just from revving the motor...or my other friend's Pontiac Formula 400 (Trans AM)...part of the perfromance is the feeling of the thing...there's a depth to it. Has to be experienced and it has to be something that matters to you, but that's totally how it is with the MM-1000 for me, and there are results.

yeh man ... i don't know anything about cars but there is no comparison between teac and older ampex in my opinion ... night and day difference, not only in sound but the mechanics and operation. fast winding on a 440 can be an earth shattering and scary experience; on a teac its like having a sip of japanese tea.

not that teacs are bad, they are great but really not in the same league.

 

[lonewhitefly]

The $100 Chinese mic is mostly a talking point. But take a Rode NT1a for $300 and there's precious little that a $2000 mic can do detter. As the owner of a vintage Neumann U-67 and a Rode NT1a I've done some comparisons. Both mics are great.

well ... i think this is a good example of how each individual hears things differently and is looking for a different sound. i don't use much outboard gear, so i rely on mics and tape machines/tape for a big part of the sound. i personally have used an NT1A and did not find it usable ... i have an old $50 sony condenser that runs on a funky battery that i think sounds better. as does an electro voice 635a i would say.

i do believe you can get a cool sound from virtually ANY gear and you could make a great album on a couple junky boomboxes with the built in mics.

BUT there are a lot of people who say certain elements are not important, its all about the song, arrangements, players, etc ... this is true but different instruments, amps, mics, tape decks, etc have very different characteristics that can make it or break it in some situations.

one thing i don't get is the mic preamp craze. like you should have a bunch of different preamps for different instruments, singers, etc ... i believe this is an artifact of the digital age because digital is so uncolored. a shure M67 is fine with me. emitt rhodes cut a great album (his first one) with an M67 and an ampex 350 4 track.