sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Best of luck getting it properly biased...
Issues with ATR tape?
- Thread starter ofajen
- Start date
Best of luck getting it properly biased...
It might not be that hard if you keep the same reference level the deck is designed for.
Cheers,
Otto
Lance Lawson
New member
Aren't you the lucky one? An occasional bad batch of tape is just reality and always has been in the 30 years I've been recording, in commercial and home environments. But then 100% in any field of manufacturing is unattainable, so we’re not just talking about tape. If any tape manufacturer pulled this off they would be the first.
Lucky? Well yes I am sort of lucky. But the problems of tape shedding, gook, goo and mush didn't become an issue until manufacturers began to using the tape formulations that have stayed with us to the present day. This isn't a bad thing but it brought new problems such as shedding and stickiness into the equation.
I recently transferred three 7" reels of pre recorded music onto CD for a cohort of mine. The tapes were recorded between 1959 and 1961. All 3 ran perfectly without shedding. However they were on a material that can be stretched out of shape unlike the mylar type tapes of today.
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
I was always under the impression that the bias level needed was related to the formulation and thickness of the oxide, not the operating level to which you set the deck; that a certain formulation and oxide thickness will require a certain "strength" of bias signal, and certain deck's bias amps weren't designed to muster the proper level of bias tone needed to properly excite the oxide. Is that wrong?
B
Beck
Guest
You got it right. But bias is more of a window than it is an exact number. Everyone used to have their preferred bias setting for a given tape/machine combo and this would often deviate slightly from factory recommendations. Well, I'm sure most people just went with factory specs, but yeah, generally speaking bias depends on class of tape. So 996, 499, GP9, SM900, etc. will require a different (stronger) bias than 456, 226, SM911, etc.
Though I don’t recommend the practice, some people will use SM900 or equivalent on a machine biased for SM911. They’re hearing high frequency distortion due to insufficient bias level, but it appears bright and crisp compared to the same tape with the proper bias level.
B
Beck
Guest
Oh trust me... I know all about that.
I should clarify… when I talk about QC I’m not just talking about sticky-shed syndrome, which is a specific affliction due to a urethane binder breakdown, not to be confused with normal oxide shedding. In fact no new tape suffers from “Sticky-shed.” But you will see certain brands or certain batches that shed oxide at heavier rates than others. Uniformity and slitting issues are the two biggest QC concerns.
All tapes shed oxide. It’s just a matter of how much and thus how often a tape path should be cleaned during a session (or not until after a session if you’re lucky). I remember when 499 shed like crazy about ten years ago, so much so I wouldn’t use it, but it never had sticky-shed syndrome since it was introduced.
~Tim
You are right. Bias level depends on the relative dimensions of tape coating thickness, recording head gap length and the recorded wavelength. Bias level setting is a sort of compromise, because low bias current gives best response at low levels, medium bias current gives greatest output for a given distortion and high bias helps reduce dropouts. This is why it's useful to have separate rec and play heads: you can optimize geometry for each function. With a three-head professional unit, best operation is generally biasing at or a few dB above the bias for maximum sensitivity at low frequencies.
Beck said what I should have said, which is that since you have this compromise going on, you can always just do your best to bias the tape and then live with the result, which might be more dropouts or more distortion.
What I was thinking of, but didn't actually say, is that you are probably better off keeping your reference level down at the design value for the deck, because you start to get electronic problems (distortion) if you run the electronics too hard. I suspect you may also have erasure problems, too. You may even run into record amp failures (or at least distortion and crummy results) if you are trying to set record equalization at high frequencies and high levels. Make sure to turn those levels down to something your machine can handle. If you're running them 10dB below reference level, but the reference level is 10 dB higher than the machine is made for, it could be a problem.
Cheers,
Otto
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
Okay...yeah...I'm aware of the operating level issues...dealing with that (conceptually at this point) with running 996 on my Ampex 440-8. After much consultation I've come to the conclusion that it'll bias the tape fine but there may be the erasure issue if the operating level is set too high so I'm likely to initally set the deck of at 250nWb/m and experiment from there.
I think what Tim said is really important too because people run +9 tape an all these Teac/Tascam decks which for the most part don't have the umph in the bias amp to properly bias that family of tape...I always tell people this as a point of awareness, not "it will sound like poo" but rather "beware that you may or may not be able to properly bias the tape, but you might like the sound." I think it is an important awareness issue. I'm glad I was sorta on-track because it would upset my mental apple-cart if I was yet again confused.
I think what Tim said is really important too because people run +9 tape an all these Teac/Tascam decks which for the most part don't have the umph in the bias amp to properly bias that family of tape...I always tell people this as a point of awareness, not "it will sound like poo" but rather "beware that you may or may not be able to properly bias the tape, but you might like the sound." I think it is an important awareness issue. I'm glad I was sorta on-track because it would upset my mental apple-cart if I was yet again confused.
Lance Lawson
New member
I've been searching for my original TEAC A-2300-SD manual that had all of the settings. My machine has 2 bias switches giving it a total of 4 possible settings. The manual listed about 5 tapes and the settings suggested.
That said back then (1979) we more or less simply bought tape. Some tape was cheap some was expensive. There was a sense that expensive was better so when critical recordings were being made we bought expensive tape. The point is many of the same bias arguments being made today could have been made back then when there were dozens of tape formulations but it never came up and my machine always sounded good regardless of which tape was used. The big issue was tape hiss more than anything else. Now that tape recording has become something of a niche market (hopefully it'll become more mainstream again) there could be the tendency for over analization of certain aspects that perhaps do not require the minute attentions that niche market endeavors seem to elicit.
I'm using RMG 468 right now and it sounds good. I'm sure to try 911 as well and ATR will find its way onto my machine too. I'll wager that all of it will sound good and if any of the half dozen or so choices we have now were to dwindle to lets say only 911 well the recording would continue and fine recordings would be made.
That said back then (1979) we more or less simply bought tape. Some tape was cheap some was expensive. There was a sense that expensive was better so when critical recordings were being made we bought expensive tape. The point is many of the same bias arguments being made today could have been made back then when there were dozens of tape formulations but it never came up and my machine always sounded good regardless of which tape was used. The big issue was tape hiss more than anything else. Now that tape recording has become something of a niche market (hopefully it'll become more mainstream again) there could be the tendency for over analization of certain aspects that perhaps do not require the minute attentions that niche market endeavors seem to elicit.
I'm using RMG 468 right now and it sounds good. I'm sure to try 911 as well and ATR will find its way onto my machine too. I'll wager that all of it will sound good and if any of the half dozen or so choices we have now were to dwindle to lets say only 911 well the recording would continue and fine recordings would be made.
dodgeaspen
New member
Be good to hear some of what you've done on your 38 / ATR combo Dodge. Why not put up a link to some of it?
Sorry I didn't reply sooner. I forgot to save this post in my favs. I'm having a hard time getting a clean analog to digital conversion on my computer. I was using Audacity and then downloaded Reaper thinking that would take care of the problem but it didn't. It must be my sound card because I can run my board into my phones or stereo and the sound is amazing. As soon as I dump to digital the sound is to bright on the highs and has a weird effect I really can't explain. As soon as I get this figured out I will post a tune.
dodgeaspen
New member
From what i understand it is slightly thicker but the guy at ATR assures me it's ok for my 38. I have also had no biasing issues with using ATR. When my machine was serviced it was cald to RMG 911 but I will never soil my heads with that junk ever again. I would go as far to say that if RMG was the only manufacturer of analog tape I would junk all my analog gear and go full tilt boogie to digital. Just my opinion.
jjones1700
Learning, always learning
Ouch, kind of harsh, isn't it?
Was it one reel or multiple reels of 911? So far, I haven't had any problems out of the 911. I do need to get a splicing block and some leader tape though. I've got 2 used reels of 456 that I haven't had a chance to record onto yet. They are one-pass recording reels. I've listened to them a couple of times and they don't seem to pack as well as my 911.
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
we all know how dodge feels about RMG tape...
lo.fi.love
Functionally obsessed.
dodgeaspen seems to have the world's worst luck, because he's had a thoroughly rotten experience with a product that thousands of other customers have been completely satisfied with.
My offer still stands: I'll ship you a brand new reel of 1/2" RMGI SM911 if you promise to take macro photos of your 38's transport after recording fifteen minutes on that reel. Gosh, I'll sweeten the pot even further and include an ATR 1/4" splicing block, to compensate you for having sullied your deck with that lowly, lowly RMGI tape
My offer still stands: I'll ship you a brand new reel of 1/2" RMGI SM911 if you promise to take macro photos of your 38's transport after recording fifteen minutes on that reel. Gosh, I'll sweeten the pot even further and include an ATR 1/4" splicing block, to compensate you for having sullied your deck with that lowly, lowly RMGI tape
dodgeaspen
New member
dodgeaspen seems to have the world's worst luck, because he's had a thoroughly rotten experience with a product that thousands of other customers have been completely satisfied with.
My offer still stands: I'll ship you a brand new reel of 1/2" RMGI SM911 if you promise to take macro photos of your 38's transport after recording fifteen minutes on that reel. Gosh, I'll sweeten the pot even further and include an ATR 1/4" splicing block, to compensate you for having sullied your deck with that lowly, lowly RMGI tape
Thanks guys for the last few posts. I needed a good laugh and I got it. I'll except your challenge!! I guess I might be overreacting a Tadd, but after 2 reels with different batch numbers I tend to think it was the tape manufacture. I was even asked to send RMG picks of my transport system for a deck that just came out of service with flying colors. I even sent picks of the q tips after 500 feet or so of use. Also, I can hear a huge difference in highs between the RMG and ATR. As I said in a previous post I have a strange noise when I convert analog to digital. That's why I haven't posted any of my recordings. PM me if your serious.
Victory Pete
Banned
The difference in highs is probably due to the difference in bias levels. ATR told me they were bias compatible but they are not. Any tape that is higher output than 456 or 911 will have to have the bias increased. I used to run 499 without rebiasing and it had more treble also, that is underbiasing, it is actually less bass and more treble.
VP
dodgeaspen
New member
VP, I have noticed the bias is a little touchy on the highs, but the mids and lows have not suffered as a result. It in all honesty it should be recaled to the ATR but I don't have a cal tape or the $$$ right now.
Victory Pete
Banned
I actually need to tweak the bias up a bit on my TSR-8, It seems a little to toppy. Even though 911 is bias compatable with the factory specified setting of 35 mv. The factory setting was for 456. I think I will increase it by 2 mv and see how it sounds. I still have plans to make that tape for you, I just cant seem to catch up with all my projects.
VP
dodgeaspen
New member
No problem! I didn't think you'd forget. BTW do you have the walls done in the studio yet? I'd like to see some more pics when your done.
Victory Pete
Banned
I havent done any construction in a month. I am going to do the rough wiring and insulation soon, I hope to have it wrapped up by Halloween. We can have a Grand Opening Halloween Bash!
VP