Nice ending price ... whew!

[cjacek]

2 previous owners, couple of dozen hrs (probably an underestimate) and I wonder how old the unit itself was ?? Yet another example of units like this bidding higher and higher .....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7336760270&rd=1&sspagename=STRK:MEWA:IT&rd=1

 

[Dr ZEE]

original box must be a factor ... what else?

looks like we are entering the dark age of struggle.

 

[Seeker of Rock]

Haven't hooked my ebay MSR-16 up yet as it is still being worked on (calibration, head relap, and new tach roller). Very anxious though. Oh the digital gurus love preaching that "analog is dead"...yeah right, my ass.

 

[Track Rat]

Oh the digital gurus love preaching that "analog is dead"...yeah right, my ass.

It's not dead, it's just on life support (don't kick the plug out of the wall ).

 

[Seeker of Rock]

At least if I did, it would be ready to go once I plugged it back in....no need to reboot here

 

[FALKEN]

if you dont know how to fix these things, that price is worth it. reason being first that it is going to be shipped in the original box so when it arrives it will be in perfect working condition. I have bought 3 reels so far and only the one that came in the original box arrived in working condition. the other 2 had to be sent back because the reel tables got screwed up in shipping and other crap (peanuts in the circuitry, god knows what else). although I wouldn't bid that high on a unit unless it was claimed to be in perfect condition guaranteed.

 

[cjacek]

reason being first that it is going to be shipped in the original box so when it arrives it will be in perfect working condition.

It surely helps but those machines were not meant to be shipped like that. They were originally placed on wooden pallets/skids (many boxes at once). They were never made to be safely transported only in the original boxes via UPS, USPS, Fedex etc .... Those things weigh a ton and all that supports them is perhaps an inch of styro. They CERTAINLY will be taking nose dives from several feet, repeatedly. If I were the seller, I'd inspect the integrity of the original packing materials and also place the original box in a heavy duty (double walled) box with at least a couple of inches of hard styro panels in between the boxes. Then you could say with some confidence that it will arrive in "perfect working condition".

~Daniel

 

[analogelectric]

Wow, I'm really surprised it sold for as much as it did.

I worked ONCE with a TASCAM 1/2" 16 track (of the same model posted) and it sounded like complete crap. It was a cassette 4 track tone but with more tracks... kinda a step backwards in my opinion. That's like buying an Alesis 3630 that has 8 channels instead of 2, worthless. (again, my opinion).

When I was in the market to sell my TASCAM 1" 16 track 4 or 5 years ago I was lucky to get at least $1500 for it. I tried to sell it but I hung on to it, now it's on loan to a local studio. Hmmm, maybe I should get it back....

-- Adam Lazlo

 

[RICK FITZPATRICK]

I worked ONCE with a TASCAM 1/2" 16 track (of the same model posted) and it sounded like complete crap.

I drove a Corvette ONCE and it felt like crap. I tried to sell my Maseratti ....but now I guess I'll keep it.
fitZ

 

[analogelectric]

I drove a Corvette ONCE and it felt like crap. I tried to sell my Maseratti ....but now I guess I'll keep it.
fitZ

Just talking from experience and my perspective at that time was based on when I worked with a cassette 4-track.

Sorry if you took it personally or you felt like I was belittling the original post.

You really think almost $1200 is a good price, Rick? If so I have some land in Montana you might be interested in.

-- Adam Lazlo

 

[cjacek]

I worked ONCE with a TASCAM 1/2" 16 track (of the same model posted) and it sounded like complete crap. It was a cassette 4 track tone but with more tracks... kinda a step backwards in my opinion.

-- Adam Lazlo

No one's saying that a TASCAM 1/2" 16 tracks sounds like a Studer, Otari or Ampex but the above statement, saying in essence that the 1/2" has the tone of a cassette 4 track, seems ridiculous.

 

[arjoll]

I worked ONCE with a TASCAM 1/2" 16 track (of the same model posted) and it sounded like complete crap. It was a cassette 4 track tone but with more tracks... kinda a step backwards in my opinion. That's like buying an Alesis 3630 that has 8 channels instead of 2, worthless. (again, my opinion).

I worked with one of these in 1993. Absolutely loved it. Would love to get my hands on one, but now one on this side of the world seems to be selling!

 

[analogelectric]

No one's saying that a TASCAM 1/2" 16 tracks sounds like a Studer, Otari or Ampex but the above statement, saying in essence that the 1/2" has the tone of a cassette 4 track, seems ridiculous.

What kind of Studer, Otari, or Ampex are we talking here? I didn't mention those or meant implication toward such a thing.

Ridiculous how? So my opinion isn't valid, it's just down-right ridiculous without backing your conviction?

Just because a 1/2" machine has more tracks means there's more tone? No, it has more tracks. So everyone here on this thread would buy a 1/2" 24 track analog deck just cuz there were more tracks? Please do your homework on analog tape, tape machines, signal loss, fidelity, saturation, and so on. I wasn't trying to cut-down the original post, I was just giving an opinion based upon my experience.

It's not a wonder to me why the Homerecording BBS is touch and go for me. Some of you are so touchy and on edge about pretty much any kind of honest opinion that doesn't mollycoddle the majority.

Plus most have nothing to back up their knee-jerk responses. Some state exactly what they want to in order to get on a soapbox without a challenge.

Relax, people... this forum and most all forums are based upon opinion (or at least should be without feeling flamed).

Swimming among the minority,
-- Adam Lazlo

 

[cjacek]

What kind of Studer, Otari, or Ampex are we talking here? I didn't mention those or meant implication toward such a thing.

Ridiculous how? So my opinion isn't valid, it's just down-right ridiculous without backing your conviction?

Just because a 1/2" machine has more tracks means there's more tone? No, it has more tracks. So everyone here on this thread would buy a 1/2" 24 track analog deck just cuz there were more tracks? Please do your homework on analog tape, tape machines, signal loss, fidelity, saturation, and so on. I wasn't trying to cut-down the original post, I was just giving an opinion based upon my experience.

It's not a wonder to me why the Homerecording BBS is touch and go for me. Some of you are so touchy and on edge about pretty much any kind of honest opinion that doesn't mollycoddle the majority.

Plus most have nothing to back up their knee-jerk responses. Some state exactly what they want to in order to get on a soapbox without a challenge.

Relax, people... this forum and most all forums are based upon opinion (or at least should be without feeling flamed).

Swimming among the minority,
-- Adam Lazlo

Jesus! Who's being touchy ?

You misunderstood or I chose the wrong sentence/word structure 'cause I did NOT mean to imply you were saying anything about Ampex, Studer etc .... Look, forget what I said about that ... Here's my main point: I am shocked and surprised that you placed the TASCAM MSR-16 in the same sound category as a 4 track cassette. Sorry but that seems ridiculous on more than one level. I think it is you who has no clue what you are talking about. Check the speed on the MSR-16 and track width, compare it to a cassette 4 track and get back to me .... By its very nature the MSR will have a bigger sound and higher fidelity ....

I have NEVER, EVER, heard anyone say a wider track format operating at 15" per second has similar "tone" to a cassette 4 track, no matter if it's TASCAM, TEAC, Studer, Otari, Revox or even Fostex. Look, either you had a faulty machine or monitoring system ... anything else I can't believe what I'm hearing ..... I respect opinion but this is just wrong ....

 

[analogelectric]

Jesus! Who's being touchy ?

You misunderstood or I chose the wrong sentence/word structure 'cause I did NOT mean to imply you were saying anything about Ampex, Studer etc .... My point was that I knew the TASCAM may not have been of the same quality as say a Studer and such, HOWEVER, and this really was my whole point and reply to you .. that I was shocked and surprised that you placed the TASCAM MSR-16 in the same sound category as a 4 track cassette. Sorry but that seems ridiculous on more than one level. I think it is you who has no clue what you are talking about. Check the speed on the MSR-16 and track width, compare it to a cassette 4 track and get back to me .... By its very nature the MSR will have a bigger sound and higher fidelity ....

Yes, I am saying that the 1/2" 16 track sounded like a 4-track cassette but with more tracks, FROM MY EXPERIENCE IT SOUNDED LIKE A 4-TRACK.

Okay so lets take a cassette 4-track (1/8") so that's split in to 1/4th of 1/8" width tape. The you have 16 tracks split in to 1/16th of 1/2" tape. So what is it gaining? More tracks at the same track width, ultimately.

So you have 1/2" tape with 16 tracks and that breaks down to 2 x 8 tracks at 1/4" and further down to 4 x 4 tracks at 1/8".

Is not that the same width dedicated to each individual track when it's broken down? Seems like common sense to me.

All I'm saying is I'd rather purchase a 1" 16 track for a little more than what the 1/2" 16 track went for cuz in my opinion it's not worth what it went for.

-- Adam Lazlo

 

[Beck]

I've worked with an MSR-16 as well -- a beautiful sounding machine with a good rep. I'm wondering if maybe Adam just happened to be working with a dog -- not setup right, worn out, wrong tape, etc.

The math on the track width is right, but a cassette portastudio is moving the tape along at a mere 3.75 ips (some only normal cassette speed) compared with 15 ips on the MSR.

Plus the 1.5 mil pro tape is a different animal than cassette and the flux level, 250 on the reel compared with 160 on cassette – it’s just a big difference on many points.

16 on ½” was a project studio standard before and even sometime after digital came along. Songs and even albums were produced on the format by some pretty big names. Graham Nash for one and there’s another just on the tip of my tongue who had a project/home studio built around the format – I’ll add when I remember. Need to get some more ice for my cola first.

Oh yeah, Walter Becker of Steely Dan had a super home studio with a Fostex E-16 in Maui in the early 90's.

The E-16s were more prolific just because they had been around longer, but the MSRs became pretty common over time.

Graham Nash recorded a song entirely on his E-16 that ended up on the American Dream Album. Just happened to see the video on VH1 Classics the other day.

-Tim

 

[Seeker of Rock]

Wow. Haven't even plugged my MSR-16 in yet(still at the tech getting tweaked after purchase...not the one at the above listing btw, bought mine in late June). Hope going to a reel from cassette was a step up in sound. Anyway, I'll chime in as an owner of the MSR-16 and former recording on one (as a player in a band). The sound to my ears was deep. Given the engineer mucked it up with too much reverb and compression, but the underlying sound was good nonetheless. That was back in the '90s. I could easily work with 8 tracks, so why the MSR16 and not the TSR8? True the track width will be half that of the TSR, but I plan to double most of the tracks into the MSR, using 1/16" for most primary instruments by doing this. I will only single track a few of the instruments, likely ones where there are two separate instruments recording two separate tracks such as rhythm guitar. A typical setup may be as such:
Track 1 and 2-kick
Track 3 and 4-snare
track 5-toms
track 6-cymbals
track 7 and 8-bass guitar
track 9-guitar 1
track 10- guitar 2
track 11 and 12-lead guitar
track 13 and 14-vocal 1
track 15- vocal 2
track 16-backing vocals
So most of the tracks will be on 1/16" of tape instead of 1/32". Same as a 2 track cassette, but I would bet if a/b'd there would be a distinguishable difference between the two. Let ya know when I get it back from the tech and start tracking with it.

 

[RICK FITZPATRICK]

Hope going to a reel from cassette was a step up in sound.

Hey Rich, I used cassettes for years before and STILL do. There is no comparison except in Mr. Masaratti's brain. And you know what. I don't give a damn what anyone says, especially people like that. How many of you are doing World Class work for the industry hmmmmmm? geezus.. give me a fucking break. Here is "my" opinions.
1. If you recorded the Beatles on a cassette it would sound BETTER than the Troggs on a Studer.
2. If this was PROREC we wouldn't even be discussing it.
3. If I had the money "I" would have bid, even though I have 2 of them already. This is a machine that sold at over $7000 fucking dollars when new. I could only dream of owning one when these came out.
4. I believe for "most" of us, this is strickly a hobby, and I'll be amazed if anyone out there spends the serious money it costs to jump to "pro" level machines for a fucking hobby .....that is unless you your Bill Gates. Frankly, it's ludicrous to think the average recording enthusiast would even if he could.
5. If you DO own a pro machine, you need to make a U turn to PRO REC, cause you seemed to have taken the wrong offramp.... the heading of this BBS is HOME RECORDING MR. BRILLIANT!! If not, since you own a WORLD CLASS recording studio... you must enjoy slumming bub.... in that case, maybe you can lend me a a Mill for a burger...I seem to be a little short and I'm hungry
6. IF a consumer can hear the difference between recordings made on different LEVEL machines or formats in a POST MASTERED FINISHED PRODUCT, I'll eat the master. I've even heard a friends music who mixed to a cassette and CD at the same time. I "thought" it was a released product on cassette..and then listened to the SAME recording on his CD...it sucked. He recorded it on a 38.
7. Finally, if you have the resources it takes to get into Pro level machines, make no mistake. If you want to do PRO LEVEL RECORDINGS, then you better be prepared to build a PRO level studio with PRO level acoustics as well, cause if YOU can hear the difference between a "semi" pro and a "PRO" machine, you sure as hell can hear the comb filtering in your live room if not a 18ms reflection off the rear wall. That is... IF you have a control room with an RFZ engineering position, a less than 3db reflection off the console, and a longer TDG greater in your control room than your studio. BTW....you might think about upgrading your Mic collection too...that ole SM-58 won't be very usefull anymore. And while your at it, build in a sauna and a kitchen stuffed with goodies.. world class clients like their creature comforts......otherwise you are spittin in the wind anyway......
homerecording indeed....
fitZ

 

[Dr ZEE]

It's not a wonder to me why the Homerecording BBS is touch and go for me. Some of you are so touchy and on edge about pretty much any kind of honest opinion that doesn't mollycoddle the majority.

Plus most have nothing to back up their knee-jerk responses. Some state exactly what they want to in order to get on a soapbox without a challenge.


Swimming among the minority,
-- Adam Lazlo

Geeee, man..... yeah, you are right I guess. Here we go again.

I'm sorry, Adam, but you really DID make a very silly statement about comparing 16 track 1/2" r-t-r machine with 4 track cassette recorder and placing them on the same level. LOL. If you need me to back up the fact that your 'opinion' is silly (softly speaking) with some 'technical information, then you really should not be so self-chest-punchy about 'being a pro', man. other words, if you need some home-recordist to explain you differences between cassette recorder and r-t-r recorder, then ...well, stick around, it may pop-up.... we do discuss this sorts of things here , you know .... low level sorts of things, non-pro sorts of things... we do blah blah about this sorts of things all the time.... so you are in good hands, man.... stick around. (or did I say it already - stick around, that is - )

btw, Adam, you are pretty good in math


/respects

 

[cjacek]

More tracks at the same track width, ultimately.

Ok, I screwed up with the track width. My bad.

16 tracks on 1/2" = 8 tracks on 1/4" and that IS the same track width as the 4 track cassette. You are right about that but all the other stuff I mentioned, including 15ips and what the guys said about the tape differences etc ... is still an argument against your statement that the "tone" of the 4 track is similar to that of the MSR. Again, you definitely were hearing somethin' else rather than a well working example of the MSR.

UPDATE: I just took a look at your site .. Of course you're gonna slam anything which is not "pro" standard ... You have a couple of open reel machines there that most of us will never record with. I think HomeRecording may be a wrong place to post and expect to "talk the same language" as the rest of us.

Btw, I don't think you had a faulty machine or tape .. I really do believe that anything which is not up to YOUR standard of 2" 24 tracks and 1/2" 2 tracks is going to be dismissed. That way you're pretty much alienating most if not all of us. This is Home Recording and most of us work with, what you would call "SEMI-PRO" gear and to me this is as "pro" as I wanna get - and I couldn't be any happier.