N00b Question - Why get a reel to reel?

[eddisc]

Nostalgia. And they do look cool and uniquely different while running.
Today there is no practical need for a Reel to Reel. And yet, there is this tactile experience to using one to record and play back music that the modern formats just can't match.

Add to this the great feeling of accomplishment when we hobbyists succeed in a diagnosis, repair/proper adjustment!!!! :thmbsp::thmbsp::thmbsp:

+ no one's gonna rip one off from your car when you stop for lunch after a GW shopping spree!

 

[mhardy6647]

Tape on reels has offered the highest possible sound quality available of any format for about 70 years.
It is only very recently that high sample rate and long word digital recordings have been able to catch up.

Ever listen to a direct to disk record? They probably give up a little in s/n (and, thus, to ultimate dynamic range) to a 15 ips two-track first or second generation tape, but they don't give up much else... and they're random-access, too!

 

[Inscrutable]

and they're random-access, too!

Like when my puddy-tat jumped on my dustcover?

 

[Inscrutable]

Ever listen to a direct to disk record? They probably give up a little in s/n (and, thus, to ultimate dynamic range) to a 15 ips two-track first or second generation tape

Which brings up a point i haven't seen specifically, at least lately ... Is/are many here going for those 15 ips 'master' releases ? Very pricey, wondered what people thought?

 

[DougMac]

Yep

there are no logical reasons. They are simply cool and sound great.

I got my first reel to reel in 1964, before cassettes were around. I still have tapes from then and need a way to play them. I have several reels of sound checks, some from AM radio in the '60's. It's a hoot to listen to the DJ's from back then.

I somehow have ended up with five decks, including my second RTR, a Viking 88 Pro I bought second hand in 1966. I bought an AKAI in pristine shape, but it had the dreaded transistor rot. It was fun to recap and replace the 16 transistors and now it sounds wonderful.

Someone compared commercial 3 3/4 tapes to LPs. I guess I must have always had a good turntable setup, because I have yet to hear a commercial 3 3/4 tape that sounds anywhere near as good as an LP. I have some commercial 7 1/2 tapes that sound great, but few match or exceed LP's.

 

[Inscrutable]

Someone compared commercial 3 3/4 tapes to LPs. I guess I must have always had a good turntable setup, because I have yet to hear a commercial 3 3/4 tape that sounds anywhere near as good as an LP. I have some commercial 7 1/2 tapes that sound great, but few match or exceed LP's.

That's what I was wondering, and probably expecting given my cassette experience (I know not the same but extrapolatable maybe)
I was wondering if really good 7-1/2 could match a moderate vinyl rig, or do you have to go to those $300 15-ips'ers to get there?
[My 'moderate' for reference is a mid-to-upper Music Hall and Goldring cart, upper would be my former Oracle/Koetsu.]

 

[KentTeffeteller]

Problem with pre-recorded tapes are. No two examples are alike in condition or sonics. And most post 1965 tapes are duplicated at 8x and higher speeds. And too many rock tapes are also 3 3/4 IPS, and no 7 1/2 IPS options.

 

[rlovison]

Problem with pre-recorded tapes are. No two examples are alike in condition or sonics.

Discovered this recently when I purchased two copies of the same tape. I couldn't believe the difference in stereo balance between the two.

And most post 1965 tapes are duplicated at 8x and higher speeds.

And there is the reason the fidelity is so poor.

And too many rock tapes are also 3 3/4 IPS, and no 7 1/2 IPS options.

Even at 7 1/2 ips the quality is poor. There isn't one 7 1/2 ips tape that I own where the sound quality can't be outmatched by recording the same material from cd or lp to tape at 3 3/4 ips on my tape machine.

 

[Tinman]

Which brings up a point i haven't seen specifically, at least lately ... Is/are many here going for those 15 ips 'master' releases ? Very pricey, wondered what people thought?

I bought ONE, just to see what my Studer can really do. And it sounds good.
However, unless you also have the rest of the system to fully reproduce what's on the tape, I'd say save your money. These tapes are really meant for high end setups.

 

[c-atle-79bay]

I just upgraded from a ampex 2000 series to a pioneer rt707, why? Meters And the pioneer sounds great too. was lucky enough to get the ampex with a dozen studio albums.

And fun to find the tapes, not alot floating around.

 

[eddisc]

I bought ONE, just to see what my Studer can really do. And it sounds good.
However, unless you also have the rest of the system to fully reproduce what's on the tape, I'd say save your money. These tapes are really meant for high end setups.

I heard a couple @ a NW Audio Society meet a few yrs back. They had THE total set-up. VERY VERY impressive. Probably a 20-30,000 $$$ set up (+ cables) :scratch2:

 

[restorer-john]

There's no real reason to own them apart from the nostalgia value and the physical interaction and fun playing with them- all good enough reasons for me!
I have half a dozen or so decks, including an enormous Teac, a lovely Akai GX-625, a revox A-77 in pieces someplace and a few more Teacs. I sold my Pioneer RT909 as part of a complete system to another collector.
None are actively in use however.

 

[04blackmaxx]

But then all of us tape junkies would not have as many opportunities to assert the positive qualities of tape, logic be dammed

Good, I cant believe how many responses there are. My preamp has a tape source in need of something plugged into it, and they are awesome so Ill probably get one one of these days but try to not spend too much on it. I suppose I could make some cool reel to reel mixtape of cds just for the heck of it and see how it sounds. The answers have confirmed my suspicions.

I never had a r2r, just a hitachi dual cassette deck when I was about 10. Then I saw Pulp Fiction.

 

[Inscrutable]

I heard a couple @ a NW Audio Society meet a few yrs back. They had THE total set-up. VERY VERY impressive. Probably a 20-30,000 $$$ set up (+ cables) :scratch2:

No longer, but over the years I've had some components that belong in that arena, and perhaps I will again if/when I get to that mythical 'last' setup. I was just curious if they are 'all that'.

Guess it's like everything else here, it's all on an S-curve and beyond a point all things exhibit diminishing returns, but our inflection points and asymptotes are all individual.

 

[Sam Cogley]

Discovered this recently when I purchased two copies of the same tape. I couldn't believe the difference in stereo balance between the two.



And there is the reason the fidelity is so poor.



Even at 7 1/2 ips the quality is poor. There isn't one 7 1/2 ips tape that I own where the sound quality can't be outmatched by recording the same material from cd or lp to tape at 3 3/4 ips on my tape machine.

If pre-recorded tapes sound bad, and tapes you record sound good, I'd suggest that something may be out of whack with your tape deck.

 

[tnmike1]

You may also want to check out Tapeheads forum. as the name suggests, it's almost solely for owners of various tape decks, cassettes and rtr

 

[GuyK]

...

Someone compared commercial 3 3/4 tapes to LPs. I guess I must have always had a good turntable setup, because I have yet to hear a commercial 3 3/4 tape that sounds anywhere near as good as an LP. I have some commercial 7 1/2 tapes that sound great, but few match or exceed LP's.

This is opposite to the results that seem to come up regularly in the classical music thread. The consensus there is that well manufactured tapes are often far superior to lps.

 

[gdmoore28]

I LOVE the sound I get when I transfer CDs to reel. But in all honesty, I get transfixed just watching the reels go round and round and round . . . .

It's one of the few (maybe only) audio components that one can watch move and do things. I get the same kind of feeling when I play in a band and watch and listen to the Leslie speaker spin. What a rush.

As a side note, we'll never see such marvelous machines as reel-to-reels again. If you've ever tried to work on one, or just browsed thru the service manual, you'll see why. They would cost thousands of dollars to manufacture now. They are old-tech marvels, but their time has come and gone forever.

That's why I have three!

GeeDeeEmm

 

[Tinman]

I heard a couple @ a NW Audio Society meet a few yrs back. They had THE total set-up. VERY VERY impressive. Probably a 20-30,000 $$$ set up (+ cables) :scratch2:

Well, subtract one zero from that price tag and $10 cables and you can see why I only bought ONE tape.

As a side note, we'll never see such marvelous machines as reel-to-reels again. If you've ever tried to work on one, or just browsed thru the service manual, you'll see why. They would cost thousands of dollars to manufacture now. They are old-tech marvels, but their time has come and gone forever.

GeeDeeEmm

And yes, Reel to Reels were electromechanical marvels. We will never see them again. My mind was only blown by the achievement of recording video on a ribbon of rust with amazing precision.
You haven't lived until you see a broadcast open reel video machine go through it's paces. Just alone the sounds the machines themselves made...

Absolute genius of design and engineering. Today... blah... all files on hard drives.

 

[mrdbdigital]

And yes, Reel to Reels were electromechanical marvels. We will never see them again. My mind was only blown by the achievement of recording video on a ribbon of rust with amazing precision.
You haven't lived until you see a broadcast open reel video machine go through it's paces. Just alone the sounds the machines themselves made...

Absolute genius of design and engineering. Today... blah... all files on hard drives.

:thmbsp:

Worked on all types of broadcast video machines over the years. It's fast becoming a lost art! The Ampex VPR-3 was about the pinnacle of video tape transports: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpEFPLKXE8w

Dave