Bias

[themaddog]

I am just beginning to understand the differences in tape bias (high output, etc.) Is this the same as a comparison between normal bias and high bias tape?

The reason I'm concerned is I just got a Tascam MSR-16, which I've learned is factory biased for 456 tape (thanks Beck!). Because the machine was moved from Alabama to Massachusetts by truck, I feel like it would be a good idea to bring it in to get calibrated. When I do that, would it be worth it to get it calibrated for a different kind of tape, like SM 900, or even more specifically LPR 35 (please see this webpage for info: http://www.tapeworkstexas.com/basf_lpr_35_1_2_x_3600_10_5_reel.html)? I'm trying to save money by buying cheaper tape, but if I'll see a loss in performance from tape to tape then I'll just can the idea.

Also, is S M468 compatible with 456, or would SM 911 be a better choice?

Thanks for any and all help,
-MD

 

[Beck]

I believe the MSR-16 could do 320 nWb/m (+5) with only a slight loss in performance (on paper) compared to factory specs. Above that I think there would be a noticeable performance loss.

The MSR-16 is undeniably a narrow-track format. Tascam has tweaked it for optimum performance. It is generally not a good idea to go to the +9 tapes such as 499 or SM 900 on a narrow format. If you plan on using the onboard dbx there is really no benefit to using these hot tapes, and the higher levels will cause the dbx to perform poorly.

Higher levels will most notably affect high frequency response and crosstalk. Even the jump form 250 to 320 nWb/m will make a difference.

Case in point -- the Fostex E-16 is factory set for 320 nWb/m and has a top frequency response of 18 kHz (which isn't bad) compared with 20 kHz for the MSR-16. The E-16 also has a 55 dB crosstalk figure compared to a stellar 80 dB for the MSR-16. Some of this can be attributed to the benefits of dbx over Dolby C in regard to these particular specs. However, The harder you push a given machine the lower the high frequency response will be and the worse the crosstalk and distortion will be.

Part of this phenomenon is the reaction of the tape itself and part is the electronics of the machine. It may not be objectionable in the real world though. Most adults can't hear 18 kHz, or even 16 kHz.

The TSR-8 will easily do +5, and I even had mine set at +8 for a while using Quantegy GP9 w/o dbx. But the track width on the MSR is probably pushing the limit as it is.

SM 911 is an excellent tape, as is SM 468. While SM 468 is not technically drop-in compatible with 456, many people have used it as such because it's close enough and sounds great. I happen to like it a lot on my TSR-8.

SM 911 is a direct counterpart to 456. Hopefully we will be seeing this formula soon under the RMG International brand. I use all these tapes interchangeably depending on what I'm recording.

LPR35 is a +6 tape, not a +9 like SM 900. I've seen this "special run" advertised by Tape Works Texas, but have my doubts. I can't imagine why anyone would want to hit a 1-mil tape with +9 levels.

-Tim

 

[acorec]

I am just beginning to understand the differences in tape bias (high output, etc.) Is this the same as a comparison between normal bias and high bias tape?

The reason I'm concerned is I just got a Tascam MSR-16, which I've learned is factory biased for 456 tape (thanks Beck!). Because the machine was moved from Alabama to Massachusetts by truck, I feel like it would be a good idea to bring it in to get calibrated. When I do that, would it be worth it to get it calibrated for a different kind of tape, like SM 900, or even more specifically LPR 35 (please see this webpage for info: http://www.tapeworkstexas.com/basf_lpr_35_1_2_x_3600_10_5_reel.html)? I'm trying to save money by buying cheaper tape, but if I'll see a loss in performance from tape to tape then I'll just can the idea.

Also, is S M468 compatible with 456, or would SM 911 be a better choice?

Thanks for any and all help,
-MD

The answer is that you can calibrate the machine for any type tape you want IF the MSR is CAPABLE of erasing the high bias tape. Some machines did not have a strong enough bias current to erase these types of tape. But, the MSR is new enough that you should not have this problem.The next problem is that the high bias tapes tend to weigh more and that additional weight can really put a strain on the reel motors. These narrow format machines were built with some reastraint in the $$ department. It is possible that the motors are not up to the job. These are caveats to be aware of. When you bring the machine to a tech, make sure that he absoultely knows that the machine is capable of using the high bias tapes. The machine also has to have the tape tension set for this type of tape and a complete transport alignment.

If the tech does not know the answers to these questions, or tells you that the only service is a simple bias adjustment, you really should have it aligned for the 456 tape. It is in the tape machine's best interest as you can increase your headwear if not set up correctly. I have read that it is not a good move to use high bias tape with narrow format machines for a variety of reasons. The #1 reason is that "hitting" the tape with +9 bias creates too much crosstalk etc. Well, just because the tape is biased at +9 does noy mean that you should peg the meters with signal. The +9 talk is with pro recorders and *allows* you to slam the tape for that good old tape compression. You certainly don't have to kill the poor tape to get a clean strong signal. I have found out that the GP9 on my Fostex E-16 is great because the bass and high end sounded tighter than the muddy 456.

Now, the high bias tape WILL get you a much lower noise floor (less hiss) and tighter low and high end on tape. The tape I use on my MCI 2" 24track recorder (3M 996) is much like the Quantagy GP9 in that there is very little to no tape shed and sticky tape syndrome. So, if your tech deems that the machine can take the high bias tape, then it is a wise move indeed. Another reason to go to high bias tape is that it is very possible (in what I have read) that the high bias formulations will be actually cheaper than stuff like the 456 in the future because all the pros use the high bias stuff and the volume is there to be able to lower the price on new tape. The 456 and like formulations have not been in favor for a long time and have only been offered because it was part of the catalog line. I have read that Quatagy and APR (both will be making tape) might drop the 456 formulation because the sales vs. cost of production is not there. Despite what people will write here to the contrary, a mildly pro studio that uses tape spend over $5000/year on tape (high bias in virtually all of the pro studios I know of). How much does the avarage home recorder use? About $100 if that.

I have converted my Fostex E16 to GP9 and it sound awesome compared to any reel of 456 I have ever had. I can't speak for the rest of the crowd, but I found that 456 1/2" up to 2" tape is really horrific stuff. Every reel I ever had has had problems and fouled my machines each and every time. I only bought new reels up to 1999. Interesting though I have rarely had a problem with the 1/4" stuff. They say that the reels are cut from the same lot and if that is true, then 456 should stay 1/4" as it seems to work better than the wider cuts.

Oh well, enough of the diatribe.

Good Luck.

 

[themaddog]

Thanks to both of you for all your help. Beck, I have a couple more questions about SM 468 and 911. When you say you use the two interchangeably, depending on the type of material you are recording, what determines your decision to use one tape over the other? Would you say, use 911 to record an acoustic song, and use 468 for rock? Are Quant. 456, SM 468 and 911 tapes +5? You said in another post that the MSR-16 is calibrated for 250 nWb/m, are these tapes 320 nWb/m?

Thank you for all your help, I really appreciate it,
-MD

 

[jpmorris]

Another reason to go to high bias tape is that it is very possible (in what I have read) that the high bias formulations will be actually cheaper than stuff like the 456 in the future because all the pros use the high bias stuff and the volume is there to be able to lower the price on new tape. The 456 and like formulations have not been in favor for a long time and have only been offered because it was part of the catalog line. I have read that Quatagy and APR (both will be making tape) might drop the 456 formulation because the sales vs. cost of production is not there. Despite what people will write here to the contrary, a mildly pro studio that uses tape spend over $5000/year on tape (high bias in virtually all of the pro studios I know of). How much does the avarage home recorder use? About $100 if that.

This would make a certain amount of sense, but last I heard ATR was starting with 456-compatible, and possibly moving on to high-bias if there was sufficient demand for it.
Also, I'm sure I heard that 456 accounted for something like 90% of the market, although I could well be wrong.

 

[Beck]

Thanks to both of you for all your help. Beck, I have a couple more questions about SM 468 and 911. When you say you use the two interchangeably, depending on the type of material you are recording, what determines your decision to use one tape over the other? Would you say, use 911 to record an acoustic song, and use 468 for rock? Are Quant. 456, SM 468 and 911 tapes +5? You said in another post that the MSR-16 is calibrated for 250 nWb/m, are these tapes 320 nWb/m?

Thank you for all your help, I really appreciate it,
-MD

Yes, you guessed it exactly -- I like the way acoustic instruments sound on SM 911 and how edgier rock sounds on 456 and 468. All these tapes are +6 tapes, and most commonly set for +5 @ 0 VU; less commonly +3 @ 0 VU.

The differences are very subtle, especially when using dbx, which is the great equalizer in many respects. If I could only choose one tape though it would be 456.

I currently have in my stock new and used (by me) 456 that date from 1995 through 2003. You won't have problems with 456 falling apart as acorec described unless you get some rare batch from hell or older pre-1994 stuff. It's the most widely used formulation in the world.

A lot of people preferred other tapes over the years, such as 226 or 911 because of the way they sound at higher saturation levels. 456 has been described as "glassy." 226, 911 and even 406 are softer. Tascam may have taken this into consideration when they decided on 456 @ 250 nWb/m. You will never realize the glassiness at those levels.

Hot tapes like GP9 and SM 900 are absolutely not recommended and not widely used for narrow track machines. They are more popular on the big 2" machines and for half-track mastering, but even that is a sliver of the market compared with 456, which is still the industry standard.

I don't doubt acorec is happy with GP9 on his E-16, and is probably experienced enough to have it tweaked "just right." but, as we speak that is the most expensive tape made.

-Tim

 

[acorec]

Yes, you guessed it exactly -- I like the way acoustic instruments sound on SM 911 and how edgier rock sounds on 456 and 468. All these tapes are +6 tapes, and most commonly set for +5 or +3 @ 0 VU.

The differences are very subtle, especially when using dbx, which is the great equalizer in many respects. If I could only choose one tape though it would be 456.

I currently have in my stock new and used (by me) 456 that date from 1995 through 2003. You won't have problems with 456 falling apart as acorec described unless you get some rare batch from hell or older pre-1994 stuff.

A lot of people preferred other tapes over the years, such as 226 or 911 because of the way they sound at higher saturation levels. 456 has been described as "glassy." 226, 911 and even 406 are softer. Tascam may have taken this into consideration when they decided on 456 @ 250 nWb/m. You will never realize the glassiness at those levels.

Hot tapes like GP9 and SM 900 are absolutely not recommended and not widely used for narrow track machines. They are more popular on the big 2" machines and for half-track mastering, but even that is a sliver of the market compared with 456, which is still the industry standard.

-Tim

I just want to add that I never had any 456 that fell apart or shed wildly. But, I did have to re-lap the heads once and had drop outs on new tape on more than a few reels. The tape was definitely the culprit in the head re-lapping as the oxide shedding was so bad that it wedged it' s way so far into the head surface that cleaning over and over never fixed it.

The big tape survey that APR asked for shows that at least %80 of the market that still uses tape (like $1000-10,000/year) want high output tape. The 456 mostly had the sales go to home recordists. Now, the problem is that the sales/volume thing has reversed. I am sure that they will offer 456 for the other guys, buy I heard it would be made in smaller lots and might cost a few more $$$ if they were going to do it at all. I certainly hope that this is not the case but I did read a small blurb from the new Quantegy owners about supplying pro tape and the current demand for the high output stuff.

We will see.

 

[themaddog]

Thanks for all your help guys, I really appreciate it.

I located a reel of 456 tape here in Boston, so I'm going to test out the machine today and see if it's calibrated. Basically, I'm just going to plug in a snyth into the machine on each track and see if the record and playback volumes are the same, as close to 0 as possible, at like 3 different pitches.

I also called Tape Works Texas and they'll be shipping me out a reel of the LPR 35 to try out. I figure it's worth if it works, since it's a lot cheaper and they have a very large supply of it. It's not "true" LPR 35, nor is it SM 900, and they estimate it to be +7 tape. Should be an interesting test anyways, once I have my mixer up and running (which should be by 4/18 once they can actually sell it to me from Daddy's Junky Music) I'll try both tapes to hear which I like better. I hope it's the $21 over the $50 tape!

Thanks again,
-MD

 

[Beck]

Thanks for all your help guys, I really appreciate it.

I located a reel of 456 tape here in Boston, so I'm going to test out the machine today and see if it's calibrated. Basically, I'm just going to plug in a snyth into the machine on each track and see if the record and playback volumes are the same, as close to 0 as possible, at like 3 different pitches.

I also called Tape Works Texas and they'll be shipping me out a reel of the LPR 35 to try out. I figure it's worth if it works, since it's a lot cheaper and they have a very large supply of it. It's not "true" LPR 35, nor is it SM 900, and they estimate it to be +7 tape. Should be an interesting test anyways, once I have my mixer up and running (which should be by 4/18 once they can actually sell it to me from Daddy's Junky Music) I'll try both tapes to hear which I like better. I hope it's the $21 over the $50 tape!


Thanks again,
-MD

Let us know what you think of TTW's LPR 35. I'm interested to see how it works out.

If you're using a synth, you can test with key B6, which is 987.8 Hz (close enough to 1 kHz). Use as pure and flat a tone as you can get.

Tones an octive higher or lower won't necessarily play back at 0 VU.

Where is B6 on your keyboard? That's a whole 'nother can of worms. If you're lucky your manual will say what octave your keys start. Anyway, it's in the octave above A 440, which you can confirm with a tuning fork or guitar tuner.

-Tim

 

[themaddog]

Sure thing, I'll definitely let you know how it works out when I get it. Nice Ben Franklin quote, by the way.

-MD

 

[themaddog]

I tried out playing a 1000 hz test tone yestarday from my computer. Everything worked pretty well on each track, some of them came back barely +1 db louder, but it was hard for me to center at 0 anyways. The only track that had any problems was 16. It played back significantly lower. It wasn't in snyc mode, and it happened with DBX on or off.

I tested the tones at 7.5 ips. Afterwards, I recorded over the section of the tape that I tested and everything was erased just fine. This was on Quantegy 456 tape, on my MSR-16. I'm going to be looking for a tech to calibrate it soon.

Could moving it from Alabama to Boston have knocked off the calibration, especially on 16? Or could it be something else that is wrong with it?

Thanks for all your help again guys,
-MD

 

[jpmorris]

The only track that had any problems was 16. It played back significantly lower. It wasn't in snyc mode, and it happened with DBX on or off.
-MD

I don't know the MSR16, but the TSR-8 has a switch at the back (near the phono connectors) which sets the level on track 8 to -10, +4 etc.
See if you have one of those for track 16.