what reel size position is better for the machine?
- Thread starter 100LL
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
It does not make much of a difference, the small setting gives a slightly reduced tape tension and that's it. Both settings will give a good spooling, if this is your only goal I would go for the small reel setting for a (very slightly) reduced head wear.
Incidentally, I made extensive w&f and frequency response measurements in both settings, and did not find differences worth mentioning. With 5" reels, the setting does matter, but then the Revox is not really made for smaller reels than 7", it is best to transfer them onto 7", AEG or NAB hub to avoid higher w&f towards the end of tape. Note that my tests with higher end machines with regulated tape tension did not always give better results.
Incidentally, I made extensive w&f and frequency response measurements in both settings, and did not find differences worth mentioning. With 5" reels, the setting does matter, but then the Revox is not really made for smaller reels than 7", it is best to transfer them onto 7", AEG or NAB hub to avoid higher w&f towards the end of tape. Note that my tests with higher end machines with regulated tape tension did not always give better results.
It does not matter
Blue Shadow
Waiting for Vintage Gear from this century
I'd use the small setting for the first reel and the large when you put the second reel onto the big reel
twiiii
Lunatic Member
Remember to store the tape tails out. Then place the stored tape on the feed side when recording. If stored for a long period rewind the tape and replay the tape and place the tape on the feed reel before recording. If you are using 2 trk format always store the recorded tape tails out and then rewind before playing. If 1/4 trk tape then play it in both directions before storing the tape. Do not play the tape in one direction only and then rewind and store the tape. Play it both directions. Revox roller bearing guides which I used on both feed and take up sides aren't that accurate and at high speed the tape can shift back and forth almost nudging or nudging the reel flanges which can cause tape drop outs on channels 1 and 4 with 1/4 trk tapes. Thats one of the reasons I only used 2 trk format for reel to reel tape machines. Plus I got better signal to noise, better dynamic range by being able to place more signal on the tape using 2 trk. I never used 10 1/2 inch plastic reels as they had a tendency to have warped flanges. Pre-recorded tape albums used cheap plastic reels and I ended up replacing most of then. 3 3/4 ips prerecorded tapes were always stored on 7 in reels with the 10 1/2 diameter center hub to prevent tape tensions from varying to much as with the standard 7 inch reel hub diameter. IF a 7 1/2 ips album would fit on to a large hub 7 inch reel I would do that, too, to decrease the chances on damaging 1/4 track pre-recorded tape.
Back in the days of acetate recording tape you had to be very careful. I absolutely refused to use .5 Mil tape. Until back coated mylar came along I only used 1.5 mil acetate tape. Then when Mylar came alomg all acetate tapes were dubbed to mylar.
My chief engineer at the radio station preferred Acetate tapes for a long time before he accepted back coated mylar. He preferred the clean break that acetate afforded and the tape could easily be spliced back together. Mylar usually stretched first before breaking and therefore the recorded tape could not be used if spliced back together.
Tape was such a pain in the neck. I am glad that tape is basically gone. That goes for video tape and cassette and DAT and all other formats. The sound could be fantastic, but tape was more of a headache than Lp's in my book. If you don't play a record, it doesn't wear out, where tape just continues to self destruct.
Back in the days of acetate recording tape you had to be very careful. I absolutely refused to use .5 Mil tape. Until back coated mylar came along I only used 1.5 mil acetate tape. Then when Mylar came alomg all acetate tapes were dubbed to mylar.
My chief engineer at the radio station preferred Acetate tapes for a long time before he accepted back coated mylar. He preferred the clean break that acetate afforded and the tape could easily be spliced back together. Mylar usually stretched first before breaking and therefore the recorded tape could not be used if spliced back together.
Tape was such a pain in the neck. I am glad that tape is basically gone. That goes for video tape and cassette and DAT and all other formats. The sound could be fantastic, but tape was more of a headache than Lp's in my book. If you don't play a record, it doesn't wear out, where tape just continues to self destruct.
Last edited:
This advice probably sounds odd without explaining the reason, so I'll elaborate. The reason for doing this is that all the recorded tapes develop print-through, which creates a faint copy of the recorded signal from one turn of the spooled tape to the former one and to the next one. This is audible as an echo and a pre-echo. For some reason the print-through is stronger on the inner neighbouring turn than on the outer one, so you mostly hear a pre-echo, which is unnatural. One way to solve the problem is to store the tape tail out in order to promote the echo instead of the pre-echo, another way is to wind and rewind the tape from time to time, which smears the print-through as the new turns will not be exactly at the same places as the former ones, so both echo and pre-echo are reduced. Note that on B-wind machines - the old European broadcast recorders that played the tape oxide-out instead of oxide-in - the tape should be stored tails-in instead of tails-out.
The Revox in & out tape guides are not the best on the market, no doubt about that. However I definitely don't blame them for the tape going up and down at high speed. I blame the tape itself, and more specifically the slitting. Evidence of this is that the same tapes that don't pack evenly on my Revoxes, don't pack evenly on my broadcast recorders either. Conversely, the tapes that pack evenly on my broadcast recorders, also pack very evenly on my Revoxes. Experience has taught me and many others that the European tapes (Agfa, Basf, Emtec, RMG and RTM) pack well at high speed, while 3M and Ampex/Quantegy are prone to winding problems leading to almost systematic tape spillage when fast winding. BASF produced a video showing the difference on a Studer, I will find the link for you if you want. Common wisdom is that the different slitting quality is due to the widespread use of flangeless AEG hubs in Europe, which are unforgiving to packing problems.
My tests on both 1/2 track and 1/4 track have shown that the Revox guides are only related to a phase fluctuation higher than on a broadcast recorder, but this minor issue can be solved rather easily.
More specifically, consumer 1/2-track (2 mm wide) is 3 dB less noisy than 1/4 track (1 mm wide). Wide tracks (2.75 mm wide) add an extra 1.4 dB at the cost of slightly reduced channel separation.
My experience is exactly the opposite: metal reels were almost all warped due to shocks after being used for a while, whereas the plastic reels remained flat. I don't use cheapies, only good quality reels made by Agfa, which probably explains our different experiences with plastic reels.
Last edited:
twiiii
Lunatic Member
if you don't abuse metal reels they will last for ever. Of course tape should be stored vertically like Lp's to prevent issues. I never had an issue with a metal reel I bought loaded or unloaded new from Ampex, Scotch, or Maxell. Maybe I was just lucky. Didn't matter if I was using Revox, Crown , Ampex or Studer Recorders.
I started storing mine tail out because I notice on my Sony, if I rewind a reel the tape doesn't pack neatly. Not sure if thats just an issue with the machine or what but instead of a nice flat reel it has random high and low spots. The takeup reel lays nice and flat after playing though.
