A New Take On Tape

L

Lance Lawson

New member
After having acquired about 100 gigabites of my own recordings done on SONAR I decided to revisit tape. Its been a VERY sonically worthwhile exploration.

Around the same time as I recommissioned my TEAC rtr I happened onto a SONY N-60 HiFi stereo VCR deck. The sound quality of the SONY is little short of amazing. I've been sampling in real time recordings I put on the SONY off of SONAR and switching back and forth live from SONAR to playback from the SONY. There is precious little difference between the two and the SONY my even be able to edge out the TEAC.

I got to thinking if it would be possible to create a new generation of multitrack tape recorders utilizing the VHS cassette running in a dedicated audio only recording device. It would be a kind of big brother to the old Tascam Porta Studios but with the advantage of the superior sonic capabilities of VHS as well as the less wow and flutter prone nature of the VHS drive. The devices could also run a a faster than SP VHS which would further enhance the sound.

Anybody know why such a device as described couldn't be done with 8 tracks?
 
It's been done. It's called ADAT. Except, ADAT isn't analog, so maybe that's not what you're asking.

The problem with VHS is that information isn't stored on it the same way that information is stored on open reel audio tape. Specifically, it's not stored in a linear stream; it's stored like little diagonal "stripes" across the tape from the top to the bottom, if you think about a VHS cassette laying on its (broad) side. It's "sampled", and not continuous.

So, in reality, the sound coming off of a prerecorded VHS tape is of less quality than that coming from a prerecorded, open-reel tape. It's even of less quality than doing it at 16 bit digital.

It's been thought of before, but it hasn't been done because the only way to make it work well just isn't practical enough to be commercially viable.
 
I used a Sony Super beta hi-fi VCR for mastering in the 80's. In fact I still have it and it still works great. I like beta hi-fi a bit better than VHS hi-fi.

It’s analog, but acts more like digital in that you can’t push levels for compression effects. If you hit much above 0 you’ll get a similar unmusical distortion like you get with digital.

We won’t see any mulitrack analog machines based on the VCR type rotating head. Yeah it could be done, but videotape is in bigger trouble than audiotape. In fact, the decline in videotape sales is what put Quantegy on the ropes in the first place, as that was their biggest source of revenue.

Beta or VHS hi-fi is still a good option for mastering if you can find a machine in good shape and have a source for high quality tape (I still have tons of it unopened). In the late 80's/early 90's many dup houses accepted beta hi-fi masters, so yeah it can sound pretty damn good.

:)
 
Akai MG1212 & MG1214 were cartridge type machines too weren't they? There's probably a couple of folk on the forum who have them. I understand they had a proprietary cartridge though.

MG-1212_002.jpg


I hear that they are quite nice machines if you can feed them.

G
 
jedblue said:
Akai MG1212 & MG1214 were cartridge type machines too weren't they? There's probably a couple of folk on the forum who have them. I understand they had a proprietary cartridge though.

MG-1212_002.jpg


I hear that they are quite nice machines if you can feed them.

G
Click to expand...


Yeah, these Akai machines are the only analog cartridge multitracks I know of. It doesn't use rotating heads though. It sounds great, but it is more similar to an open reel design and runs at 7.5 ips on the high-speed setting. I always thought they were pretty cool though. I almost bought one back in the day, but...

:)
 
Yeah, cool.

The Akai MG121x series were the only devices seriously competing in the '388' market space, at the time.

I like the 12 tracks on 1/2" tape idea, but I'm not crazy about the proprietary cartridge. I think the 388's mixer section is overall better than the Akai MG1212/4 models. YMMV.

I like the Akai MG1212/4 as a concept. Don't know if I'd ever own one. I'd suspect they're pretty rare these days.:eek:;)
 
Tech support and parts are part of the achilles heel on the Akai units today unfortunately...that wouldn't stop me of course just because I'm a little looney that way but the deal-breaker for me is the tape. I have yet to get a definitive answer on the specs on the tape stock in those proprietary cartridges. Akai was going to just use Beta shells but then there was a licensing battle and they went their own road.

Beck, I think it was you in some other thread where you basically felt it would be completely reasonable to just load them with 1/2" 1.5mil spec +6 tape but that there wasn't really any definitive answer as to what eactly is in those things. Sorry if I'm misquoting that content. If there was some assured source of the MG tape spec then it would be relatively easy enough to buy a 2500' roll of SM911 and load your MG carts with fresh tape. The track width is slightly better than a 388 and certainly more tracks. IIRC the 12 audio tracks are not spread evenly across the tape path because there is a dedicated sync track and a guard-band in between at the top of the stack...maybe that's only on the 1412...

Anyway, IMHO the mixer section on the 388 kicks booty so I stopped considering an MG some time ago.

BTW, here's a thread on the whole VHS multitrack thing. We beat it to death but there is a reason it keeps coming back around: it is intriguing. Not to be a naysayer but there is also a reason it keeps dying.

Beck, or anybody, isn't the audio on a hi-fi video deck tracked linearly using a separate audio head or is it parsed using the rotating drum as with the video?

[EDIT]

I'm reading that other thread I linked above...Ghost indicates that the Akai carts were loaded with the equivalent of 457 which new today would be LPR35...

['NUTHER EDIT]

And both 13th and 14th tracks were used on the 1412...no guard band...one for internal autolocator and another for external timecode sync...I'll shutup now and encourage you to read that other thread...
 
sweetbeats said:
Beck, or anybody, isn't the audio on a hi-fi video deck tracked linearly using a separate audio head or is it parsed using the rotating drum as with the video?
Click to expand...

With beta hi-fi the audio is actually on the rotating video head between the chroma and luminance signals. Technically it's part of the video and the standard stationary audio tracks are still available.

VHS hi-fi uses separate tracks from the video, but still on the rotating head.

Beck, I think it was you in some other thread where you basically felt it would be completely reasonable to just load them with 1/2" 1.5mil spec +6 tape but that there wasn't really any definitive answer as to what eactly is in those things.
Click to expand...

No, that wasn't me. I still say it has to be some other kind of tape. The manual says the tape is a special "Cobalt modified" tape. Cobalt was used in type II cassette and high-grade beta and VHS tapes. Tapes such as 456/457, 911, etc are strictly ferric-oxide, so IMO it can't be 456 or equivalent. It's most likely something like Maxell XLII EE, which is the open reel version of Maxell type II cassette. I still don't know though, but I'm pretty sure what it's not.

:)
 
Last edited:
My idea is not to be confused with VHS video. The angle of the VHS head I believe had more to do with creating more head to tape contact due to the needs of video requirments.

Picture a device running on a VHS style cartridge and recording and playing back on an 8 track head perhaps even a rotating head as its the rotating head that allows the format to work so well at the modest tape speeds of VHS.

In any event throw video completely out of the equation and think pure audio. I tend to think if a very credible system was created in conjunction with video than a surpurb system could be arrived at for audio only. Audio is the easier element to engineer compared to video.
 
Last edited:
I think that we already had this type of unit, a very similar concept, in the AKAI MG series, which did not prove too popular or had the staying power, probably due, in part, to the proprietary tape design, actual recording mechanism, cartridge and tape type. I would rather see a TASCAM 388 on the shelves again. I mean, the blueprints are there and so is the facilities to get it going. Why not have China put it all together from genuine Japanese components? That would surely drive the price down but not necessarily the quality. Picture a 388 costing the same as it did 20 years ago. Sure, I'd bite. :)
 
Part of the beauty of mulitrack analog recording was its usual connection to a dedicated (read professional) recording studio. I don't know of many people who had Tascam 8 tracks in their home studios when the Tascam was current. The home studio marketplace has matured considerably and hardware availible is lightyears less expensive and not that far off from what was available during the heyday of analog multitrack. If the increasing interest in analog is genuine and sustainable then a modern cost effective analog tape recorder just may find a willing market.

In the scheme of things without a new breed of analog recording devices home multitrack recording is less likely to happen again since nearly all if not all multitrack reel to reel decks are if not antiques are specialist items. The price of tape is also a consideration and is likely not to be getting cheaper.

However the VHS cassette is still being produced in the 10's of millions and by reel to reel standards is dirt cheap visa vi the same amount of recording time. With state of the art electronics and onboard effects I believe the device I'm describing would be outstanding.
 
I remember that old post; I learned a lot from it.

A 12 track machine would be pretty sweet for recording a lot of rock music. 8 was never enough for me, and most of the time 16 tracks is more than I need, but there is that rare occasion when I use up every track.

-MD
 
themaddog said:
I remember that old post; I learned a lot from it.

A 12 track machine would be pretty sweet for recording a lot of rock music. 8 was never enough for me, and most of the time 16 tracks is more than I need, but there is that rare occasion when I use up every track.

-MD
Click to expand...

The most fun I ever had during recording was with 8 tracks. Once I got to unlimited tracks in digital I found it too easy to get self induldgent. I do however feel that 12 tracks is about right. In any event what I'm describing here would be at best 8 tracks but 8 is still a decent number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top