• 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

Why didn't 8 track decks use 8 channel heads?

swechsler

Frog Whisperer
A recent thread from a new user trying to repair their 8 track deck got me thinking: why did 8 track decks use a 2 channel head combined with mechanical head movement, when a much simpler mechanism would have been to just use an 8 channel/8 track head and switch the channels? I know this could lead to the chicken-and-egg problem with someone saying "there were no 8 channel/8 track quarter inch heads". However, there were no 2 channel/8 track quarter inch heads until someone started needing them. It's not like they could repurpose R2R heads as those were 1/4 track, and 8 track heads are 1/8 track. And there were 4 channel/8 track heads (this nomenclature is getting confusing) made for quad decks.

About the only thing I can think of is that the technology of the 1960s wasn't there to squeeze 8 coils into a small head, and by the time it became possible, the track switching mechanism had already been developed.

Anyone know for sure?
 
Register to hide this ad
Money. Much cheaper to take a simple 2 track head and stick it on a moving doo-dad that gets it close enough than to spend the coin on an 8 track head with intricate low level switching. If they made the machines that expensive the format never would have caught on. The speakers and amplifiers in car radios never would have justified such an expense.
 
I don't know anything about head manufacturing, but I would have thought the opposite. Low level switching is easy (it was a solved problem even back then; see stepping relay), and you've got a whole new complicated electromechanical system that wouldn't otherwise be required at all. Plus assembly would be quicker and therefore cheaper. But again, I'm no expert.
 
The electromechanical system in an 8 track deck is incredibly simple. CA-CHUNK!
 
That's a lot of little coils & cores to squeeze into such a small space.
Yeah, after a little more searching it looks like that may be the reason. Even at the height of analog tape, it looks like nobody ever did an 8 channel 1/4" head. There were 4 channels on 1/8" inch tape in the Tascam Portastudio (and I believe at least some portable stereos and possibly car cassette decks with auto reverse used that type of head as well), but that doesn't necessarily translate easily into 8 tracks on tape double the width.
 
For whatever reason, it appears that complex gears, cams, pulleys and springs were cheaper back in the 70s compared to a simpler solution.
Take an analogy with a single motor cassette deck with all the above in numbers compared to a 4 motor transport like that of the Revox. These were made back then and considered to be luxurious and priced accordingly. Even adding a second motor to a cassette deck moved it up in the food chain as a "two motor deck".
And head manufacturing was not simple as well. And again, they were not available in numbers - only few studio R2R models featured 8 track heads on 1/4 inch tape.
 
Just think about the testing and the fallout effects. Packing 8 individual heads together in one package and if one fails final test the whole thing is junk. Think about trying to pull off alignment of all 8 together.
Maybe today we could pull that off, but not when we made 8 tracks.
 
Money/profitability.

As an example, I’ve got a quadraphonic 8track player. It uses 4 pickups in the head instead of the standard 2:

IMG_5932.jpeg

As opposed to the “standard” 8 track head:

IMG_8228.jpeg

Which means the quad head moves 1/2 as much as a two pickup head and uses a relay system to get all 4 programs (8 tracks). It physically moves between programs 1 and three and then uses a relay system (to switch over which pickups its using) to get programs 2 and 4. Each program uses two tracks to get stereo, which gets you to your “8 track”. Quad cassettes only have two programs (4 tracks each).

That quad head is pretty packed with pickups, you can see they are much smaller and I can’t imagine 1960’s/70’s manufacturing processes getting 4 more in there without other problems. Its a size thing. They probably could get eight pickups in there in the 70’s, but it would probably be (had been) prohibitively expensive and 8 track was really meant for cheap, mobile applications.

Logically, you would think just make the tape wider, but then everything gets bigger/more expensive and 8 track was meant to be a “mobile“ format. Size begins to work against you at some point and 8 track players were already pretty big chunks hanging under a car’s dash.

I’d guess by the time they had gotten something like an 8 pickup head rolling (manufacturing wise), compact cassettes would have been coming on strong and that killed off 8 track anyways. Making an 8 track player more expensive would have just killed it off faster. There are other reasons why CC killed off 8track (and good reasons) but thats a topic for another discussion.

You also have to remember 8 track was originally designed by Lear for use in Lear jets so their (fairly exclusive) passengers could listen to something besides the sound of air screaming past the fuselage. “Quality” sound was neither intended (nor would it have been applicable) in such a noise filled environment. Tape wind up and deteriorating highs would just mean tossing the tape and getting a new one as a business expense so they didn’t care about those issues. A private car owner would a different story though.…wallets are not bottomless like a luxury/business venture like private jets were/are.

Industry seldom reinvents something if it already works, so 8 track simply transferred over “as is” from aircraft to road cars….along with its limitations.

The other thing is that manufacturing was still more comfortable with making “mechanical” movements back then: wind up wrist watches, desk and wall clocks, kitchen/home appliances, carburetors and mechanical spark advance, etc.

Digital “trickery” was still relatively new and comparatively expensive. It was also still relatively primitive compared to today, mostly using discrete components rather than todays powerful “chips”. I still remember the first TI red segmented display calculators being a “wow” thing and expensive for that time (anyone remember spelling “boobies” and giggling?). It also wasn’t too long before that time that a computer would take up an entire room, or even a building. Mechanical movement's were just easier (Ie:cheaper) to build and control.

Even my quad 8 track player uses relays to change two of the programs and relays are electro-mechanical devices, subject to the possibility or both electrical and mechanical failures. I’ve had to pull the orginal relays and replace them with modern ones in an external network because the originals had failed. Yet anther reflection of the tech of the time being more comfortable with mechanical movements, meaning it was more affordable to build. An 8 pickup head would at least double the twin relays and associated circuit components. Which would mean more design, more components and circuits, more points for failure.

And with that we’re back to the “money/profitability” reasons.

8 track just carried within its very design the seeds of its own failure. 8 pickup heads would have just sped that demise up.

To say nothing of all the 8 track tape you’d find tossed by the roadside in the 70’s because it had balled itself up in the player and had to be literally “ripped” to get the cart back out….:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
The mechanical aspect of 8 track players wasn't usually all that complex, definitely less than any car tape deck I've been inside. The ones I've been inside of were just a solenoid with a ratchet pawl that pulled on a cam. The head was attached to a plate that rode on the cam and was held there with a spring. 4 steps on the cam for programs 1-4. Each operation of the solenoid indexed the cam around 1/4 turn so the head was pushed up. Once it got back around to the start a spring shoved it back down to position 1. Its mostly all simple stamped sheet metal, and the solenoid is pretty much what a door bell uses. Drive is a belt-driven capstan from a motor and a pinch roller. The belt and pinch roller are probably the most fragile parts inside the whole thing.

Portable and car cassette decks have the reel tables and clutches and the mechanism to drive all that off a single motor, and to switch it into fast forward mode at least. Auto reverse and ones with rewind have more junk yet. Some of the auto-reverse decks physically move the head, some switch pickup coils, depends on the design.

As for low level switching, yes it can be done but consider the usual environment. Cars and other portable applications. Wee little fragile relays in something bouncing down the road is not really a great idea. The solenoid and cam may not be as technically optimal but its more likely to work, and most consumers are more likely to notice their device not working on one channel than having a slight azimuth misalignment from a sloppy mechanical design.
 
Magnavox 8-track player (weighs about 5 pounds) into a 1971 Magnavox console. Another way it's simple is there is no power switch, pop the tape in and it turns on.

 
I miss dad's 8 tracks!!! Now I want one!!

Thanks a lot :rolleyes:
Only reason I have one.

I remember Dad's favorite cartridge was ELO greatest hits. I remember him driving home at night in the Cutlass Supreme 442 with that playing while I laid on the rear package tray and watched the stars go by.

I hunted one down and that's all I play in my quad 8 track player.

"Kachunk"


Ah, memories.....:)

Was kinda fun rebuilding the old 8 track player too. It was different.
 
I worked in the industry from 1978 - 1982 (the virtual end of 8-tracks) and the limits were already kind of being pushed with the quad heads as far as tolerances. 8 gaps/coils could have been engineered, considering what was done with cassette heads but the standards were in place.

The coming end of the 8-track format was pretty obvious by the late seventies and they weren't about to redo the whole thing.

Doug
 
A recent thread from a new user trying to repair their 8 track deck got me thinking: why did 8 track decks use a 2 channel head combined with mechanical head movement, when a much simpler mechanism would have been to just use an 8 channel/8 track head and switch the channels? I know this could lead to the chicken-and-egg problem with someone saying "there were no 8 channel/8 track quarter inch heads". However, there were no 2 channel/8 track quarter inch heads until someone started needing them. It's not like they could repurpose R2R heads as those were 1/4 track, and 8 track heads are 1/8 track. And there were 4 channel/8 track heads (this nomenclature is getting confusing) made for quad decks.

About the only thing I can think of is that the technology of the 1960s wasn't there to squeeze 8 coils into a small head, and by the time it became possible, the track switching mechanism had already been developed.

Anyone know for sure?
Because 8 track, 2 channel heads on 1/4" tape was expensive then, and difficult to do with any degree of azimuth accuracy was difficult to do at affordable prices for consumers. Remember, then in studios 8 track in one direction involved 1" wide tape at 15 or 30 IPS; which were coming into standard studio use in 1965-1966.
 
I don't know anything about head manufacturing, but I would have thought the opposite. Low level switching is easy (it was a solved problem even back then; see stepping relay), and you've got a whole new complicated electromechanical system that wouldn't otherwise be required at all. Plus assembly would be quicker and therefore cheaper. But again, I'm no expert.
8 channel heads with that small of track width, was darned near impossible with the head technology then. That was at any price. And have any kind of decent cross talk performance. Not affordable to do, for consumer prices in that era. The ramp system for track changing on Stereo 8, was affordable, decent if aligned right. And cost effective enough that the Stereo 8 format would be a success. Stereo 8 was a major revolution in terms of narrow tape track performance.
 
Only reason I have one.

I remember Dad's favorite cartridge was ELO greatest hits. I remember him driving home at night in the Cutlass Supreme 442 with that playing while I laid on the rear package tray and watched the stars go by.

I hunted one down and that's all I play in my quad 8 track player.

"Kachunk"


Ah, memories.....:)

Was kinda fun rebuilding the old 8 track player too. It was different.
A virtual salute and "KerChunk" back at cha. Program #2 now playing.
 
When I used to make my own tapes, I always made sure the program changes were between tracks. The manufacturing of commercial tapes didn't have that luxury, I guess.

Some of the commercial tapes were absolutely horrible. Many with hard plastic "pinch rollers".

Most of my friends, upon listening to my 8-tracks in my '71 Buick LeSabre, into which I had installed 8" woofers and separate tweeters and a power amp to supplement the player, would exclaim, "This is 8-track? It's all there!"

Doug
 
When I used to make my own tapes, I always made sure the program changes were between tracks. The manufacturing of commercial tapes didn't have that luxury, I guess.

Some of the commercial tapes were absolutely horrible. Many with hard plastic "pinch rollers".

Most of my friends, upon listening to my 8-tracks in my '71 Buick LeSabre, into which I had installed 8" woofers and separate tweeters and a power amp to supplement the player, would exclaim, "This is 8-track? It's all there!"

Doug
Depends on the label I guess. Some maneuvered the song layout to miss the sense tape section. My ELO greatest hits 8 track tape is like that. The songs are arranged slightly differently (ie: order) between my vinyl copy and the 8 track one.

But I'm guessing in some cases (depending on song lengths) it might have been "unavoidable"....
 
Guy I used to work with told me about his switch from 8 track to cassette. I forget what song he specifically mentioned but it was one of those long ones that had a program change in the middle of it. He bought a cassette deck for the car and got the same album on cassette, only to find that apparently, they still split that song across 2 sides of the tape.

I don't know if thats a BS story or not but I thought it was pretty funny at the time.
 
Back
Top Bottom