Quantegy 406?

  • Thread starter Thread starter James K
  • Start date Start date
J

James K

Member
Hi,
I've always used Quantegy 456 and more recently RMGI SM911to record on and I've been very happy with the results. However, now I'm using a Tascam MS16 I'm considering using Quantegy 406 due to the price difference. How does this compare to the other two tapes? Any comments would be great.

Cheers
James
 
I have used them interchangeably, though I probably shouldn't do. I'm not sure they're bias compatible.
If they're the pancakes that Carousel are selling, what are you doing for flanges? I figure that would eat into the savings on the pancake, though it looks like it still might be £20 less even then.
 
I've got a load of sticky Ampex reels I can use the flanges off. I'm temped just to give it a try. What difference would I notice in sound?
 
That I can't really answer. I didn't really notice the difference myself, at least with DBX engaged. I figured it would have a higher noise floor and it may have done, but I couldn't really tell.
But a trained ear might pick out problems which I couldn't (it took me a long, long time before I was able to hear bias problems, for instance).
 
James K said:
Hi,
I've always used Quantegy 456 and more recently RMGI SM911to record on and I've been very happy with the results. However, now I'm using a Tascam MS16 I'm considering using Quantegy 406 due to the price difference. How does this compare to the other two tapes? Any comments would be great.

Cheers
James
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that 406 requires less bias than 911. Assuming you don't recalibrate your machine, you can expect less headroom and a duller top-end. If you do recalibrate and respect the operating level differences between the 2, things should sound fine. If you use dbx I and respect it's parameters, the differences will be even less noticeable.
 
Per the place I used to buy tape from and elsewhere I've heard 406 and 456 are bias compatible and can be used interchangeably, except for operating level: 456 can take +3dB more signal. I have a case of 406 and did my most recent bit of tracking on it I liked the sound. I guess it's maybe not as bright sounding as 456, but I don't think I have that critical of an ear. I did use dbx though.
 
Blue Jinn said:
Per the place I used to buy tape from and elsewhere I've heard 406 and 456 are bias compatible and can be used interchangeably, except for operating level: 456 can take +3dB more signal. I have a case of 406 and did my most recent bit of tracking on it I liked the sound. I guess it's maybe not as bright sounding as 456, but I don't think I have that critical of an ear. I did use dbx though.
Click to expand...

Yeah. It's got a lower threshold for when those "tapey" artifacts start kicking in. It's much easier to hit the tape hard without having to hit your electronics too hard - easier to hit that sweet spot between "too accurate" of a sound, and ugly tape distortion - that little sweet spot where there's just a bit of compression in the sound. I think you'll like it- I know I do.
 
Blue Jinn said:
Per the place I used to buy tape from and elsewhere I've heard 406 and 456 are bias compatible and can be used interchangeably, except for operating level: 456 can take +3dB more signal. I have a case of 406 and did my most recent bit of tracking on it I liked the sound. I guess it's maybe not as bright sounding as 456, but I don't think I have that critical of an ear. I did use dbx though.
Click to expand...


"Compatible" is not the same as identical. One of the tricks to make 456 come back a bit brighter and have more headroom is to align with 406 but then use 456. I've done so myself and it worked like a charm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top