Mark7
Well-known member
I'm asking on behalf of a friend 
R
RRuskin
Rick Ruskin
It should have no problem with 1.5 mil tape. 1 mil might yield slightly better measured performance but not to the point you'd actually hear any difference.
Mark7
Well-known member
Thanks. I'll let him know
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
It was *designed* around "1.5mil" tape. What thickness can it "handle"? Well, that's kind of dubious...I mean, sky's the limit until it either doesn't fit or is so stiff it doesn't properly snake through the path you know? Thicker tape will (arguably and to possibly indeterminable degrees) have a detrimental effect on the wear of tape path components.
Is this another one if those "can I use ATR Magnetics tape on my machine" questions?
If so, the answer is "yes" you can use that tape, and you will encounter differing opinions on whether or not there will be any long-term effects from it. This is of course of more concern if the machine is being used 8 hours a day year-round. For the recreational user, heads last a looooong time.
If the background story on this inquiry DOES have to do with the use of super high output tape on that machine, the more important question on my mind is "why?" If the answer is " because I want super hot tape compression" then your friend is barking up the wrong tree. If its "tape compression" (tape distortion) that he/she is after then it'd be best to stick with +6 tape or even +3 tape end experiment with some different operating levels (like 200 to 250nWb/m with the +3 tape for instance). Keep in mind also that with the narrow track width and dbx n/r on the MSR16, you *have* to keep your levels conservative anyway...slamming tape on that format with dbx engaged is asking for tracking errors.
If dbx is NOT going to be used, and your friend is looking to increase headroom with a super high output tape (i.e. get some distance from the noise floor), keep in mind there is a greater issue with cross talk and electronics clipping on a machine like that.
I see the more narrow format machines as VERY effective *systems*...not as flexible as a wider format machine BUT VERY effective and economical when used within some wise parameters. If I wanted to increase tape distortion effects on an MSR16 I'd try +3 tape at maybe 220nWb/m with dbx in.
More than you were asking, and quite possibly totally off track. My apologies if so. I've just seen this question before and the root driver behind it...so, sorry if my assumption is in error and hopefully you got something of an answer in all that.
Is this another one if those "can I use ATR Magnetics tape on my machine" questions?
If so, the answer is "yes" you can use that tape, and you will encounter differing opinions on whether or not there will be any long-term effects from it. This is of course of more concern if the machine is being used 8 hours a day year-round. For the recreational user, heads last a looooong time.
If the background story on this inquiry DOES have to do with the use of super high output tape on that machine, the more important question on my mind is "why?" If the answer is " because I want super hot tape compression" then your friend is barking up the wrong tree. If its "tape compression" (tape distortion) that he/she is after then it'd be best to stick with +6 tape or even +3 tape end experiment with some different operating levels (like 200 to 250nWb/m with the +3 tape for instance). Keep in mind also that with the narrow track width and dbx n/r on the MSR16, you *have* to keep your levels conservative anyway...slamming tape on that format with dbx engaged is asking for tracking errors.
If dbx is NOT going to be used, and your friend is looking to increase headroom with a super high output tape (i.e. get some distance from the noise floor), keep in mind there is a greater issue with cross talk and electronics clipping on a machine like that.
I see the more narrow format machines as VERY effective *systems*...not as flexible as a wider format machine BUT VERY effective and economical when used within some wise parameters. If I wanted to increase tape distortion effects on an MSR16 I'd try +3 tape at maybe 220nWb/m with dbx in.
More than you were asking, and quite possibly totally off track. My apologies if so. I've just seen this question before and the root driver behind it...so, sorry if my assumption is in error and hopefully you got something of an answer in all that.
Blue Jinn
Rider of the ARPocalypse
sweetbeats;4108516 quite possibly totally off track.[/QUOTE said:Was that pun with or without dbx?
I had to run out and get me one of those machines, because I always wanted 16 tracks. The benefits/tradeoffs of narrow track w/ dbx has always been a consideration. One interesting anecdote, my 38 will accommodate plastic reels, whereas the MSR-16 won't. The reel tables don't seem to be off on either one.
witzendoz
Senior Member
The MSR16 is a very good machine, however I would not dream of using one without the noise reduction in?
Alan
Alan
B
Beck
Guest
1.5 mil is the recommended. It's biased for 406/456 compatible and that is what Tascam intended to be used with the stock settings. +9 tape like Ampex 499 and Scotch 996 weren't on the market yet when the MSR-16 came out. dbx makes different tape sound more or less the same, with some very subtle nuances. Since dbx makes print through almost nonexistent you can use 1-mil versions as well, like 407, 457, etc. Ampex 456 is traditionally recommend for the MSR/TSR series. Scotch 226 was also at the time, but since then has gained a bad reputation for one of the worst sticky-shed tapes ever, so you'll want to pass on 226... even brand new old stock. 206/207 is great however.
Mark7
Well-known member
I'd imagine that he'd want to try some tape compression (he told me he liked it). But he (Jon) was thinking of doing that on a half track machine and bouncing to the MSR.
B
Beck
Guest
It's difficult to get true tape compression with dbx, but on the other hand dbx lends a certain warmth that is associated with compression. I like the sound of it on narrow-track machines.
sweetbeats
Reel deep thoughts...
I agree with Beck on the sound of dbx n/r. TOTALLY subjective but it thickens the sound to my ears.
Based on what you are saying of your friend, Mark7, I'd really consider a +3 tape then at some elevated level above SOL for that tape type...something less than 250nWb/m but more than 185nWb/m with dbx, and then keep levels at or near "0" for the sake of the dbx. The machine will be operating well within its intended specification, all the advantages of the dbx processing will be retained which are important for that format, but the tape itself will be pushed closer to its MOL as compared to a +6 tape and the machine being set at "0" = 250nWb/m.
My 2p
YMMV
Based on what you are saying of your friend, Mark7, I'd really consider a +3 tape then at some elevated level above SOL for that tape type...something less than 250nWb/m but more than 185nWb/m with dbx, and then keep levels at or near "0" for the sake of the dbx. The machine will be operating well within its intended specification, all the advantages of the dbx processing will be retained which are important for that format, but the tape itself will be pushed closer to its MOL as compared to a +6 tape and the machine being set at "0" = 250nWb/m.
My 2p
YMMV