Tube Radio
Super Member
I do know some 3 3/4 IPS recordings on reel to reel tape (none professionaly recorded)do sound a bit better on my AKAI GX-255 which I suppose is because of the glass and xtal heads.
Reel to reel sound quality vs. vinyl..What do they mean?
- Thread starter soma89
- Start date
jviss
Well-Known Member
Thanks, a fascinating and informative post!
Tube Radio
Super Member
Very informative
krisjay
Super Member
I am not sure if technically RTR tapes sound "better" than vinyl, I know that I prefer the sound of most tapes over the vinyl counter parts. I record alot of digital files to RTR tape and I find the outcome can be fantastic, once again, technically I have no idea of the specs at work here, but I know what I like to listen to more, and it seems to be RTR tapes, vinyl a close second.
charles 1973
Super Member
When we record an LP to Tape it may be that the by backing off resulution just a hair, we filter out, or blend in some defects from the disc and smooth out the music a touch, much like sharpness on a TV set. Me I want the LP just as is, tiny defects and all. For the Record (pun Intended) I've recorded an LP on a Sony Crome cassette tape on a midrange Tape Deck, played it back, and it sounded amazing.
I throughly enjoy my LP's, and in terms of SQ I find used LP's at the record store often "Blow Away" my new CD's for whatever the reason (that's a another subject). I want a way to record them to retain that sound but want a more convient way to play them when I'm not in the mode for Vinyl. I thought of R to R too, but I also want access to specific tracks without searching for it on a tape. So Im thinking of recording them digitally at 96 kz/24 bit and playing them back on a Bryston Server to get the best sound possible. It's said it comes very close to Vinyl, unlike CD's. I want to hear it first however because that server isn't cheap. Keep in mind new LP's pressing's are Digitally processed too, at the very least in buffer's before stamping, but at a resulution higher than CD's, closer to the resulution of that Bryston server. There is no way to get away from digital in new recording's, except maybe 1 in 5,000 thats done in an analog studio.
I throughly enjoy my LP's, and in terms of SQ I find used LP's at the record store often "Blow Away" my new CD's for whatever the reason (that's a another subject). I want a way to record them to retain that sound but want a more convient way to play them when I'm not in the mode for Vinyl. I thought of R to R too, but I also want access to specific tracks without searching for it on a tape. So Im thinking of recording them digitally at 96 kz/24 bit and playing them back on a Bryston Server to get the best sound possible. It's said it comes very close to Vinyl, unlike CD's. I want to hear it first however because that server isn't cheap. Keep in mind new LP's pressing's are Digitally processed too, at the very least in buffer's before stamping, but at a resulution higher than CD's, closer to the resulution of that Bryston server. There is no way to get away from digital in new recording's, except maybe 1 in 5,000 thats done in an analog studio.
Last edited:
Tube Radio
Super Member
All you need to do is get wavepad pro and a pro audio soundcard for your current computer. I use the m audio delta 192 at the church I go to and it produces some mighty fine recordings. Once you have that setup then record in the highest available bit rate wav format possible. You will have large files, but the audio quality will be out of this world and you will be spending less than what that server costs whilst in all actuality getting the same if not better sound quality.
charles 1973
Super Member
Thanks for the suggestion, I'll look into it! I'll be doing a lot more research on the bryston before I buy it, there are many options i've been told. I'd like a seperate device not connected to my computer.
One thing that might make the bryston Server better choice is it's Analog Audio Section. No amount of digital processing will sound it's best with out a first rate audio section. It's like a phono stage. There are decent ones for $200 but the $1,000 ones sound much better. So it is with Bryston's Digital Server.
Last edited:
Tube Radio
Super Member
That might be true, but that card does have an excellent analog audio section that at least to my ears sounds exactly like the source I recorded from. Biggest thing i noticed is that card has no background noise I could hear.
I've never had any experience with that server so IDK bow it sounds
I would be interested to know just how good that server sounds though. Maybe it would be good to record the same song on that server then on a computer with audiophile sound card then play both back and see which sounds the best.
I'm one who likes to know something will indeed sound better than what I have before I buy it.
I've never had any experience with that server so IDK bow it sounds
I would be interested to know just how good that server sounds though. Maybe it would be good to record the same song on that server then on a computer with audiophile sound card then play both back and see which sounds the best.
I'm one who likes to know something will indeed sound better than what I have before I buy it.
Hendrix416
Nice Buzz/Good Tunes
What does it mean?
I don't know, it's all analog to me. One is played with a needle, the other is played with heads. One may have pops and clicks, the other may have dropouts.
I don't know, it's all analog to me. One is played with a needle, the other is played with heads. One may have pops and clicks, the other may have dropouts.
Tube Radio
Super Member
I too prefer analog, but do record my analog to my computer so I can have it on my iPod for portability.
JeffR714
JeffR714
I just added a Pioneer RT-707 to my setup and couldn't be happier I can't stop buying rock titles of eBay. As soon as I bought the deck I took it to my audio guy and had him go over the deck he went over it all and his words were "you have a excellent deck" I was lucky! I purged all digital out except my Oppo BD-103 which I'm converting all SACDs and DVD-A to analog no more 5.1.either but I love the deck
Skylab
Watcher of the skies
I certainly can relate to this
Congrats on your 707 - great deck indeed. I love mine!
Catcher10
Prog-tastic!
I don't own a single SACD and only one or two DVD-A and no 5.1.....I am good ole boring 2-channel audio only and very heavy to analog.
Have never been happier.....
ppeterso2
Active Member
I admit, I am a reel to reel nut. At one point I owned 50 machines--in search of the warmest sounding machine--Or what a great recorder adds to a recording (I know, I know, subjective...but you dig what you dig!).
At any rate, I'm down to a more manageable 20 or less machines. I have to say that some machines are UNBELIEVABLE!)
I found that out of all I owned, the best sounding machines "I" have are the Philips N4520 (you can tweak the bias A LOT to your own taste--it is one amazing recorder!), the Revox A700 (yes mine works..lol), the Revox PR99mkII, the Akai GX-400DSS (that one surprised me), and the Sony TC-880-2 (it's magic), and at 7-1/2ips, the Pioneer RT-909
At any rate, I'm down to a more manageable 20 or less machines. I have to say that some machines are UNBELIEVABLE!)
I found that out of all I owned, the best sounding machines "I" have are the Philips N4520 (you can tweak the bias A LOT to your own taste--it is one amazing recorder!), the Revox A700 (yes mine works..lol), the Revox PR99mkII, the Akai GX-400DSS (that one surprised me), and the Sony TC-880-2 (it's magic), and at 7-1/2ips, the Pioneer RT-909
Spectreman
New Member
I am very happy with my Pioneer RT-1050 two track deck, it sounds fantastic !
The Tandberg TD20 is a legend.
rollcentre
Boom-tizzz
I have an elderly Teac A series machine I started out with. This was basically the gateway drug of tape for me. I've since fell in love with open reel decks, not just the SQ, but handling tape, lacing it thru the machine. The "clunk" you hear when you push the buttons, etc. That deck is a 3.75 & 7.5 ips 4-track model. I loved the sound, but still was not on the level of what i could get with my turntable, not bad.. but just a different flavor. I was always curious how much better a 15ips 2-track machine was. I finally found one, and i must say, it blew me away! It's probably not easy finding pre-recorded tapes that are 15ips 2-track, but does it ever make sweet sounding recordings!
I think a lot of people are intimidated by taking on such a complex machine and media as another source in their system. but imho, it's worth the effort and the research on how to get the best out of it. I think everyone's vintage system needs a good open reel tape deck!
I think a lot of people are intimidated by taking on such a complex machine and media as another source in their system. but imho, it's worth the effort and the research on how to get the best out of it. I think everyone's vintage system needs a good open reel tape deck!
It depends on what a listener means by "better." In technical terms, an analogue transfer ALWAYS changes the original because it adds the defects of the source to the defects of the storage medium. Vinyl recordings have more problems with wow because they must be perfectly flat in order not to produce a low frequency affect to the playback. They suffer from rumble, more or less. Although they can have more extended frequency response than an analogue tape recorder, that extension is not uniform: both low frequency and high frequency reproduction decrease as the stylus moves closer to the center. A vinyl recording can have very low distortion, but there are only two points of lowest distortion as a stylus travels across a disc surface. Distortion increases at all other points. And, of course, there is always the problem of any debris falling into a groove that will cause a pop or click and the problem of wear from multiple playings.
Analogue tape has uniform frequency response from beginning to end, and that response is dependent on the tape speed and the playback gap size (as well as the quality of the tape that is used and the initial recording quality). However, head geometry can vary the low frequency response in what are called "head bumps," and they differ from machine to machine if the head geometry differs. Tape also wears, but the wear factor depends on the tape formulation and the integrity of the tape transport. Distortion can vary dependent on the level; but if levels are set reasonably, the loudness overwhelms most increases in distortion so that the distortion is generally not audible. The biggest weakness of tape is the constant tape hiss from misaligned or poorly shaped particles and tape/head friction. Unlike pops and clicks on vinyl that stand out from the content, the hiss is always there; but noise reduction techniques can reduce the effect of the hiss. The uniformity of playback is a major reason that recording studios chose tape as a mastering format rather than cutting straight to a disc master.
The quote above is accurate--unless the tape is a digital tape--because "analogue" is the placing of a pattern on top of another pattern. Loosely translated from its Greek source, the word means "word for word." The medium holds a pattern, and the pattern becomes part of the content. In vinyl, the pattern is a groove pressed into the plastic. Any deformities or imperfections in the plastic become part of the pattern and part of the playback. For analogue tape, the pattern is in the magnetic prints on the tape. Imperfections in the tape also become part of the content when played back. Digital (from the Latin for "finger" used for counting) is a mathematical coding process. It separates the content from the medium because the content is in a code, not a pattern. As long as the elements of the code can be reproduced, the medium does not contribute to the content. Pops, clicks, hiss, wow, and flutter are not part of the code. If they are there and not massive, error correction built into the code repairs missing pieces.
Digital recordings expose all the flaws that previous distortion and noise effects covered up. Recording engineers have to be especially careful about extraneous noise because a digital recording can pick it up. Transferring a digital recording to an analogue medium adds the distortion and noise of the analogue medium so that it sounds familiar. To many listeners, this sounds "better." It is not better in technical terms, but it may be more satisfying to those listeners.
All of the information above refers to the media under discussion, not to recording content on them. Wonderful recordings can be put on average quality media and still sound good. Poor recordings can make even excellent media sound poor, one of the problems of the early CDs when some studios transferred sub-masters equalized for vinyl to compact discs.