Ampex AG-440 Differences

  • Thread starter Thread starter sweetbeats
  • Start date Start date
sweetbeats

sweetbeats

Reel deep thoughts...
What are the main differences between the 440A and 440B/C Ampex decks?

Ive got the manual set for the B/C versions but not the A.

There is a 1" 8-track AG-440A for sale relatively local to me.
 
I have a pair of 440C machines, and I know they are quite different functionally than the 440A/B machines I have used in past times.

The main gripe with the A version was the lack of finesse on the transport..It did not have the logic built in like the C rev, so it was posible to make a complete mess of the tape when switching transport modes. It also lacked the tape motion sensing and tape lifter delay the later version has.
The electronice on the C version are superior, but will not back fit to the A version.

Upside is the thing is built like a tank, and quite simple to work on, and they look dead cool. If the price is right, you can sell the modules and transport separately and make a tidy profit to help pay for your other orphans.

>>>Are you sure you want to mess with 1" tape???

IMO the 440 C is the one to have. Look for one with the servo motor option.
 
>>>Are you sure you want to mess with 1" tape???
Click to expand...

heheheheh...uh...no. :D But 1" 8-track has a certain allure...

Is this any help?
Click to expand...

Yes, definitely. Thanks. Too bad the link to the Ampex Data Systems online manuals isn't working. :( The Seller says he has the B/C manual with it, and he's been using that to maintain his other 440 1" 8-track :eek: and it works fine, so...

*sigh* :rolleyes:

Pipe-dreamin' with absolutely no logic or sense about me...:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::o
 
AG440 Manuals!!!
Click to expand...

Among other things...Cool! :cool: Thanks, Techno! :)

As far as the 440 stuff most of it is what is available on AnalogRules.com, but there is some additional stuff here including the 440-8 R-P schematic.

  • Its interesting... there is almost nothing in all this 440A/B/C stuff pertaining directly to the 1" 8-track format...so was that just super rare or something?

And here's a couple thoughts ripe for all kinds of subjective responses:

  • The 440 platform now dates back some 40 years...:eek: Enthusiasts generally seem to tout that more tape real-estate is gonna be better, but is a 1/2" 8-track such as a Tascam 48 or 58 going to perform better than a 40-year-old 1" 8-track due to advances in head design, electronics componentry, transport design and electronics?
  • I see Daptone using (what I think) is an AG-440C-8...does it hold its own performance-wise against the more contemporary 1/2" decks or is there a draw to a particular vintage sound of the AG-440?
 
I don't think the 440-8 was super-rare, but it would have been phenomenally expensive and the 2-track version would naturally have been more common, IMHO.
I think Wendy Carlos had one, and King Crimson's first album was tracked to one as well - at least 'In the Court of the Crimson King' was, and given how much texture that song has, it probably wouldn't have been technically feasible on a 4-track.
 
Wasn't the 1" 8 track Ampex more commonly known as the MM1000??
I know the 8 track transport was different than the two track one, even thought the channel electronics were the same.
I recall that the 8 track was about $10K in the day.

The mono machines and two tracks were a staple of radio stations and performing arts centers, and a lot more common obviously. Still, a 440C two track in a cart was 4 grand new, equal to a nice new car.

Quality: I cant speak to audio specs, but the build quality and mechanicals were A-1. No corners cut, no cheapie plastic parts, undersized components, etc.
Everything is servicable, accessable, well laid out. Did I say I liked these machines??
 
jpmorris said:
If you google for images, the MM1000 is twice as wide as the 440-8. Looks like a different design to me...
Click to expand...

The MM1000 was based on the Ampex video deck of the same period. I never worked with one as an engineer but as a session player, every date done with an MM1000 was interrupted by machine failure. Because of these experiences, you couldn't give me one.
 
Nobody's even touched my earlier questions...

"They must all be afraid to 'go there'." ponders sweetbeats... :)

So? :???:

The 440 platform now dates back some 40 years... Enthusiasts generally seem to tout that more tape real-estate is gonna be better, but is a 1/2" 8-track such as a Tascam 48 or 58 going to perform better than a 40-year-old 1" 8-track due to advances in head design, electronics componentry, transport design and electronics?

I see Daptone using (what I think) is an AG-440C-8...does it hold its own performance-wise against the more contemporary 1/2" decks or is there a draw to a particular vintage sound of the AG-440?
Click to expand...
 
Hm...that'd kinda be Daptone...they've got that 85-16...dunno about the electronics in it, but the format is equivalent to 1/2" 8-track, and then they've got that 440-8...hm...
 
sweetbeats said:
The 440 platform now dates back some 40 years...:eek: Enthusiasts generally seem to tout that more tape real-estate is gonna be better, but is a 1/2" 8-track such as a Tascam 48 or 58 going to perform better than a 40-year-old 1" 8-track due to advances in head design, electronics componentry, transport design and electronics?
Click to expand...


If everything being compared was in "as-new" condition with everything in the signal chain being equal, a 1" 440-8 would sound considerably better than anybody's 1/2" 8.
 
sweetbeats said:
... is a 1/2" 8-track such as a Tascam 48 or 58 going to perform better than a 40-year-old 1" 8-track due to advances in head design, electronics componentry, transport design and electronics?
Click to expand...

Yes. This a perfect case in point when looking at the developments that make some later models with narrower tracks match and even out perform some early designs with twice the track width. Theoretically wider tracks mean better performance, but when comparing actual decks practice trumps theory.

The Tascam 48 stands well against the original AG-440-8 1-inch and on some measurements out specs it. They are very close though.

:)
 
This great old Ampex white paper has a table that shows the theoretical signal-to-noise ratio difference with with difference track configurations:
http://ftp.ampex.com/ampex/manuals/audio/theory/ampex.basic.concepts.of.tape.recording.pdf
I asked Greg Norman about the track width issue when he was in Montreal for a seminar and he told me it's primarily a signal-to-noise thing. Frequency response curves/the effects of unbiasing etc. aren't necessarily related to tape real estate.

(I think narrow widths are also more prone to dropouts). So I reckon you could use a lower reference flux without noise reduction and have more headroom with a given tape stock. But i'd guess that the ampex would have a more extreme low end bump.

I'm actually tempted by an Ampex 440b that's for sale locally. It was converted to a 1/2" 4 track but was originally a 1" 8-track. The other 4 amps are still there and working... I wonder if i could rig it up so i could monitor off the repro and sych heads at the same time (a la Abbey Road) and do true ADT and flanging during mixdown?
 
Last edited:
Do you mean a 1/2" 4track? That was a common configuration.
 
What I love about those old Ampex AG440 machines is that they're built like Lego, in that everything pops in and out quickly. Very easy to get in there and service. I don't think there's anything proprietary in there either. Basic, good sounding, overbuilt modular machines, with parts plentiful and mostly "off the shelf" stuff in there. What more can one ask for? If you thought the Tascam 58 innards were a headache, access & service wise, and that the 48 was much better [and it is], then the 440 will be like a cake walk compared to. I almost bought one a few years back but had to stop myself in light of too much gear.:eek::D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top