• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

What would you consider to be a TOTL pro machine?

goldear

goldear

Certifiable Audio Junkie
Obviously there are some undisputed machines to add to this list such as the Studer A820, Ampex 102, Otari MTR-15.

But which others would quality? Ampex 440? MCI? Studer A810, A807?

Also, what would you consider to be a MOTL pro machine? Tascam 42B, 52, 62, BR-20? Studer B67? Revox A700? Revox C270? Otari 5050 BII, BIII?

And what would be BOTL pro (or just pro-sumer) machine? Tascam 32, Revox PR99? Otari 5050?

And which machines that were marketed to professionals but don't even deserve to be called pro at all? Fostex? Some BOTL Tascam multitracks?

I'm looking more for an approximate head-to head ranking comparison based upon criteria such as measured performance, build quality, tape handling, ability to take full-advantage of +9dB tapes, and overall versatility. I don't really care where one machine technically fell in a given manufacturers pro or pro-sumer lineup.

Yes I know that the Revox PR99 was technically a TOTL pro-sumer machine, and that an Otari 5050 BII was a BOTL pro machine. But in comparison to each-to each other, when judged based on pro machine criteria, how do these various 1/4" half-track machines stack-up against each other?
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
Tascams are semi-pro machines, though I like them. ReVox PR-99 is a broadcast tape machine. Fostex is bottom of the line semi-pro. Otari MX 5050 B II and III are low end studio machines or high end broadcast grade machines. Here's some high end real studio machines which earned their living in recording studios.

MCI (all models)
Sony APR 2003
Ampex 300, 350, AG 440 all variants, ATR 100 series.
3M M 23, M 56 and M 79
All Studer machines
Telefunken pro decks
Fairchild pro recorder
Lyrec recorders
EMI BTR recorders
Presto pro recorder

For home use, and most semi-pro and light professional needs, the Otari MX 5050 B II or III or the higher end MTR 15 sibling make the most sense.
 
I like how the tape deck niche came up with the term 'prosumer'.

Gotta love those marketing guys. :deal:

Edit: 800th post. Time for a beer.
 
Last edited:
Dmannnnn said:
I like how the tape deck niche came up with the term 'prosumer'.
Click to expand...

well - didn't the expression appear when they needed a fancy name for decks that was too expensive for the typical consumer, and just barely could meet the need's required for professional use ? It seemed so here in Scandinavia, yet a deck like Revox A77 High Speed version, was used in very high numbers in the Danish boradcast industry, because they where extreemely reliable, and very simple to handle - totally lack of gimmicks !
(And they could be repaired in a jiffy)
 
I suspect that Kent has probably nailed the top-tier pro machines fairly well. However, I'm less certain about the tier 2 and tier 3 machines.

For one thing, how can all Studer's be in the top tier of pro machines if a B67 can't take full advantage of +9dB tape?

Also: All Tascams were not created equal, and there is a huge difference in built quality and performance between the (definitely pro-sumer) Tascam 30 series with their small motors, and inexpensive heads, and the far superior 40B, 50, or 60 series machines with their fully direct drive mechanisms, amazing tape handling, and superb heads. To me, these Tascams appear to be more impressively built, and to have better performance (and better tape handling) than do the Otari 5050 BIIs and BIIIs. The only way in which these seem to be nferrior is their lesser versatility (ei: No front panel calibration facilities, only 2 speeds, and not having switchable IEC EQ ). But in terms of performance, these are in the league of a studer.

So are all Studers really top tier, and all Tascams really just "Prosumer"? I think that it is important at the very least to make a distinction between machines which can take full advatage of the most advanced tape formulations out their, such as ATR, and those which can't.
 
One error in creating a top notch list - might be the +9 selection - i'm not certain that is a valid criteria. There where Pro decks around before +9 tapes arrived, they where not degraded to semiPro just because of that :)

Another criteria for naming a deck a Pro deck, is not it's tape handling - of course a Pro deck won't destroy tape, or handle them hard, but the question of how easy it is to do proper maintenance and adjustment. No one of healthy mind would choose a deck, where you have to adjust bias, or risk the need for adjusting the tapepath, before each run. You'd select a deck, where the head assembly are mounted on a very stable platform, not something build on flimsy thin metal frame.
( and of course - a deck, where you could be absolutely certain, it would do the entire session + the next 10 )
 
Our old Ampex 300 can't handle +9 tape well. But it don't make it any less pro for it. Many a legendary recording was tracked and mastered on one in the day. +9 tapes weren't made when she was made. Ampex made them from 1949-1965 on top of that. The Studer B 67 and older likewise. But +4 tapes do just fine. ATR Tape is really for the elite pro recorders optimally. Not all Tascams are lesser, some are truly worthwhile. ReVox decks were originally made to be domestic/ i.e. consumer machines. But they were overachievers and capable of some broadcasting work. I recommend the Otaris over Tascams in broadcasting due to being lower maintenance and easier to maintain and align. In broadcasting use, dependability under hard use is paramount, failure isn't an option, and the decks get put through hell. In a recording studio, the decks had to be able to withstand 12-16 hour a day use with good maintenance habits, and not to fail during a session, and deliver the sonics clients paid good money for.
 
The PR99 is definately a professional use machine. Has cme out in several incarnations to meet professional (etc playback only) needs for broadcasting.

Certainly not the deck of choise to use for critical tasks, like 2 track downmixing/mastering, it can however succesfully meet several different other professional needs.

And after worn out, it still can (and was typically) used as an editing/splicing station.

So several different pro needs dictate different devices.
 
A PR 99 was designed for radio station needs. Basically a A/B 77 line ReVox on steroids. Usually dependable for automation and control room work with minimal attention save head cleanings. About the only things I see are the usual aging issues with ReVox decks but mechanically it's better. Main issues at home are no 1/4 track playback capability and XLR connectors. Cost within $10 of the Otari 5050 decks in 1988 new.

Bottom of the line semi pro machines: (basically home demo studio grade)

Fostex (all models)
Tascam 32

MOTL semi pro/broadcast machines:

Otari MX 5050 line
ReVox PR 99
Tascam BR 20 and older better Tascams
Crown 800 based machines
Ampex ATR 700 (The deck which birthed Tascam, Teac built it) and ATR 800
Technics closed loop based machines.

High end semi-pro/ broadcast/low end pro

Otari MX 15
Studer B 67 or ReVox A 700
ReVox C 270

Do remember there is more than one kind of professional category. Broadcasters need different things than full service recording studios. Some broadcasters use a mixture of machines from the classes. Some lower end machines might be used in a high end studio to make tape dubs for clients to take home with them.
 
Maybe you guys can discuss which machines were used in which famous recording/studio?
Such as the J37 was used by the Beatles.
What did Elvis, Bob Dylan, up to the 70's and 80's?
 
jan_stevns said:
One error in creating a top notch list - might be the +9 selection - i'm not certain that is a valid criteria. There where Pro decks around before +9 tapes arrived, they where not degraded to semiPro just because of that :)

Another criteria for naming a deck a Pro deck, is not it's tape handling - of course a Pro deck won't destroy tape, or handle them hard, but the question of how easy it is to do proper maintenance and adjustment. No one of healthy mind would choose a deck, where you have to adjust bias, or risk the need for adjusting the tapepath, before each run. You'd select a deck, where the head assembly are mounted on a very stable platform, not something build on flimsy thin metal frame.
( and of course - a deck, where you could be absolutely certain, it would do the entire session + the next 10 )
Click to expand...
I fully admit that my criteria may not be the best ones to judge these machines by here. The problem is that I'm not entirely clear on what the best criteria to judge these by are.

The reason why I brought-up the +9dB bit is that I'm trying to make a distinction that the best of one era, while still superb in its own right, may have some deficiencies when compared to a later design.

That said: I would still love to own an Ampex 300, despite the fact that it can't take full advantage of ATR tape.
 
Last edited:
I think Kent Teffeteller gave a very usefull description of a Pro deck :

"dependability under hard use is paramount, failure isn't an option, and the decks get put through hell. In a recording studio, the decks had to be able to withstand 12-16 hour a day use with good maintenance habits, and not to fail during a session, and deliver the sonics clients paid good money for. "

While we're talking about decks here, they seem to be quarter inch decks - in a recording studio, there would have been other decks in use
 
Yes I'm well aware that larger tape widths are/were commonly used inside of recording studios. However, my interest is purely in 1/4" tape machines (machines which I could actually use), and that is why I have contained my query to these.
 
Last edited:
The Studer J 37 and C 37 would be the European equivalent of the Ampex 300 and 350 and Telefunken built a comparable class machine. Both in very common use in Europe. Motown used the Studer J 37. Scully's 280 was a machine I forgot to list which was a common studio favorite in the 1960's and 1970's.
 
Oh I remember Sun Records used an Ampex 350.
The J37 is a 1" machine with 1/4" tracks!
That must sound nice even back in the 60's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom