Hmm, strange problem with new RMG SM468 tapes...

I think the point was, if I understand correctly, that the OP didn't have the said problems with 456 on the same machine so.... I don't think it's the machine but the tape and, it has nothing to do with the bias requirements or such thing but rather the integrity of the said tape. That's why it was suggested to look into tape replacement of the suspect SM468 RMGI batch number. That said, 468 is a fine tape to use on just about any machine.
 
lo.fi.love said:
I disagree wholeheartedly. I'm currently tracking on 1/2" BASF PEM468 with my Tascam 48 8-track machine and it's an absolute dream.
Click to expand...

Well we'll in 2 different leagues here. You hav BASF 468 not RMGI 468. My deck raun BASF fine and always has. Also you're running 1/2" and I'm running 1/4" The slitting of RMGI468 1/4" is actually a bit wider than every other non BASF tape and wider than some batches of BASF tape. 468 creates 2 problems for my TEAC A-2300SD. The first issue is the wide slitting. It causes my guides and lifters to shave the edges of the tape and all those shavings not only make a mess but they foul the heads creating horrendous dropouts in the form of almost dead silent segments. The other issue is the thickness of the tape. A consumer machine like mine was designed to run on thinner tape. My TEAC was run in using Ampex and it's heads and guides are worn in to the narrower slitting that virtually all of the other tape brands used.

I was told by RMGI that my best recourse was to have the entire tape transport relapped to accomadate the RMGI slitting width. The thinner LPR-35 runs well in my deck. The LPR-35 is just as wide as 468 but because its thinner it makes less of a shaving mess and the heads don't foul up from it. Lastly the 468 I had shed a lot of oxide, way more than anything I've ever used. I will continue to avoid 468.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top