Why Does 8-Track Exist?

[Ragnar_AT]

That's one thing that still annoys me very much... back in the days of tape, many European laws allowed you to copy vinyl and prerecorded tape as well as record from the radio for home use and for friends. There was no official number, but it was generally agreed that you could make up to seven copies from one original and do with them whatever you want except sell them or play them to a larger public. The purchase price of blank tape included a small fee that went to the music industry.

Nowadays every copy is considered a crime!

Even in the early days of CD-R you could buy Audio grade CD-Rs here that included the fee (much heftier than on tapes though, so NO one actually bought them).

 

[mhedges]

That's one thing that still annoys me very much... back in the days of tape, many European laws allowed you to copy vinyl and prerecorded tape as well as record from the radio for home use and for friends. There was no official number, but it was generally agreed that you could make up to seven copies from one original and do with them whatever you want except sell them or play them to a larger public. The purchase price of blank tape included a small fee that went to the music industry.

Nowadays every copy is considered a crime!

Even in the early days of CD-R you could buy Audio grade CD-Rs here that included the fee (much heftier than on tapes though, so NO one actually bought them).

I believe you can still by music CD-Rs which include the fee. Standalone CD burners require them - computer CD drives do not.

Mark

 

[AAA3330]

I'm sure that this has been previously mentioned, but I think that they were the best thing available at the time for portability(car etc.). They ran at twice the speed of a cassette and we're talking about a time when cassette technology hadn't evolved and was only considered for dictation. I can actually remember debating with friends in the 70's over which was better. My dad had a cassette deck, theirs 8-track decks. The main reason why I continue to enjoy them is because during the 70's a ton of pre-recorded tapes were produced, many albums of which I don't have on any other format. Also, they just seemed cool to me at the time and still do. Mostly a nostalgic thing I suppose. Not that the format is a great one. I think that we all know that the 8-track format is probably the worst with all of their problems. Today most of the tapes and decks need repairs. They are just a lot of work.

 

[bshorey]

Interesting. So the 8-track was the initial superior format, and cassette was simply developed to higher standards later.

This, in turn, begs the question of why was the cassette developed so rigorously and the 8-track left to wither as it was? Perhaps it was because development saw more potential in the cassette than the wonky 8-track design?

It also seems to be a general consensus that the ridiculous setup inside an 8-track invariably gives high W & F values as well as occasional crosstalk. That seems like an inherent defect, to me.

The 8 track had two fundamental design flaws, imo.

First, the endless loop design results in tape that's constantly slipping against itself. Eventually the tape wears out. There is no way around this. Wow and flutter is just a bad side effect on the way to wearing out..

Second, the heads move. This means that eventually the mechanism that aligns the heads against the tape will wear, cross talk will become a problem, etc.

bs

 

[RobRoy]

The 8 track had two fundamental design flaws, imo.

First, the endless loop design results in tape that's constantly slipping against itself. Eventually the tape wears out. There is no way around this. Wow and flutter is just a bad side effect on the way to wearing out..

Second, the heads move. This means that eventually the mechanism that aligns the heads against the tape will wear, cross talk will become a problem, etc.

bs

That was basically what I argued with my friends back in the early 70's, when I bought my Sony TC-30 car cassette while they all had 8-track.

Especially number 1.

 

[quaddriver]

I remember my dads huge 8track collection. He had a decent sony player and used to record his albums for the player in his gto and off of WDVE.

prblem is back then the tape was crap. the 2x speed was the only way to get any fidelity from it. in later years (around 1980) he went to a sony receiver, sony cassette and infinity speaks and plugged in the old sony 8track.

he complained the fuses in the speakers would blow from the noise on the 8 tracks. dunno how true that was but once I learned what a frequency response was, I was shocked at how no-fi they were compared to even cheap cassette decks of the late 70's early 80's

 

[1tumbleweed]

prblem is back then the tape was crap. the 2x speed was the only way to get any fidelity from it.

??? 8 track only had one speed - 3-3/4. I gar-on-tee.

 

[quaddriver]

??? 8 track only had one speed - 3-3/4. I gar-on-tee.

no no, I meant that the tape formulation for 8track and cassete was junk, but 8 track at twice the speed of cassette made it acceptable.

and lets face it, same generation, only r2r at 19cms really shined...

 

[Ragnar_AT]

I believe you can still by music CD-Rs which include the fee. Standalone CD burners require them - computer CD drives do not.

Mark

Possibly... haven't seen any in the shops for quite a while, which isn't too surprising since standalone CD burners weren't exactly a huge success here. I remember an article in one of the major newspapers here though... it recommended to insert a music CD-R, then pry open the tray with your fingernails, replace the music CD-R with a regular one and record it... back in the late 90s/early 2000s.

At any rate, back when all this was new, the price difference between a data and a music CD-R was more than the retail price of a TDK SA 90 I think...

 

[oldvinyldude]

The 8 track really took off when Ford decided to offer the 8 track in it's Mustang. That was a landmark car-EVERYbody was talking about it, and they were the Cool car to be in and seen in. Those who could afford to buy the player were even cooler. It was a brilliant product placement story.

Years later, Chris Everitt Lloyd wore a bracelet during her matches, and the "Tennis Bracelet" was born. Jewelers everywhere were handed a big gift by that exposure. Same with Nike-was it Connors or McEnroe or Bjorg? Nike took off.

In 1964, the cultural icon of that year might be successfully argued to be the 1964 1/2 Ford Mustang. And it's most popular accessory was the 8 track.

cherclunk

 

[62vauxhall]

This thread's been going on a while so I thought I'd throw a post on the pile as I started revisiting the 8 track format recently.

In 1969, I got a 62 Vauxhall Victor station wagon (hence the handle) and in 1970, an 8 track player. Thought it was a Muntz but might have been a Lear Jet. Only one tape, Beatles - Let It Be. The car was positve ground so I couldn't mount the deck. Had to lay it on the passenger floor mat so it wouldn't short out. That was it for me with 8 tracks and those tapes were really expensive back then, about twice what an LP cost.

Worked in HiFi since 1980 and 8 tracks were around but the format was tolerated, not embraced.

Not sure why, but I bought an 8 track recorder a year ago. Got it working then bought another and another etc. Tape count is now around 500 not counting those I gave away because I didn't like the artist and I reconditioned all of them.

I compare 8 tracks with old sports cars and motorcycles. Mazda Miatias or Honda Goldwings are more sophistcated and perform better than Triumph TR3's or BSA Lightniings but if you like cars and bikes, who whould not want one of those.

 

[kfalls]

The 8 track had two fundamental design flaws, imo.

First, the endless loop design results in tape that's constantly slipping against itself. Eventually the tape wears out. There is no way around this. Wow and flutter is just a bad side effect on the way to wearing out..

Second, the heads move. This means that eventually the mechanism that aligns the heads against the tape will wear, cross talk will become a problem, etc.

bs

I agree with both flaws. I worked for CBS records and Tapes starting in 1976, just out of school. I was a technician in the Duplication Area where the recording for 8-Track and Cassette tapes were recorded.

At the time we had 17 systems which included one playback "Master" unit and 10 recording units. All recordings were done on spools of tape which recorded the programs one after the other with a tone inserted in between. Eight systems were dedicated to 8-Track, nine to cassette.

All recording was done at 40x playback speed, except for our "audiophile" Masterworks tapes which recorded at 16x. At the end of each run, the 10 spools of tape were collected. One spool from a different recorder was checked by QC. Once checked all spools were sent to de-spoolig.

The de-spoolers would unwind onto a hub (8-Track) or directly into a cassette. A sensor would detect the tone between programs and cut the tape. For 8-Track the hubs would then to go another line which would splice the ends together with metallic tape (causes the solenoid to change tracks) then put them into their cases. They were then put in "indexers" which brought the splice to the beginning.

Cassettes were spooled directly into the cassette. The despooler would draw out the leader and place it across the cutting block. A blade would then cut the leader and splice it to the end of the recorded tape. The tape would then wind into the cassette. When the tone was sensed, the despooler would them cut the recording tape and splice it to the remaining end of the leader. It would then softly wind the leader back into the cassette.

All units would then go to labeling and printing, before finally going to packaging and shipping.

Another problem with 8-Track was the splice would wear out and either break or stop changing tracks. I don't ever remember having a "high-end" playback unit for 8_Track. For cassette we used Nakamichi 700, 1000 and I believe a 628Z units.

We had problems all the time with 8-Track alignments on QC units. We eventually bought drives and added our own control and preamp boards. Cassettes were much more stable. Advent and Wollensack units were used for routine playback on the lines.

I just thought someone might be interested in the manufacturing methods.

 

[michaelhigh]

To provide music in boats and cars which was simple and easily handled. 8 Track was simply a refinement of the Fidelipac and the 4 track cartridge systems which followed so the basic cartridge form dates to the 1950's. Until the early 1970's, 8 Tracks on average were actually superior to cassettes. The Advent 201 changed that and the introduction of CRO2 tape.

IIRC, from my days in radio, 8-tracks were used in radio stations to play PSA's and commercial announcements. Right, Kent? :yes:

 

[1tumbleweed]

IIRC, from my days in radio, 8-tracks were used in radio stations to play PSA's and commercial announcements. Right, Kent? :yes:

Not exactly. The 8 track, which had the pinch roller in the cartridge. was based on the earlier Fidelipac cartridge which had the pinch roller in the machine. That design was used for the original car stereos - 4 track - which evolved into the 8 track. The Fidelipac is what was used in radio stations.

Some people believe that Bill Lear's modification of the original Fidelipac - moving the roller from the machine into the cart itself - was done strictly as a way to patent a different design; and of course having 8 tracks instead of 4 meant only half the tape was necessary for an album. Having the roller in the cart also meant the machines could be simpler, as it was no longer necessary to have an arm/roller assembly swing up from underneath.

An additional comment on the tape wearing out from friction: I have dozens of 8 tracks that have had the snot played out of them, and they still work. 8 tracks fail for lots of reasons, but not that often because of "tape wearing out". Splices fail, tapes get jammed, pressure pads wear out - but the tape itself is pretty durable.

 

[Raynie]

8 tracks were horrible. I think the big draw for them was the quasi-ability to flip through different songs instantaneously

 

[1tumbleweed]

8 tracks were horrible. I think the big draw for them was the quasi-ability to flip through different songs instantaneously

If you were in your teen years in the late '60s - early '70s you wouldn't have thought so.

In a time when music-on-the-go choice was pretty much AM radio, 8 tracks offered the ability to pick and choose your own music. That was the big draw.

 

[audiojones]

I agree with both flaws. I worked for CBS records and Tapes starting in 1976, just out of school. I was a technician in the Duplication Area where the recording for 8-Track and Cassette tapes were recorded.

At the time we had 17 systems which included one playback "Master" unit and 10 recording units. All recordings were done on spools of tape which recorded the programs one after the other with a tone inserted in between. Eight systems were dedicated to 8-Track, nine to cassette.

All recording was done at 40x playback speed, except for our "audiophile" Masterworks tapes which recorded at 16x. At the end of each run, the 10 spools of tape were collected. One spool from a different recorder was checked by QC. Once checked all spools were sent to de-spoolig.

The de-spoolers would unwind onto a hub (8-Track) or directly into a cassette. A sensor would detect the tone between programs and cut the tape. For 8-Track the hubs would then to go another line which would splice the ends together with metallic tape (causes the solenoid to change tracks) then put them into their cases. They were then put in "indexers" which brought the splice to the beginning.

Cassettes were spooled directly into the cassette. The despooler would draw out the leader and place it across the cutting block. A blade would then cut the leader and splice it to the end of the recorded tape. The tape would then wind into the cassette. When the tone was sensed, the despooler would them cut the recording tape and splice it to the remaining end of the leader. It would then softly wind the leader back into the cassette.

All units would then go to labeling and printing, before finally going to packaging and shipping.

Another problem with 8-Track was the splice would wear out and either break or stop changing tracks. I don't ever remember having a "high-end" playback unit for 8_Track. For cassette we used Nakamichi 700, 1000 and I believe a 628Z units.

We had problems all the time with 8-Track alignments on QC units. We eventually bought drives and added our own control and preamp boards. Cassettes were much more stable. Advent and Wollensack units were used for routine playback on the lines.

I just thought someone might be interested in the manufacturing methods.

Thank you for this. I often wondered about the high speed duplicating process that was used for factory pre-recorded tapes. The subsonic rumble tone that triggered the machinery in the duplicating factory would also trigger the auto-reverse mechanism on Ampex open reel decks with that feature. I wonder if Ampex ever made an 8 track deck that used the rumble tone for triggering the track change? Probably not since they all came equipped with foil at the change point anyway.

 

[oldvinyldude]

If you were in your teen years in the late '60s - early '70s you wouldn't have thought so.

In a time when music-on-the-go choice was pretty much AM radio, 8 tracks offered the ability to pick and choose your own music. That was the big draw.

Makes sense :yes:

I was in HS when the 8 track and Cassette were both popular. The main attraction to me, with any tape deck, was the ability to record. Virtually all 8 track portables, and the majority of home decks were playback only. The recording ones were way too expensive.

I made due with a Sony mono cassette deck-bought for a song, from a real audio shop, was my first quality deck. Think it was a TC52 or something like that.

I (correctly) reasoned, that I could buy the LP, dub it to cassette, for less than the tape version. It was a no brainer.

So I came along when the door could have swung either way-I went for the option of recording.

 

[rnorton]

Interesting. So the 8-track was the initial superior format, and cassette was simply developed to higher standards later.

This, in turn, begs the question of why was the cassette developed so rigorously and the 8-track left to wither as it was? Perhaps it was because development saw more potential in the cassette than the 8-track design?

It also seems to be a general consensus that the setup inside an 8-track invariably gives high W & F values as well as occasional crosstalk. That seems like an inherent defect, to me.

Having once been in the business of actually manufacturing 8-tracks, I can tell you that breaking up an album into 4 tracks of nearly equal length is no picnic. Many 8-tracks ended up with different sequencing than the artists had intended. The steppers in the decks that moved the heads from track to track were the weakest point in the system and required a lot of maintenance and replacement to keep the heads even remotely aligned. The decks seldom came up to their manufactured frequency or crosstalk specs after a few months of use.

I made a lot of them and, in another job, repaired huge numbers of them but I never had the slightest desire to own one.

 

[sssmokin99]

GM offered 8-track as an option (first under-dash, then in dash- thru the dial) in the late 60's. And was still an option in the late 70's/early 80's. A friend bought a new '78 Trans Am that had an AM/FM/8track radio. He took it out in order to install a cassette unit and sold it to me for $75. The price he paid? It was $341 (pretty sure on that, lol). - and it was a very good radio. Didn't use the 8 track much, but the radio was good, and I kept it until swapping it out for an Alpine cassette. I still have that Delco 8-track , and it still works using a power supply/speakers !