Roozter
New member
Has anyone tried using ATR tape on a Tascam 80-8? Is it even able to be used on one?
lonewhitefly
Active member
it would probably function alright, but it's not ideal. RGMI 911 or 468 would be better options for new tape.
Roozter
New member
Not ideal for the transport? Or for the heads? or sonically? How so?
lonewhitefly
Active member
(Let me preface this by clarifying that I have never in fact attempted to use ATR tape on my 80-8)
WELL ... yes yes yes
My understanding is it is slightly thicker/heavier/stiffer (with more oxide) than the machine was designed for, meaning more wear on the transport and heads. While a fairly robust deck as far as 'prosumer' stuff goes, the 80-8 is kind of a gentle-duty transport compared to the kinds of machines ATR tape was designed for. BUT these potential issues may not be a big deal -- it would probably take years for any problems to develop, if they did at all.
The main thing is it's a high-output tape, and I'm not sure an 80-8 can be set up to such a high operating level. Meaning it would sound very 'clean' if you use it on a deck set up for 456-type (+6), which that deck was designed for.
Basically, in a nutshell -- you can use it, and it would probably work ... but it's not the ideal tape. Why are you thinking of using ATR specifically?
F
fgonza2
New member
what happens if you use +9 tape or ATR on a deck setup for +6 ? will you get dull frequency response or some specific color ?
lonewhitefly
Active member
in terms of operating level, it just gives you more headroom ... which means you won't easily be able to saturate the tape. but i believe the bias is different between Ampex 456 and ATR tape as well. RMGI 911 is 'bias compatible' with 456.
F
fgonza2
New member
yes it is different. I guess i did not asked the question correctly. So what i meant was, if there is higher noise floor or any other effect if you are operating +9 tape on a +6 biases machine. I understand that for sure you won't get any of the extra benefits, but vs. 456 on the same deck is there anything bad about it ? (other than no compression due to lack of saturation)
A Reel Person
It's Too Funky in Here!!!
Outright Speculation Follows...
What I've deduced from other posts I've read here is that full and complete erasure may be a problem.
What I've deduced from other posts I've read here is that full and complete erasure may be a problem.
lonewhitefly
Active member
I've never actually tried it since I'm not into high output tape, but ...
I don't think you'd hear extra noise, since the tape is still operating at the same level (+6) ... you're just not taking advantage of the extra headroom. I've read elsewhere that some people like to run ATR tape at +6.
We should also make the distinction between 'operating level' (the 'volume' your deck is set up to operate at), and 'bias' -- which is the high frequency signal that is sent to stabilize the magnetic particles. People sometimes refer to 'bias' when they mean 'general calibration', which also includes things like adjusting your internal EQs as well.
The amount of bias required for different tape types is different. ATR is not a 'drop in' replacement for 456, regardless of operating level. Or rather, sure you can go ahead and try it -- and you might like the sound -- but it's not optimized to the correct standard. As far as I am aware, there is no +9 drop in replacement for 456.
For instance, Ampex 406 is 'bias compatible' with 456, even though it's a +3 tape. In this case, the operating level is different, but the tape is similar.
RMGI 911 is also considered a drop in replacement for 456 (though it doesn't quite sound the same). A tape like 468 is technically different, but I think sounds good on a deck setup for 456.
So you have more ideal options if are looking for a drop in replacement. Personally, Quantegy 406 and Scotch 206 are options I like. BUT ... you will get more noise and/or need to hit the tape harder, especially on narrow track decks.
THAT SAID ...
I've often just run any tape on any deck without calibration and it sounds cool. It's fun to play around with different tapes this way ... but it's a crapshoot.
Last edited:
R
RRuskin
Rick Ruskin
The 80-8 was the most robust 1/2" transport that TASCAM ever made so you won't damage it by using a stiffer tape such as ATR. The electronics were designed for oxide formulations around at the time so it may not have have enough suds for the ideal bias setting for ATR. But back in the day, a common practice in some studios was to align a machine for Ampex 406 but use 456 for production. This under-biasing resulted in a little extra high-end on playback and considerably more headroom, neither of which is a bad thing. IMO, try the ATR to see if you like it or not. It soon may be the only game in town anyway so you might as well check it out.
F
fgonza2
New member
by the way, the sources that you sent me for NOS 406 are all dead. so i'm still looking for 1" 406 NOS in case anyone knows where to get it. On a side note, does anyone knows of a mod for the TSR8 to go +9 ?
jpmorris
Tape Wolf
I have about 7 rolls of Quantegy 406, which I've been treating as an emergency 'no tape ever again' stash. Ideally I'd like to replace them with 456 or compatible, since that's what the machine is set for. Shipping to the US is likely to be horrifyingly expensive but I might consider it if someone really, desperately needs 406 in 1" format.
EDIT: It looks like the seller I got them from still has some left. It doesn't look like he's willing to ship worldwide, but I guess you could always ask... http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3-x-Brand..._Consumer_VintageAudio_RL&hash=item2c742b0dc9
EDIT: It looks like the seller I got them from still has some left. It doesn't look like he's willing to ship worldwide, but I guess you could always ask... http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3-x-Brand..._Consumer_VintageAudio_RL&hash=item2c742b0dc9
Last edited:
lonewhitefly
Active member
looks like we're nearing the end of the Quantegy stockpile !
lo.fi.love
Functionally obsessed.
I wanna step in real quick...
ATR tape runs at *any* operating level. Its formulation allows it to be run on most decks without realigning. Mike Spitz said that most of his customers record on ATR at +6. And it sounds great at +6. Or even +3.
Just trying to dispel a popular misconception.
ATR tape runs at *any* operating level. Its formulation allows it to be run on most decks without realigning. Mike Spitz said that most of his customers record on ATR at +6. And it sounds great at +6. Or even +3.
Just trying to dispel a popular misconception.
jpmorris
Tape Wolf
I have heard of this, so I bit the bullet and ordered some 1" stuff to try it out and see what it does. I hope it works - that reel alone cost almost as much as the TSR-8 did.
lonewhitefly
Active member
I've heard this as well. However, this can be said for any tape ... but it would have to have a 'ceiling', which is where the optimum level for your needs would come in. If you are looking for tape 'saturation', you would probably overload the electronics of your deck first if it's set up at +6. I set up my mono 440 to +3 on a '0' level tape to get it hotter. You'd really have to set up ATR at like +12 for the equivalent.
Roozter
New member
Reviving this thread. Our summer recording project is fast approaching and I've yet to decide where I'm going to go in terms of new tape. RMGI vs ATR.
I realize sm911 is what I would need. But I am also reading various sources saying ATR 1/2" on an 80-8 would be no problem, in fact, I would probably get a much better final product.
Apparently ATR is superior to any tape on the market today, literally it is, and it can be used on just about any tape machine if set up correctly. The issue seems to be that ATR cant sell anything because this +9 hoodoo is casting quite a shadow over it, and causing people to doubt if the extra price is worth the hassle of setting it up.
My 80-8 should be set to +4.5 (as a starting point) to use ATR. Where the problems come in, and this has been mentioned, will be full and complete erasure. So if someone can figure out, or knows how to fix that issue, I think Ill be switching over to ATR to try it out.
I may even try to make some type of guide for getting ATR to work sufficiently on my 80-8 and mastering machine, so that maybe others would feel comfortable using both ATR and RMGI.
I realize sm911 is what I would need. But I am also reading various sources saying ATR 1/2" on an 80-8 would be no problem, in fact, I would probably get a much better final product.
Apparently ATR is superior to any tape on the market today, literally it is, and it can be used on just about any tape machine if set up correctly. The issue seems to be that ATR cant sell anything because this +9 hoodoo is casting quite a shadow over it, and causing people to doubt if the extra price is worth the hassle of setting it up.
My 80-8 should be set to +4.5 (as a starting point) to use ATR. Where the problems come in, and this has been mentioned, will be full and complete erasure. So if someone can figure out, or knows how to fix that issue, I think Ill be switching over to ATR to try it out.
I may even try to make some type of guide for getting ATR to work sufficiently on my 80-8 and mastering machine, so that maybe others would feel comfortable using both ATR and RMGI.
R
RRuskin
Rick Ruskin
Set up @ +3 level after you have set your bias. It should work just fine with no erasure problems.
Roozter
New member
Have you been using ATR frequently, and on what machine? I cant seem to find enough credible sources to get an overall picture of how ATR is functioning on consumer and prosumer decks.
Like you said, at the very least people are having erasure issues, and some have remedied this, but can still hear faint sounds from the leftovers.
My plan, if the ATR works on the 80-8, is to use it for all my machines, stockpiling 1/2" and 1/4". Then I have to find myself a suitable blank cassette to buy in bulk.
R
RRuskin
Rick Ruskin
I was one of the 1st persons in the US to use an 80-8 and know what the it is capable of. It is supposed to be aligned @ 250 nWB (+3).
You will only have erasure problems if you align for anything higher than that. If you try to run much hotter than that you will run into not only erasure problems but possibly burn out your erase & or record heads. They are not meant to see the amount of current ultra-high print levels need.