P
pianodano
Guest
Drats. I am out of 1/4". It looks like Full Compass has some RMGI in both 7" and 10.5". Does anyone know what number RMGI is comparable to 456?
Thanks
Danny
Thanks
Danny
B
Beck
Guest
RMGI SM911 is their equivalent to Ampex/Quantegy 456. The old BASF and EMTEC SM911 is just as well if new old stock. I have all three brands… it’s the same SM911.
~Tim
~Tim
P
pianodano
Guest
RMGI SM911 is their equivalent to Ampex/Quantegy 456. The old BASF and EMTEC SM911 is just as well if new old stock. I have all three brands… it’s the same SM911.
~Tim
Thanks for that info. It's interesting that BASF and Emtec used the same number. Is the RMGI really any good ?
I'll probably need to order a case. It won't need multiple passes as on a multitrack. Mixes only.
Danny
R
RRuskin
Rick Ruskin
Probably because BASF was bought by or morphed into EMTEC.
B
Beck
Guest
Right Rick!
And some of the formulations go back to AGFA.
Sometimes I list 911 as BASF/EMTEC/RMGI 911
AND
468 as AGFA/BASF/EMTEC/RMGI 468
Danny,
The quality of RMGI is the topic of some debate, but personally I think they’ve got the bugs worked out. I’ve not had any problems with RMGI 911 or 468 myself, but people have reported some heavy oxide shedding (not sticky shed) in the past.
I think the problem has been exaggerated by guerilla marketers trying to steer people to ATR or Quantegy… maybe vendors that carry another kind of tape. Unfortunately that kind of thing goes on mixed in among the genuine conversations of most forum members.
The only thing I’ve ever had against RMGI were the price hikes, which seemed opportunistic during the ups and downs of the various “Tape supply emergencies” since January 2005.
For multitracking I’ll use either SM911 or SM468, but for mastering I like SM468.
~Tim
And some of the formulations go back to AGFA.
Sometimes I list 911 as BASF/EMTEC/RMGI 911
AND
468 as AGFA/BASF/EMTEC/RMGI 468
Danny,
The quality of RMGI is the topic of some debate, but personally I think they’ve got the bugs worked out. I’ve not had any problems with RMGI 911 or 468 myself, but people have reported some heavy oxide shedding (not sticky shed) in the past.
I think the problem has been exaggerated by guerilla marketers trying to steer people to ATR or Quantegy… maybe vendors that carry another kind of tape. Unfortunately that kind of thing goes on mixed in among the genuine conversations of most forum members.
The only thing I’ve ever had against RMGI were the price hikes, which seemed opportunistic during the ups and downs of the various “Tape supply emergencies” since January 2005.
For multitracking I’ll use either SM911 or SM468, but for mastering I like SM468.
~Tim
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
more likely by "vendors" that carry all kinds of tape....the problem has been exaggerated by guerilla marketers .… maybe vendors that carry another kind of tape. ..
B
Beck
Guest
P
pianodano
Guest
Right Rick!
And some of the formulations go back to AGFA.
Sometimes I list 911 as BASF/EMTEC/RMGI 911
AND
468 as AGFA/BASF/EMTEC/RMGI 468
Danny,
The quality of RMGI is the topic of some debate, but personally I think they’ve got the bugs worked out. I’ve not had any problems with RMGI 911 or 468 myself, but people have reported some heavy oxide shedding (not sticky shed) in the past.
I think the problem has been exaggerated by guerilla marketers trying to steer people to ATR or Quantegy… maybe vendors that carry another kind of tape. Unfortunately that kind of thing goes on mixed in among the genuine conversations of most forum members.
The only thing I’ve ever had against RMGI were the price hikes, which seemed opportunistic during the ups and downs of the various “Tape supply emergencies” since January 2005.
For multitracking I’ll use either SM911 or SM468, but for mastering I like SM468.
~Tim
Ok and thanks. Is 468 just a hotter tape or is it thicker mylar ? I am curious as to why you prefer it for mixing.
Fortunately, I am ok on 1" for a couple years but I can't help but wonder what will be avialable then.
P
pianodano
Guest
Surely you don't mean...
I was thinking duct tape for general purpose use.
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
Actually I Do, - any tape and not just tape but anything else, that was used "only once" , money back guarantee ...heh hehSurely you don't mean...
B
Beck
Guest
468 has a unique place in tape history going back to AGFA, who first introduced it in 1975. It’s a +6 class tape like 456 and 911, but it’s low-print and bias recommendations are higher, like the +9 tapes (SM900, GP9, etc.) It was made continually from 1975 to 2003 when EMTEC went bust. And now of course has been revived by RMGI with other popular AGFA/BASF formulations.
Basically it preserves the high end better in the long run, which of course is ideal for master tapes. Until recently it was the archiving tape of choice for both the US Library of Congress and the National Archives. It probably still would be if those organizations hadn’t been forced to consider digital options because of tape’s uncertain future.
Tape tends to loose high end over time even in a short time, like weeks. It’s not drastic, but enough that people compensate by adding a little more high end than they need to allow for some high frequency loss.
468 excels above all others in preserving the highs. A recording made on 468 25 years ago will sound basically the same today.
It’s hard to put 468 in a single category. It’s been used interchangeably with 456, but is also popular for Nagra for field recording and dialog in movies.
I have an article around here somewhere about Frank Zappa’s experience using Ampex 456 and AGFA 468 interchangeably. They had run out of 456 for a project, but were able to get some 468 right away. During the project the two types where spliced together at several points. Everything sounded fine at first, but then they put the project in the vault for some weeks… maybe months (I’ll have to find the article).
Anyway, when they went back to the project the spliced-in sections of 468 maintained the highs, while the Ampex 456 had lost enough to be noticeable with the tapes spliced together. They had fits riding the EQ while mixing because the hi-hat would suddenly drop out when the 456 hit the heads, but would be crisp again when the 468 part of the reel was playing.
One other thing about 468: I generally go with factory recommendations for thinner tape if the machine calls for it. For example, the Tascam 388, 22-2 and Fostex R8 all call for the 1-mil versions of a tape, like 407, 457, 207, LPR35, etc.
468 is my one exception. I will use it on my Tascam 22-2. Although it is technically a 1.5-mil tape like 456, it is more supple/bendable. Thus it makes better tape-to-head contact than other 1.5-mil tapes, which might also help explain why it’s better at maintaining high end frequencies.
~Tim
jpmorris
Tape Wolf
The way I heard it, it preserved the high-end better because people used it on 456-biased machines when it wasn't really compatible. Hence it was actually overloading the high-end slightly...
B
Beck
Guest
JP,
I think you are right. That is a factor in many cases. But even when used in a machine finely biased for 468 it does a better job of maintaining highs in the long term. Thus, it’s been so popular as an archiving tape.
I was thinking out loud about that issue in a post about 468 a couple years ago. Since the tape would be slightly under-biased it could cause high frequency distortion, which would occur with any tape that is under-biased.
Elsewhere (maybe in the same thread) I talked about why people will like the sound of GP9 or SM900 on a machine biased for 456. The tape sounds brighter, but it’s actually a distortion of the highs form under biasing. It’s somewhat like an aural exciter works… creating upper harmonics that aren’t actually in the source being recorded.
~Tim
I think you are right. That is a factor in many cases. But even when used in a machine finely biased for 468 it does a better job of maintaining highs in the long term. Thus, it’s been so popular as an archiving tape.
I was thinking out loud about that issue in a post about 468 a couple years ago. Since the tape would be slightly under-biased it could cause high frequency distortion, which would occur with any tape that is under-biased.
Elsewhere (maybe in the same thread) I talked about why people will like the sound of GP9 or SM900 on a machine biased for 456. The tape sounds brighter, but it’s actually a distortion of the highs form under biasing. It’s somewhat like an aural exciter works… creating upper harmonics that aren’t actually in the source being recorded.
~Tim