Emtec SM468 .. Tim, guys .. anyone!?

[cjacek]

I've read on some of the news groups that the SM468, although 1.5 mil and thicker than say a Japanese made tape of 1 mil, such as the Maxell UD series, is equally as stiff or even less so than the thinner 1 mil Jap tapes! Is this true and how good (or bad) of an idea it would be to use the SM468 tape on a machine setup originally for a 1 mil tape, TASCAM 388, TEAC 3440 ... ? I just like the lower operating level of the 468 and I thought I'd try it.

Thanks guys!

 

[Beck]

Originally made by AGFA as PEM 468, it’s a +6 tape like 456 or 911. I have seen it erroneously listed as a +3 tape on eBay, but this is not correct.

468 is in a class of its own and I've always liked it. It’s not technically bias compatible with 456, but it’s close, and even though AGFA had a bias compatible tape called SM 469, many people actually preferred SM 468 and would use it interchangeably with 456.

SM 469 was a flop compared to SM 468, which has been around since 1973, first as AGFA, then BASF, then EMTEC and now (soon to be) available once again from RMGI.

It is grouped in the 1.5-mil tapes but is slightly thinner and more flexible. It comes on 7” reels of 1250 ft, rather than the standard 1200 ft, which gives you an idea of it being just slightly thinner. 468 is the only 1.5-mil tape I recommend for regular use on machines that are setup for 1-mil tape. Interestingly it has the same bias recommendation @ 15 ips as Quantegy GP9 -- 4 dB down. But the secret is to use it on a machine set for 456 -- 3 dB down.

The big thing about 468 is that it holds onto the highs better, even after long-term storage. It also has a lower noise floor than 456, and great print-through specs. I posted something sometime back… a story about how Mark Pinske discovered the peculiar high frequency retention properties of the tape during a recording project with Frank Zappa.

Ah, here it is:

"We cut a deal with Ampex to drop hundreds of rolls of tapes at different cities, like Chicago, New York, wherever," says Pinske. "Well, Agfa started bidding for the business, and we started using Agfa 468. We switched in the middle of the tour, and when we got off of the tour, we started razor-blade editing a lot of the songs together from different shows, and you couldn't even tell the difference in the cymbals across the edits. That's what Frank liked about the consistency we did in the recording.

Well, some of the tapes that we meant to mix for an album we didn't get to mix, because we edited way more songs than we were able to have time to mix, so we put them in the tape vault. When we pulled them out a year later, the edits didn't work. The cymbals would drop as much as 3 or 4 dB at the high frequencies when they went to the Ampex 456, and then when we went back to the Agfa tape, it would get bright again.

This was very frustrating from an engineering standpoint. When I remixed the whole Baby Snakes movie [1983], we would have tapes that maybe the first 20 seconds would sound right, and then all of a sudden, it would get dull and everything would change. We'd have to strike the board and reset everything just to make the edit work. And you might strike the board maybe eight, 10, 12 times through one song, just to try to make the sonics match on edits that originally ran across like butter."

~Mark Pinske
Mix magazine, February 2003

It could be that part of the high frequency performance may be due to people using 468 on machines that were biased for 456. This is slightly under biased for 468, which will produce a crisper, though slightly more distorted high end.

~Tim

 

[cjacek]

Excellent post. Thank you Tim!

I can tell you that US RECORDING MEDIA has a chart and it also says +3 for SM468 :

http://www.usrecordingmedia.com/whtashius.html

 

[Dr ZEE]

Now that you've switched from Q tape to RMGI-Emtec...

there two strange things to me in that line:
first is: the term (action) "switch" (from brand to brand) is more applicable to a consumer and not to a retailer. don't you think, guys? ... unless we are in the area of fake phony fraud competition ala pepsi/coca and such.
second: "Q tape" ...."Q tape" ? ?????? is it a slang? a code word? Is "quantegy" a forbidden word? or a politically incorrect word? or what ?

anyway, it's just kind of strange, to say the least...

 

[Beck]

I’m not surprised – I’ve just about given up on US Recording Media. I’m not going to rant too much, but just to say whatever falling out they had with Quantegy they were very unprofessional about the “transition” and weren’t putting the customers first. After all just last year we couldn’t get tape because of the Quantegy shutdown. Then USR had the nerve to discontinue Quantegy products before RMGI was even ready… and they’re still not ready. (End of Rant)

I have seen claims for SM468 operating level all over the map. One vendor even listed it as a +9 tape.

Bill at tapetape.com also has some of his tapes categorized wrong.

I’m afraid as we get further and further from when tape was king it’s going to get harder to get consistent info on the web.

What USR is describing sounds like SM 368, which is no longer made… and RMGI has no plans to make it.

(CORRECTION: IT DOES LOOK LIKE 368 WILL BE AVAILABLE... I HAVEN'T BEEN TO THE RMGI SITE IN A WHILE… MY BAD).


I certainly hope the new RMGI 468 is the same as the old BASF/EMTEC. I suppose it's possible they are changing the formula, but I kinda doubt it.


We always knew 468 as +6 tape. I have an add for it in an old magazine that describes BASF 468 as +6, and Joe Nino-Hernes lists it as +6 in his tape cross-reference in the following link. If you don’t know that name, he knows about everything there is to know about tape, next to Jim McKnight.

http://www.srctape.com/pdf/tapelist.pdf

~Tim

 

[cjacek]

I’m not surprised – I’ve just about given up on US Recording Media. I’m not going to rant too much, but just to say whatever falling out they had with Quantegy they were very unprofessional about the “transition” and weren’t putting the customers first. After all just last year we couldn’t get tape because of the Quantegy shutdown. Then USR had the nerve to discontinue Quantegy products before RMGI was even ready… and they’re still not ready. (End of Rant)

Yeah, I always thought it strange that USR dumped Quantegy "just like that", especially that they've been hailing the tapes for such a long time. Now, in some of their ad copy, they diss Quantegy formulations. Additionally, their prices were always higher than most retailers. Go figure.

I have seen claims for SM468 operating level all over the map. One vendor even listed it as a +9 tape.

Bill at tapetape.com also has some of his tapes categorized wrong.

I’m afraid as we get further and further from when tape was king it’s going to get harder to get consistent info on the web.

What USR is describing sounds like SM 368, which is no longer made… and RMGI has no plans to make it.

(CORRECTION: IT DOES LOOK LIKE 368 WILL BE AVAILABLE... I HAVEN'T BEEN TO THE RMGI SITE IN A WHILE… MY BAD).


I certainly hope the new RMGI 468 is the same as the old BASF/EMTEC. I suppose it's possible they are changing the formula, but I kinda doubt it.


We always knew 468 as +6 tape. I have an add for it in an old magazine that describes BASF 468 as +6, and Joe Nino-Hernes lists it as +6 in his tape cross-reference in the following link. If you don’t know that name, he knows about everything there is to know about tape, next to Jim McKnight.

http://www.srctape.com/pdf/tapelist.pdf

~Tim

The LPR35 looks interesting as well. Basically a 911 on a 1 mil base. Better spec'd than 456!? I wonder if my machines will align for the LPR35 ... Anyway, excellent post. Thanks again Tim.

 

[cjacek]

Btw, the "Reference" pdf file is great!

 

[Beck]

The LPR35 looks interesting as well. Basically a 911 on a 1 mil base. Better spec'd than 456!? I wonder if my machines will align for the LPR35 ... Anyway, excellent post. Thanks again Tim.

Yes, I would recommend trying that on a 388, 22-2, and other models that work best with 1-mil tape. LPR35 is to 911 as 457 is to 456, more or less, and 911 was/is the BASF/EMTEC/RMGI counterpart to 456.

I wonder how much longer we will have to say AGFA/BASF/EMTEC/RMGI. God forbid anyone buys out RMGI.

Nice thing though, 911 was never an AGFA product, so we can drop that brand from the string, but 468 was.

 

[Beck]

Btw, the "Reference" pdf file is great!

And believe it or not Joe is a young fellow -- early 20's, but he's done his homework and has put some great info out on the web.

For his age he has a refreshingly mature grasp of analog recording. People like Joe are the only thing between me and total cynicism, as in “Trust no one under thirty.” But then having been a genius myself when I was 21, I wouldn’t dare underestimate him because he's half my age.

 

[Dr ZEE]

People like Joe are the only thing between me and total cynicism, as in “Trust no one under thirty.”

the problem with people under thirty is that they don't follow the rule: "Trust no one over forty"

 

[Beck]

the problem with people under thirty is that they don't follow the rule: "Trust no one over forty"

Especially those 40-something and older towns people, who would just as soon bulldoze the Freedom School as spit.

 

[themaddog]

On the subject of youth and analog recording

You all make yourself sound older than you probably are, he he he.

When I was teaching high school this past year, whenever the subject of music, and particularly recording, came up in class, I made a point to challenge the young minds. So many of them have IPods, and they were aghast at the fact that I listen to records.

Typical conversation:
Student: "Why do you listen to records, CD's are so much better!"
Me: "Really? Is that because someone told you that, or because you've listened to both?"

The student generally didn't know what to say, because I don't think a single one had ever listened to a record in his or her whole life. They had just taken what they'd been told on blind faith.

A number of my students knew I was in a band and handle our own recording. Occasionally I'd be asked for advice on what to start for a beginning studio, I'd always point them to the same Tascam machines: The 388, the 688, and the 488.

-MD

 

[Dr ZEE]

You all make yourself sound older than you probably are, he he he.

but of course... hah hah , the good thing is that we don't wear beard ...so to look older (read wiser and trustier) than we are.
Trust isn't something that can be just applied in a form of a beard or a pre-name-title.
Trust only can be earned and it takes time. And by the time that time have passed the one who earns the trust is pretty much gone, while the one who trusts is no longer young... and that's a nature of things
Young people (say, students) pretty much got no choice, but trusting a beard .
Beards are often a big problem. Here's an example. . This one was (is) distorting the truth for years while "educating" the young ones. "Distorting The Truth" was actually a subtitle in the july '97 MIX magazine's printed version (which of course I have in my cave's dusty archive ) for one of his regular full of disconnected analogies, baseless generalizations and assumptions, stirred with bleeding agenda and head spinning self-portraying as a savior of the world (you are all screwed and I'm here to straighten you out) rants in so-called "insider audio" section, titled as "Retro this, buddy!" (Part 1) , (Part 2).
Of course, due to his space limitations Paul did not realize, that the subtitle is actually perfect, as it is pointing not to the subject of writing but to the writing and the writer
God save us all. ... I keep saying it again and again, lately ...

 

[A Reel Person]

Occasionally I'd be asked for advice on what to start for a beginning studio, I'd always point them to the same Tascam machines: The 388, the 688, and the 488.

-MD

You are my Hero!

It reminds me,... since I'm older than I sound, (heh),...

I have many, many recordings in many formats of my solo and my "band" stuff from over the years. My oldest jam tapes are from around 1980!

Often, I'll still roll out those old recordings and post them on the web for people to listen to. If/when I get the occasional "aww, you suck!" comments from the listeners, I'll often say, "Yeah, & what did your mixes sound like in 1982?"... to which in most cases there is no response,... for obvious reasons. Many in my listening "audience" were not recording in 1982, nor were many of them even born yet!

I think the time factor throws a whole different perspective on all things, over and above face value.

F/I, when (mostly younger) people say, "Aw, that Beatles music is such bubblegum crap",... I often remind them that in the context of the times, the Beatles were the most forward thinking, innovative and happening music on the planet! 40 years later it may seem easy to discount their worth,... but anyone who's been there knows differently!

I dunno how this ties into SM468, but BTW, I have a HUGE 14" reel of NEW 2" 468 tape in my vast empire of recording stuff! Have you ever seen a 14" reel of 2" tape? Man, it's HUGE! The sad thing is that I have nothing to play it on! This size reel of tape would require a deck with large capacity, such as the Tascam ATR-80/24. The 2" Otari's I'm familiar with won't handle 14" reels. There's a Studer A800mk3 that I think would handle 14" reels,... but,... anyway....

Young people have very little perspective, by definition. Sometimes it's up to us "older" folks to try to enlighten them, which is no easy feat!

I agree, that much of the "analog recording is bullshit" comments you hear are from youngsters who have no experience or perspective on the subject, but they are simply regurgitating a "digital is best" dogma, 'cause it's all they know.

Off topic? I dunno.

Carry On!!

 

[A Reel Person]

...

Especially those 40-something and older towns people, who would just as soon bulldoze the Freedom School as spit.

Heh,... a "Billy Jack" reference!

You have to be "old" to get that one!!

 

[Beck]

Here it is...

I found a reference from Jim McKnight on my overcrowded hard drive (If the Internet ever disappears somehow, just ask me because I have it all saved on my PC).

I knew I had something from him, but couldn’t find it until today. He has some common audiotapes grouped by output level from A to D (his own unofficial ranking system).

Group B is +3 and includes 406, 206, etc
Group C is +6 and includes, 456, 226, 911, 468, etc
Group D is +9 and includes, GP9, 996, etc

http://home.flash.net/~mrltapes/mcknight_tape-info-table.pdf

In the link look at the chart under Remanence fluxivity, AKA, Saturation Flux, which is what BASF/EMTEC/RMGI calls it in their spec sheets. They also list MOL in dB. Quantegy only lists MOL @ 3% 3rd harmonic distortion in dB, but these are all different ways of determining how to classify a tape.

In tape terms, Remanence is the level of magnetization left on the tape after the recording process.

His Remanence figures show the following:

+3 tapes are in the 1400 –1500 range
+6 tapes are around 2000 (with 911 being the standout hottest of the bunch)
+9 tapes are in the 2600 – 2800 range

It’s more common in street terms to separate tapes into +3, +6, etc, but manufacturers almost never do put it in these terms in a spec sheet.

Anyway, to make a long story short, McKnight’s table shows BASF 468 to be almost identical in output to Quantegy 456, even a slightly closer match than 3M 226. But remember the bias is slightly different.

Once you’re familiar with the various output measurements, you will be able to see what McKnight has listed by comparing the RMGI, Quantegy and ATR spec sheets yourself. On a side note, I suspect we’ll see that ATR +10 is no more +10 than RMGI SM 900 (not that ATR won't be the best tape ever made... we'll see).

Now for the practical test – the one in which you just have to take my word for it. If you have both 456 and 468 (which I do) you can see that the output is the same. If you record a 1kHz tone @ 0 VU using 468 on a machine setup for 456 it will play back @ 0 VU. If you do the same thing on the same machine with 406 the playback level on the meter will be –3 (more or less) instead of 0.

Case closed.

~Tim

 

[Dr ZEE]

Young people have very little perspective, by definition. Sometimes it's up to us "older" folks to try to enlighten them, which is no easy feat!

It is hard and should be so for an "older" folk who gets out there to "enlighten" them instead of enlightening perspectives for them. And I mean perspectives and not a perspective. Some (way too many , I must say) "older" folks confuse enlightening with blinding.

/respects

 

[Beck]

Heh,... a "Billy Jack" reference!

You have to be "old" to get that one!!

Not only that, but even me mum says I was born on my birthday... What are the odds?

I asked her because I look 10-15 years younger than people I went to high school with. I just wanted to be sure.

 

[cjacek]

Some (way too many , I must say) "older" folks confuse enlightening with blinding.

Many distort the truth to reinforce their own hidden agenda(s). Take the digital "revolution" way back and note how the various groups including manufacturers purposly deceived in order to make a buck selling these digi toys. It's nothing more than the indoctrination of youngsters who know not better. In such and other cases, there is really no such thing as free will, quite in contrast to what people, especially the unsuspecting young tend to believe. To quote MD: ""Really? Is that because someone told you that, or because you've listened to both?""

 

[cjacek]

Guys, nothing is off topic .. It's a fascinating thread. Thanks for chiming in and Tim, thanks for your exhaustive info on the tapes.