RMGI EMTEC SM468 review

[Beck]

Sweetbeats: When my TEAC was new in 1979 I used Ampex, Maxell, BASF and Scotch. But it was Ampex by far and away the tape I used most. Virtually all of the Ampex I tossed in the late 90's from sticky shed as I didn't know about baking tape then. The last store purchase of tape I made was in the late 90's and it was Radio Shack/Maxell. The TEAC always played everything very well and will still play and record on the old tapes fine. Last year after overhauling the TEAC I ordered in 3 reels of RMGI 468. I discovered that I was getting lots of edge shaving and oxide deposits that made recording difficult.

Eventually I notified RMGI and I sent the the tape back and they replaced it with new tape. I will say they were great about it too. But the new later batch RMGI 468 had the same issues as the first batch and its largely because 468 is wider than anything else I ran my machine in on when new. After a lot of adjustments and tweeking on the transport I have the 468 running OK, but just OK. It will still choke on its own shavings sometimes although not like it was at first. But I think my tape future lies with ATR. My conversation with them recently confirmed that ATR is essentially Ampex and is made and slit as Ampex was slit. This is perfect for my TEAC. Its very important that my machine will record reliably every time since I will record live performances with it.

Use the tape that works for you but ATR is not AMPEX!!!

 

[Lance Lawson]

Use the tape that works for you but ATR is not AMPEX!!!

Of course ATR is not Ampex! It's ATR. Everybody knows that Ampex no longer is making magnetic tape. However in my telephone conversation with ATR directly on 11/4/10 ATR informed me that the all important slitting width is the same as Ampex. "It's the same as Ampex" were the words they used.

 

[Beck]

Of course ATR is not Ampex! It's ATR. Everybody knows that Ampex no longer is making magnetic tape. However in my telephone conversation with ATR directly on 11/4/10 ATR informed me that the all important slitting width is the same as Ampex. "It's the same as Ampex" were the words they used.

The wording you used could lead the reader to think that ATR is using an AMPEX formulation rather than just being the same width, as you probably intended to say. I thought it best to clarify. And unfortunately not everyone even knows AMPEX is no longer making tape and have never heard of Quantegy… mostly people that have been out of the loop for a while and have renewed interest. I still have people asking me where to get AMPEX 456 because they can’t find it.

Yeah AMPEX/Quantegy has always been a hair less in width than 3M/Scotch and AGFA/BASF/RMGI. I've had batches of 3M 226 do the edge peeling a long time ago and more recently RMGI. Funny though, I've never had that problem with BASF SM911 or SM468. I use them interchangeably with 456.

The only catch with ATR is they don't really acknowledge the home/project recordist. I've talked to them as well a few times when they first started production. They started that tape with their heavy duty ATR refurbs in mind. It will work on machines from Tascam and Fostex, but I don't recommend it for long term use. You can use any tape for a short time with no big problem. However, in the long run ATR is going to be hard on any so-called semi-pro deck. It’s the stiffest, thikest and most abbrasive of any tape I've handled. They sent me sample reels a few years ago, as did RMGI.

If you have a pro machine like studer, MCI, or even the upper Otari machinces ATR is fine, but I wouldn't use it regularly on a Tascam 32, 38, 48 or Fostex R8, E-16 etc. Best bet for the latter is RMGI after a relap. If no relap best bet is scrounging for NOS Quantegy or BASF.

I hate to say it and I wish it were not so, but I still beat the bushes for NOS Quantegy and BASF, as I still prefer it to ATR and RMGI for the machines I use.