8-track Cassette Recorders

  • Thread starter Thread starter Trace
  • Start date Start date
Reel Maintenance

Okay, here's a somewhat iconoclastic view that many will probably disagree with:

Reel-to-reel decks don't really need more maintenance than similar cassette decks, but people do more maintenance tasks to them because they can. A reel deck isn't harder to maintain than a cassette deck, it's easier. But, because it's easier, the tendency is actually to do more. And, it should be noted, if you're remiss with some of the maintenance, you shouldn't wind up with something worse than a cassette deck, it just won't be as much better as it can be.

Another point: there's a certain amount of maintenance that real, honest-to-god professional studios wouldn't be caught dead failing to do. Of course real, honest-to-good professional studios also wouldn't be caught dead using a cassette multitrack (or a Roland VS-whatever, or most computer-based programs, or $200 mic preamps) either, for that matter.

And a third: the somewhat tricky part in aligning machines arises from the desire to ensure that tapes recorded on your machine will play back on someone else's machine exactly the same way they do on yours. If your tapes don't ever need to be played on anyone else's machine, alignment isn't the life and death issue it might be for a real pro studio.

Head alignment - I don't think anybody but hardcore users ever adjusts anything except azimuth. You really should be adjusting azimuth in a cassette deck too ... yes, your stereo cassette deck: it actually needs it more than a multitrack, and more than a reel-to-reel tape deck.

There are two issues to adjusting azimuth: the "standard" you're aligning to, and the method of aligning.

The "Standard" You're Aligning To -- Unfortunately, to adjust azimuth "properly" (that is, so that it fits a theoretical ideal), you need a test tape. On the other hand: (i) there is a somewhat kludgey method that doesn't require a test tape, and does align to the theoretical perfect ideal (it's how the people who make test tapes align their machines) and (ii) in practice, what matters isn't so much whether azimuth matches the ideal as whether azimuth at playback matches azimuth at recording (okay, yes, you do want your repro and record heads to be aligned with each other). If azimuth is a little off when you record and also when you play back, nobody will die. Your tapes just won't sound as good on someone else's machine (nor will their tapes sound as good on yours). Actually, if you/they printed test tones like you're supposed to, at playback you can align (or, to the purist, misalign) azimuth so it matches how it was at record.

The Method of Aligning -- It's possible to do it by ear, or with a meter. You can even do it with the meters on the recorder. If you're going with the "meter" method, you're better off using something more sensitive. A good digital multimeter (generally not the $10 hardware store ones -- they don't have the resolution to measure AC signals under 1 volt, and they're not accurate at audio frequencies anyway) or an old-fashioned VTVM would come in handy here. You can buy the old-fashioned VTVM's for like $15-$50 nowadays. If you want to be pro about it, you probably want to use an oscilloscope. Analog oscilloscopes, fortunately, are sort of like analog reel-to-reel tape machines (but even more so): units that cost $3,000 new now go for $50-$100. You don't even need a very good oscilloscope for this purpose, since you're only working with frequencies of like 15 kHz, and you don't need precise calibration.

Record and playback amplifiers, meters, record and playback EQ - Again, the test tape and a DMM or VTVM would be handy here, but not necessary.

Bias - You can do this fairly easily, if your machine has three heads. It's possible to do it in the "standard" way (x dB past peak) with the meters on the machine, though a DMM or VTVM would be considerably better. You can do it other ways (listen for minimum intermodulation noise, adjust for best high-frequency performance) without any equipment at all.

Unfortunately, it's not so easy to do on a 2-head machine. So long as you stay with the tape the machine was originally set up for by the manufacturer (and you have a service manual that includes the information), you should be able to adjust to the bias voltage that the manufacturer specifies. Otherwise, you'd have to go with the tweak, rewind, check, tweak, rewind check (etc.) method. If you use the adjust-bias-voltage-to-specified-level method, you need a pretty good DMM or a VTVM, as the bias signal is at something like 100 kHz.
 
Don't I know you from the Analog Forum at the TASCAM site???

I'm Mr. Analog over there. If that's you, good to see ya here.

Question: could I get better recordings out of my new 38-8 if I re-bias the deck for Quantegy 499 rather than 456?

I know that 499 Studio Gold Master tape is supposed to be better. Are there trade-offs?

See you at the TASCAM board.
 
I won the first auction I was loosing. I got the TASCAM 38-8, two DBX DB-4D NR units, an M-30 mixer and a bunch of extras.

I'm pretty happy with all of it. I can't wait to get it. Definately have to upgrade the console though.
 
Wow! First the tape deck... then the console!

At this rate in a year or two you might even buy your first condenser mic... Nah! What could I have been thinking!!!;)
 
Hey! I'm working up to that condensor, I promise.

It might not be next, but it's up in the top five "gotta get one of those thing" list. :D
 
Sennheiser said:
Don't I know you from the Analog Forum at the TASCAM site???

Yes, that's me -- I've adopted the unusual tactic of using the same screen name in various different forums. I don't get a Mickey Mouse head there, though ("bring me the head of Mickey Mouse ...").

Question: could I get better recordings out of my new 38-8 if I re-bias the deck for Quantegy 499 rather than 456?

I know that 499 Studio Gold Master tape is supposed to be better. Are there trade-offs?

It definitely will take higher levels, so recordings will have a higher S/N ratio. Whether it sounds better otherwise is (a) a subjective question and (b) one about which I don't have sufficient personal experience to have a reliable view. My impression of second-hand hearsay is that people seem to prefer GP9 (also elevated-level tape, like 499) to 499.

There are people on the Tascam board who have rebiased various machines for elevated level tape. One potential obstacle is whether your particular machine can produce a high enough bias for the tape. Some machines, I know, don't. If you search on the Tascam forum, I bet you'll find a report from someone who's tried it with a 38. I'm guessing it will work. (Just to clarify here: the issue, at least as I understand it, is bias, not operating level ... I'd be confident you can hit the tape with enough signal level).

The 38 has the advantage (over the TSR8 and MSR16) of being a three-head machine, so it shouldn't be very hard to rebias for a different tape, if the bias circuitry has the juice to do it.
 
8trk cassette

Trace ,
if you are still looking, check out the forum here for free ads for music equipt for sale.
tmix
 
Yamaha's 8-track cassette machines...

Yamaha made two: the MT8X (3-band eq on tracks 1-4 only, etc.) and the MT8X II (3-band eq w/sweepable mids on all 8 tracks; phantom power, I THINK 2 XLR inputs, etc.). Both were comparable to the Tascam 488 and 488 MKII, and in fact tapes recorded on any of these four machines are interchangable. The one area where the Yamaha was better was in the outputs: the MT8X had 8 individual RCA outs - one for each track.

I had the original MT8X for 3 years and did a lot of recording on it. For what it was, it made excellent-sounding recordings. I seldom see them on e-bay, though. If you DO see an MT8X II, chances are it will have had relatively little use as these came out right when Roland's VS series was making huge waves in the market. By the way, I have a 488 MKII, and the tapes I made on the MT8X play perfectly on it.

Just thought you'd like to know...

Bruce in Korea
 
Back
Top