Any noise reduction mods for the Teac 80-8?

[ecc83]

Thank you Beck et al.

I am not ant-mod! I am THE inveterate tinkerer!

Certainly if people have done the research and the numbers on power supplies (not rocket science after all, some load Rs and a scope!) fine. No, I am refering to the bod that just reads on the internet that dropping in XYZ chip will transform his kit and does not have the knowledge to understand the implications.

Then, the 5532 is an excellent IC* but fitting one will not necessarily reduce noise. The NE's "claim to fame" is its ability to drive low resistances thus feedback and summing Rs can be kept low and Johnson noise reduced. If circuit resistances are high enough, fitting a chip with ZERO noise will do squat and rarely do interweb mods include such radical circuit changes, especially where time constants are present.

For anyone proposing such electronic dabblings Douglas Self's book, Small Signal Audio Design should be required reading.

*The LM4562 is even better, more expensive but that hardly matters in this context?

(Mr Beck: Somewhere in my loft I am sure I have a nomograph detailing the design of replay amps by Miniflux for their heads. If I can find it I shall send it to you if you wish?)

Dave.

 

[miroslav]

Miroslav (and other HR Moderators if it applies), it seems Tim Beck has a problem. Apparently you dont understand the meaning of "Analog Only" as it was originally intended.

This issue occasionally gets aired on this forum. Perhaps it would be timely for you as Moderator to explain the official position as to what "Analog Only" signifies.

Is it a merely descriptive title referring to the sorts of analog based recording gear discussed here - as the rest of the title goes on to suggest - or is it meant to be taken more as a political or tribal statement such as "Analog Tape Rules OK!" ?

Would you care to discuss your understanding of this?

Thanks

Tim G

I don't understand anything anymore.

OK...I'll give it a stab, but I am just one mod, and certainly this is not going to be some definitive answer that should be cut in stone....so I don't want anyone raking me over the coals about it.

IMO..."Analog Only" implies that there are other forums here at HR covering other topics/angles. It's a place to discuss primarily analog topics. That is what IMO the word "Only" is saying...that you can go elsewhere for other topics.
Does that mean that mention of anything else but *analog* is a major no-no....NO, it doesn't, but there shouldn't be a need to discuss other topics here when there are probably existing forums covering all other topics.
Sometimes when discussing analog, it may be necessary to mention something non-analog as a reference point or as a comparison.
That said...we all know that there are sometimes strong views about analog, especially analog tape recording...just like there can be about digital recording. People should NOT be coming into the Analog forum if their goal is to attack the views of analog tape enthusiasts...just like they should not go to the Digital forum to talk down digital.

I also think that people in the Analog forum should be free to post their negative views of digital, in a civil manner...but ppost them *in the Analog forum*...and those who have negative views of analog tape recording can voice them in the Digital forum or other forums, in a civil manner.
Coming into a specialized forum like say...the Fostex forum, JUST to say Fostex sucks...is poor form.

Not sure if that makes things more clearer or murkier for people...but that's how I see it.
I use analog gear and I still record on analog tape decks, but I also have a DAW and do a lot in the digital domian...so I'm not really biased, but I can say I prefer tracking with tape decks, but also think digital editing is the best thing since sliced bread.

 

[ecc83]

"Analogue Only"? (I reserve the right to the correct spelling!)

As a very recent interloper here I had regarded the title as a loose label for guys primarily interested in tape but not anti-digital in any fundamentalist, "blow up yer ram" sense?

Having lived thru' the pain of only valves, only Germanium transistors then (generally but not always) crap 741 chips I embrace digital technology with open arms. For SO long were we hunched over a control desk desperately trying to keep a live show below 3%(!) THD, the while keeping the noise down! (a bit of tape "warmf" might sound good on "rock and roll" but it sure AH doesn't on massed girls voices and piano!). Today you could practically set levels, record at 24bits and bugger off to the pub for the duration!

But I am not anti-tape. My son LOVES his Teac A3440 and tracks straight into it from an A&H Zed 10* but even he was frustrated by noise as he built up tracks years ago (a problem we partially solved pre computers by dumping tracks to a Hi Fi video machine).

So, live and let live. I am of the Old School. A recording chain should be transparent, High Fidelity in its truest sense, but to steal the Old Car analogue (boom! Boom!) if I may, tape is, err..Interesting!

*This has inserts in the Main Mix outs so I am going to investigate putting the Teac in there to politely mangle what comes back from'puter!

Dave.

 

[Tim Gillett]

I don't understand anything anymore.

OK...I'll give it a stab, but I am just one mod, and certainly this is not going to be some definitive answer that should be cut in stone....so I don't want anyone raking me over the coals about it.

IMO..."Analog Only" implies that there are other forums here at HR covering other topics/angles. It's a place to discuss primarily analog topics. That is what IMO the word "Only" is saying...that you can go elsewhere for other topics.
Does that mean that mention of anything else but *analog* is a major no-no....NO, it doesn't, but there shouldn't be a need to discuss other topics here when there are probably existing forums covering all other topics.
Sometimes when discussing analog, it may be necessary to mention something non-analog as a reference point or as a comparison.
That said...we all know that there are sometimes strong views about analog, especially analog tape recording...just like there can be about digital recording. People should NOT be coming into the Analog forum if their goal is to attack the views of analog tape enthusiasts...just like they should not go to the Digital forum to talk down digital.

I also think that people in the Analog forum should be free to post their negative views of digital, in a civil manner...but ppost them *in the Analog forum*...and those who have negative views of analog tape recording can voice them in the Digital forum or other forums, in a civil manner.
Coming into a specialized forum like say...the Fostex forum, JUST to say Fostex sucks...is poor form.

Not sure if that makes things more clearer or murkier for people...but that's how I see it.
I use analog gear and I still record on analog tape decks, but I also have a DAW and do a lot in the digital domian...so I'm not really biased, but I can say I prefer tracking with tape decks, but also think digital editing is the best thing since sliced bread.

Miroslav, thanks for your reply.

I'll try a slightly different tack.
Lets's go with a recent example. In the recent ADAT thread Tim Beck spoke of "the harshness of digital" (audio) as if it were a fact beyond question.

Now if someone posted on most of the other HR audio forums saying he found digital audio harsh, there would be helpful experienced responses insisting he was mistaken. Digital is not harsh, they would say. There must be something wrong with his equipment, setup or his technique, and they would offer to help him sort out the problem, step by step. They would guide him through the technical process so that hopefully in the end he could see for himself that "digital audio is not harsh". It has to be a problem in his gear, setup or technique. Problem solved.

But imagine exactly the same person comes down here and posts exactly the same post in the Analog forum. Imagine someone gives him exactly the same response as was given in the other audio forums. They offer to help him with sorting out his problem. Amazingly the guys who offer to help him are labelled as traitors and trolls, simply for answering exactly the same question in exactly the same way they did on another forum a few columns up.


So which of these two "versions of reality" should the guy believe? Is digital audio both "harsh" and "not harsh" depending on which forum you happen to be participating in at the time? Are objective facts and criteria of no use here?

To be very specific, when posting on this forum, and only on this forum, must posters be very careful to self-censor, so as not to offend the delicate feelings of one Timothy Beck?

Tim

 

[Lt. Bob]

it's not a matter of self censor.
It's a matter of someone asking a specific question and having the responses be, "Just switch to digital" which in no way answers or even addresses the question.
To use your example ...... if someone posted a question about digital recording and someone's answer was "digital is harsh" I have absolutely no doubt that someone would get slammed for such a non-sequitor answer because I have seen it happen numerous times.
This OP asked a specific question ..... THAT'S what people should confine themselves to ..... answering the question rather it's here or other forums.
If I personally want to know something specific about something I'm trying to do I care less than none about if someone else thinks I should do it or not.

 

[ecc83]

Heh! IMHO there is NO SUCH THING as a "simple, specific question" on forums and MUCH less a simple, specific answer!

The OP's question was. "Any noise reduction mods for the Teac 80-8?"

Now that question can be tackled in several ways..

System noise? In which case the first reply re capacitors would have been somewhat valid but then..

Is the noise confined to a few tracks or all? (unlikely all the caps, everywhere have gone down equally! In anycase I am not sure by what mechanism low value caps would increase wideband noise?)

Another tack would have been..
"If you are refering to overall record/play tape noise then (probably) no, you need a noise reduction system because this is a consequence of 1/4 track operation".

I know people come to forums looking for one shot answers but they rarely get them, except perhaps RTFM!

Dave.

 

[Lt. Bob]

I agree but a couple of the answers were 'that's a silly thing to do, just get rid of the machine'.

 

[miroslav]

To be very specific, when posting on this forum, and only on this forum, must posters be very careful to self-censor, so as not to offend the delicate feelings of one Timothy Beck?

I don't think it's about that. There are other tape users who say the same thing...they like/prefer tape over digital.
Would you feel the need to argue that point with everyone/anyone...over and over?
I know sometimes people think that they have the "proof"...so it's their mission to convert the unbeleivers...etc...but that rarely happens.

I'm sure we can agree that about 90% of audio/music discussions are based strongly in subjective views.
Sometimes if there is a clash with our own view, there is a tendency to try and show people their "error"....we feel if we don't, then somehow our own values/beliefs are being threatened. Heck...I've been there too, it's a natural reaction.
It's OK to bring up an opposing view and even debate it, but to get back to the original question...when you're in the Analog forum, you have to take into consideration that the people who post there have strong positive opinions about working with analog/tape...and if you always try to prove them wrong, it's not going to be taken in a positive nature.
Same in some other specialized forums. It's the thing about coming into someone's house, and then telling them it's not in order.

Like someone started a gag thread recently about ITB mixes never reaching the quality of OTB mixes......heck, if you seriously pushed that agenda in digital forums where most of the people work only ITB...you would hear them scream at you.
I mix OTB, and have "mentioned" it in discussions even when I know the majority works ITB...but if I kept coming back to argue the value of OTB over ITB in the digital forums, I know I would get strong negative responses from the ITB users.

So it's about how/when/where...and not so much about what is said.

 

[Blue Jinn]

@Tim

Dude, you appear to say that I have a tape deck as an effect like a Morley wah wah or a Maestro fuzz box and if I'm using it as a medium instead of a DAW, I'm some kind of idiot.

OP has an 80-8 that he is looking to lower the noise floor. From others posters he got:

dbx NR
upgrade the opamps,
replace the capacitors and upgrade the opamps
swap out the head for some after market brand
and more...

and a lot of clear pros/cons to the above

That's not that all different than the quest to reduce hum in valve amplifiers...

If you asked how to get a Vespa to run a little faster then 54mph, I'd tell you to

replace the stock muffler with a performance type
replace the carb with a performance type
bore the piston out to something larger than 200cc


And I'm sure others would tell you a lot of other things you could do as well, with more detail, and how easy or hard each selection would be.

I wouldn't tell you to buy a car, because the vast majority of commuters commute in cars, long live the idiots who drive cars. Nor would I tell you to buy a MOSFET amp, because they don't have AC filaments....

 

[LToro]

Long live millions of idiots out there.

Tim G

Long Live Analog. Tim.


LToro

 

[Beck]

I’m not really talking about what “Analog Only” means to different people. I’m talking specifically why HR set up an analog forum long before HR became a part of Audiofanzine and called it "Analog Only". When people tried to have conversations about analog in the general forums they were constantly harassed by people for simply preferring analog. Tim Gillett is a classic troll in the form of this sort of troublemaker we dealt with.

There were others over the years since I’ve been a member. One in particular was eventually banned from the analog forum, but was allowed to post in the other forums. But those were the days when moderation was almost non-existent at HR. When Audiofanzine took over we got moderators, but few understand what we went through here in the past trying to moderate and keep troublemakers out on our own. In fact, when Gillett first started hanging around the analog forum he was regularly teaming up with one of the old trolls that was banned several times, but kept creating new user ID’s. Gillett ran with the trolls from the beginning.

That’s why I still say Gillett should be banned from this forum. He’s not as clever as the former trolls who probably have grown out of that angry phase in their lives and had to get a real job or something. Gillett is more like the village idiot who was influenced by the wrong sort when he first joined and doesn’t seem to realize he’s been left here by himself now by those dearly departed troublemakers.

His primary roll here has been chief agitator. It’s gone on way too long. It’s absurd really. We don’t need a member here who lies in wait like a spider waiting for some poor soul to stumble in here with a question and then pounces on people for asking questions, constantly trying to talk people out of using analog. His information being embarrassingly outdated is neither here nor there. His behavior is the issue. Of course he doesn’t have a good grasp of recording of any kind. That’s quite obvious. He would be harmless if there weren’t so many beginners stopping by the forum not knowing who is who and what is what.

Imagine if I decided to take up residence in the Digital Recording & Computers forum just so I could hang out and tell them they should be using analog instead. How long do you think I would last there without a super moderator stepping in? Seven years? I don’t think so. More like seven days? Seven hours? It doesn’t matter if I’m right or not about the technical information I would provide, correcting a lot of misconceptions about digital and other good works (Which Gillett does not do by the way. He embodies the stereotype clueless permanoob with an attitude).

The Digital Recording & Computers forum would not be the place for me to share my views on the dismal state of digital every time someone had a technical question. It would be considered harassment and trolling. We’re not getting the same consideration in the Analog Only forum.

Gillett’s posts speak for themselves. The overwhelming majority of his interaction is harassing in nature with relatively little constructive input. And most of the constructive input he has is either stealing my words or another members and presenting them as his own. He wants to be something he is not, and of course has most resentment against those he wishes he could be, but that he can’t be as long as those people are here. He is as Mark David Chapman was to John Lennon in that regard.

Now I’m officially done discussing the Gillett problem here on the forum. I’m taking it up with higher powers at AudioFanzine.

Again, it’s not a matter of differing opinions here. We all have differing opinions. We all have disagreements here. Gillett is a persistent troll who has kept this up for years now. Enough is enough! Homerecording.com is the only forum I’ve seen bizarre conduct like Gillett’s allowed to go on with impunity. There’s still no law here… and that’s why he’s here. He couldn’t get away with this anywhere else. I’m not saying he’s smart enough to know all this and to plan it, but trolls and other criminals naturally seek the path of least resistance and end up in a place where there’s no sheriff in town.

 

[Tim Gillett]

Now I’m officially done discussing the Gillett problem here on the forum. I’m taking it up with higher powers at AudioFanzine.

Do that Beck. And maybe they will give you what you would so dearly crave -
THE POWER to be the Moderator yourself.