Search results

I'm having one custom made when I win the powerball. drtechno: Just stop.

I hope you corrected him.

Here's the Lavry white paper from where 60khz came: http://www.lavryengineering.com/pdfs/lavry-white-paper-the_optimal_sample_rate_for_quality_audio.pdf

468 is 1.5 mil

I just noticed that LPR35 is listed on RMGI's website (Spec Sheets & Bias Chart) as specifically designed for low speed use. The spec sheet only includes data at 3.75 and 7.5 ips. Those specs seem comparable to 468 at 7.5 ips. It lists no specs for LPR35 above 7.5 ips that I can see. I have...

I would not go that far. I think resolution needs to be standardized higher than 44.1, but 96k is overkill, let alone 192k. I think it was a Lavry white paper that siad it should probably be around 60khz to get any artifacts out of the audible range. Based on my listening tests I agree with that.

Bought a decent one at a yard sale with the intent of making mic pres out of it. Put it in my garage for a week. When I looked at it, it was full of roaches. I mean full. Took me 3 months to get them out of my house. I dumped that deck in the trash.

Also, don't record to an MP3, record to a .wav file, then rip the MP3 from the .wav. Save the .wav for future use if you want a better quality version than an MP3 - depending on how important these recordings may be to you.

The 22-2 can be pretty transparent with respect to distortion if it's properly set up and levels are conservative. At 15 ips I don't think you can get around the low end bump, so you'll always hear something from that deck that wasn't there before. If you want pure transparency, find a Nagra...

I guess whereas in digital, nyquist will cut off your spectrum lower and lower as sample rate decreases, tape would probably saturate faster as oxide decreased. You lose HF content and increase aliasing in the audible spectrum (in digital) vs lose s/n and increase distortion (with tape). Just...

I'm looking at it like this: If you were to make several batches of tape, each one with a reduced amount of iron oxide, what would you begin to hear/measure as you made identical recordings on the batches? It seems logical that s/n would drop, which would correspond with bit-depth, no? Also...

You can't blame a guy for trying... Is that thing 4-track or in-line?

I had to do something recently for my son for an audition. Made me feel good to help him. You have multipattern 319's? That's cool. I used to have a cardioid pair.

My Tascam 22-4 and 22-2 do great for playback as well. I was using the 22-4 for store bought tapes, but I have some 3.75 ips tapes so I need the RT707. The RT707 has some audible flutter that the 22-4 does not, but that may just mean I need new pinch rollers on the RT707...

Those glass heads are intriguing.

Had a B77, it was built like a tank. Had some issues that made me sell it to someone willing to deal with them. It's on my list of decks to buy if I find a good one.

I'm currently using a Pioneer RT707 for store-bought (4-track 7.5 ips / 3.75 ips) recordings. I have a Teac X1000R and 4010SL that need work on deck for similar duty. I use a Tascam 22 to play back any 2-track stuff. Anyone use open reel for casual listening, not just recording? What do...

Are you using a lot of effects that may involve widening of the stereo image? I'd look for phase issues. Flip back and forth between mono and stereo and listen to what changes. Turn the plug ins off and listen too. If you can't hear it, get some sort of phase scope. Voxengo makes a good...

The f-hole is often the last place you want to put a mic. Every bass is different, so maybe it worked. Usually, you have less woofy sound pointing the mic at the bridge or somewhere at the upper bout. After listening though, I don't hear anything but mush from the bass so my statement is...

What do you mean? Chorus as in a group of singers? Record them in stereo and do it well.