 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.104.110.35
What are folks using for noise reduction when recording to tape in home studio?
I am recording to blank "NOS" Maxell UD and "NOS" Quantegy 456 1/4" 4 track using both Pioneer RT-707s and Pioneer RT-909s
Dolby still the way to go? DBX still too audibl?
Any new alternative tape NRS I don't know about?
There must be something wrong with me for not having something wrong.
Follow Ups:
> Any new alternative tape NRS I don't know about?
I never felt the need for noise reduction when I had a Revox A77 operating at 7.5-ips quarter track. I suspect it's even less needed if you record at half track.
On the other hand, for $900 you can buy an excellent TASCAM DSD recorder and that's what I use now. The media is so much cheaper and the noise floor is non existent. I think DSD128 sounds just about as analog as you'll get with tape. At any rate, it's exceedingly accurate. Therefore, if you copy a tape, your DSD copy will sound just like tape. And, when I copy a vinyl record, my DSD128 copies sound identical to vinyl. The best part is the cost of media. I can't afford analog tape anymore. ;-)
Best regards,
John Elison
really depends on what you are recording and what you are going to do with it.
I have the Tascam DA3000. really nice machine for the price, but needs a better clock to really shine.
I used to do a lot of live to 2 track analog recordings. Was out at least 1x per month. Hauled along a pair of tascam 42s, a dozen reels of tape, dual mono mic pre amps, mics, stands, cables, etc. quite a bit of gear to lug around.
8-10 years ago switched to digital just to reduce the total weight of all the stuff I was hauling. first wend to CD, then to DV-1000R and finally the DA3000. 99% of what I recorded ended up on CD anyway, so was much easier.
I was once recording at a large south side church. The AC was pretty noisy so asked them to shut it off. they opened a bunch of windows to let some air in.
Recording was under way. all was going well. the chamber group reached a quiet passage at the same time the wind picked up. the wind caught one of the open windows, and blew it against the window frame, making a "BANG, BANG, BANG" which of course the mics picked up and so did the tape.
Had a number of dbx1 tapes (via a long-gone Teac open reel deck) and Dolby C (AND B) for open reel and cassette. All was well as long as I had the source components, but once they're gone -- and a number of my Dolby processors simply died over the years -- I was SOL.
Helps that I don't hear tape hiss :-)
I do have a working (knock wood) Dolby processor now, but my Dolby-ized tapes actually seem to sound better today without it in the system. Even the Barclay-Crocker open reels, of which I have way too many.
A pox on all of them :-)
I have developed a *perfect* full quality DolbyA decoder, so I know what I am talking about... Don't use NR unless you really need it... Using the compander NR systems for high quality audio is a devils bargain. I can go into all kinds of theory, but that shouldn't be necessary to give this word-to-the-wise... Decoding Dolby (and encoding) naturally create modulation distortions, and so the results will never be perfect. Also, some schemes create too much noise pumping (any DBX), etc. Even TelcomC4 has its problems (esp since the units drift into failure.) Best to avoid NR -- my project is to be able to recover the old archives from consumer materials that are actually stealth DolbyA (really cool in a way), but no matter what -- the NR systems are ALWAYS devils bargains.
John Dyson
Point taken.
Although would it not be reasonably practical to use some analog or horrors - even digital - EQ in the signal chain to correct for the dolby applied during recording?
There must be something wrong with me for not having something wrong.
Both Dolby and DBX work on the principal of dynamic range compression/expansion. Simple EQ can only do a fixed roll-off or accentuate across a frequency band.
ljb
But you may have a point. If there were any REAL interest in this subject, someone would have come up with a Dolby processor that sounds as good -- as musical -- as the best current DACs. My search for musical Dolby playback once took me to a Nakamichi NR-200 -- I mean, NAK made great-sounding gear, right? -- and it was the absolute pits.
I was listening to cassettes just this morning. A friend gave me a bunch. I ended up playing several without Dolby B, and of course they ended up sounding more than a tad bright and wiry, but at least they didn't have that muffled, flat, a-musical sound that characterizes so many commercial cassettes. Cassettes don't have to sound that way -- I have plenty that don't -- and at least part of the reason lies with the Dolby itself and the way it was handled by 1980-era electronics.
Frankly, many of the cassettes I recorded back then -- with no processing at all -- sound a lot better today than any of the Dolbyized ones. Yeah, the tape hiss was more prominent, but so was the music.
I get very VERY good results with chrome Maxels, Sony, TDK, and FUJI using dbx2 on my cassette decks. Absolutely no hiss and no pumping affects heard. I record exclusively with dbx . I use Dolby C with normal tapes that I use on my Walkmans
If you can afford 15 ips half-track you can forget NR systems. You can get a good deck for somewhere around $1k or less, like an Otari MX5050 B2 or later series recapped, aligned, and relapped, or a Studer B67 for $3500-ish. Tape will run you around $75 a reel (1.5-mil 2500 feet). Take it up to a much higher level with better repro amps, like Dan Schmalle's Bottlehead or the hard-to-find Manley repro amps.
The performance difference between quarter-track consumer machines and studio machines is enormous. I found that good digital far outperformed quarter-track tape, and I'm not quite sure why you want to base a studio around quarter-track decks. (If you sold those decks, you would have more than enough to set up one really good half-track deck.)
Of course you know that much 456 had sticky-shed. If you are setting up a home studio, ATR Master Tape is a wonder, and the RMG/Emtec 911 is supposed to be good as well. If your transport says "Studer" on it, you can use ATR's 1-mil MDS-36 tape which packs 3,400 feet on a reel.
My recommendation is to skip noise reduction, go half-track, and stick with studio machines. They are almost always much easier to work on, and designed for tens of thousands of hours of use. Get a studio machine, get an MRL tape, learn to align it, send the head block to John French for a dose of his magic, and you're off to the races.
WW
"I'd crawl over twenty miles of bad country to listen to you pee in a tin cup on the telephone." (Jo Carol Pierce)
that is interesting idea. Big step mentally - and hassle wise - though to sell my four 1/4" decks.
There must be something wrong with me for not having something wrong.
It all depends on what you're using them for, and I'm afraid I have no idea what one would do with four quarter-track decks. Whatever you're doing, if it works for you, you're all set.Most studios keep 1/4" and 1/2" half-track machines on hand for a number of uses. Printing 2-channel mixes to 1/2" half-track 15 ips tape can do real magic for imaging, but I do not suggest going to 1/2" tape. Slap-back echo can be done with a digital delay and digitally emulated plate reverb plugins, or it can be done old school, sending the vocal to tape running at 10 to 20 ips (varispeed is essential), then sending it from the PB head to a plate reverb, and mixing the plate output back in. And there are a (very) few studios who still keep their 2-inch 24-track machines ready for those few artists to like to track to tape.
It's just that consumer machines *are* a hassle. They tend to be hard to work on, and getting parts almost always at some point becomes impossible. Pro machines are much easier to work on, and you have resources like John French at JRF Magnetics who can relap or replace the heads on pretty much any pro machine regardless of age. Quite a number of suppliers are still making parts for pro machines, and the manufacturers generally keep in stock some parts for their machines regardless of age... so far.
Again, it depends on what you use them for, which is something of an unknown. (And I am curious: what do you use tape for in your home studio?)
I *can* say this: if you use tape to record and play back two-channel material, one good 1/4" half-track pro deck beats four consumer decks by a mile. You do not need NR with 15 ips half-track. On pro machines, motors and their bearings are designed for tens of thousands of hours, and now that *all* tape decks are starting to show their age, that matters. With the half-track format, you can keep print-through limited to post-echo by storing tapes tails out, which you can't do with any two-sided formats.
Pic is an Otari MX5050B2-II I restored during my studio assist days as a project to learn how to properly set up and align a deck. It was a good exercise and the results were very satisfying, despite the gazillion hours of use the deck endured. I became a big fan of Otari, as their audio performance is comparable to, say, the Studer B67, but the Otari repro electronics are far less colored. (Studer made the best transports, but their electronics had a very distinctive, slightly warm sound. It's really compelling on most music, but definitely not neutral.) I also found that parts costs for the Otaris way below Studer parts. On the other hand, once you've worked with a Studer transport, it's hard to go to anything else.
Have fun.
WW
"I'd crawl over twenty miles of bad country to listen to you pee in a tin cup on the telephone." (Jo Carol Pierce)
Edits: 01/12/20
I want that.
There must be something wrong with me for not having something wrong.
It is a highly addictive hobby, worse than some drugs. It is a true money pit.
Don't ask me how I know... :(
LOL in many ways similar to an addiction I have to admit.
But then again, we are adults, not hoarders or mentally unbalanced. We can curb our impulse buying and discipline ourselves to spend money wisely (which often means not spending at all).
There is a lot of satisfaction in self control, discipline, and wise money habits.
There must be something wrong with me for not having something wrong.
As the prerecorded tapes alone cost $400 each depending on the original source.
If a thing's worth doing, it's worth doing well
(Proverb)
...he was asking how to get best result with the machines he already has.
There is sizable expense to moving to 15ips, plus the tape cost is going to be 4 times higher.
dbx 224 should do the trick for you, and they are not expensive these days.At that price you can afford to try it. Yes, on some material you may be able to notice its effect, but generally speaking it is plenty good.
Problem with dbx is the compatibility. But it all depends on your particular needs.
For this reason I don't use any noise reduction.
Edits: 01/12/20
and dbx 150 Type I noise reduction unit that I was using with my Revox A77, Teac and or Otari RTRs. I find that type II sound somewhat a little incoherent and compress against type 1 which was a bit more open but at the expense of pumping sound intruding into the music every now and then. But it was barely noticeable mind you unless you're only focusing on it. Also, I noticed that the Otari greatly benefited from it as I've never heard it sounded so much better especially on the 15IPS at IEC equalization. I quit using them after I got my Revox PR99 MKII restored.
I can't remember selling them so I probably still have them in the closet somewhere.
If a thing's worth doing, it's worth doing well
(Proverb)
I bought it not too long ago to be used with several "Direct to Tape" rerecorded tapes that I still have. I think I paid $70 for a mint unit.
I don't use it for anything else, as I believe in purity and simplicity.
That is one of the main reasons I quit using them. Heck, I rarely use the Dolby C noise reduction on my Revox B-215 cassette deck unless the vinyl that I'm recording from has some inherent tape hiss in it.
If a thing's worth doing, it's worth doing well
(Proverb)
I know some people put their ear to the speaker and expect to hear nothing. With analog that doesn't work. I can easily listen through some hiss - unless it is very high I don't even notice it.
would agree with the comments made by Bill and Victor. If you can swing it, half track the way to go.
If not an option, and you are locked in the 707 and 909 or similar machines and formats, dolby HX pro or an outboard Dolby S encoder may be an option or alternative. Problem wth DBX is once encoded, you can only playback with DBX, not without it.
on either quarter track machine you can also make a significant improvement by taking the signals off the tape heads and route to a tube tape head preamp. Their playback circuits were designed in the days of high neg fdback to lower THD levels, so much better sounding alternatives are out there now.
Quite a few of the tube phono stages are available, and not a lot of cash. you would have to modify the RIAA eq curve to fit either NAB or IEC tape curve. so would need some basic soldering skills.
[[ taking the signals off the tape heads]]
Interesting idea, especially if the deck's preamps start to give me trouble (pioneer tape deck preamps have a common problem with corroded transistors).
I have good soldering skills. Would not be difficult I think to tap into the direct head output but noise could be a problem routing to external tape head amp.
My playback system is already all tube - Transcendent Sound Grounded Grid preamp and Transcendent T8-LN OTL amp.
There must be something wrong with me for not having something wrong.
I have two such installations, both using modified our tube phono stages. One uses single ended connection to the head, the other one balanced. Both are much quieter than the tape. Both are set to work at 15ips, either NAB or IEC. Here is one of them. In both cases I simply run the cables over the top cover panel.
Edits: 01/14/20 01/14/20 01/14/20 01/14/20
Mine was the Otari MX5050 MKIV similar to the photo above that I destroyed the electronics on it when one day I decided to use too much deoxit to clean it up. I thought I was being careful when I was cleaning it, however, I didn't know that some of the liquid leaked inside the electronics module. Needless to say, when I turned it on again I smelled something funny and then nothing... What a waste as I always loved that machine. Oh well live and learned I suppose.
BTW, the 3-prong wall socket on the wall behind the Otari is that an M.E.S DOUBLE SOCKET OUTLET 2 x 3-pin outlet 250V AC 16A I thought they only use that kind of wall socket in Europe.
If a thing's worth doing, it's worth doing well
(Proverb)
Yes, those are 240V outlets, they are actually in use in the US.
I still have the MX5050 BIII among my machines, had it for many years, and love it.
I like that individual reel size feature on MX50 and your deck.
Is the unit under your Otari an external tape head preamp that you had designed? The reason I asked this question is I've never used one. My preamp which is a Krell Evolution 202 has the tape input and tape loop that serves me well and soundwise it is better than the Audio Research Ref1 that I used to own prior to it.
If a thing's worth doing, it's worth doing well
(Proverb)
Yes, it is based on our VK-P12SE phono stage, modified for tape EQ's. The dials above the front panel allow me to adjust it very easily, using test tapes. The switch selects NAB or IEC.As far as the Tape input on your preamp, I would check what it is exactly. Sometimes it is just another line level input, just marked that way for convenience. But if it is indeed a sensitive input with tape type EQ - that would make your job much easier.
Edits: 01/15/20
as I have to toggle it off first before I could change the input again or I could be wrong. In any case, it sounded excellent with any RTR that I've tried in the past which include Otari, Revoxes, Dokorder to Teac.
Anyway, that unit you have looks very expensive...I wish I could listen to it to hear the difference compared to the one I have.
If a thing's worth doing, it's worth doing well
(Proverb)
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
