LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  December 2006

ARSCLIST December 2006

Subject:

Re: Yahoo discussion group for Scully tape machines

From:

Rod Stephens <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 7 Dec 2006 11:18:14 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (90 lines)

I purchased a used Scully 280 4/2 track in 1998 for Family Theater in 
Hollywood for use in transferring 1/4" masters to digital.   It came 
with manuals and plug in 2 and 4 track head stacks and a 1/2" alignment 
tape.   The project has finished, so it remains there in the downstairs 
vault.   It worked fine except for a small off speed playback which had 
to be corrected.   It's still there while I've since moved to northern 
California with my own Teac A-6100 "Master Recorder" deck I use for 
remastering.

Rod Stephens

Tom Fine wrote:

> I think another factor is that few Scully machines survived. I've 
> never used one so I can't comment on their reliability or durability. 
> I've only seen two working, and one of them is Steve's.
>
> That said, I can name at least two studios with Scully machines in 
> service for at least part of the 60's.
>
> 1. Stax -- numerous pictures show Scully 4-track in the control room 
> when they were still mixing to mono on an Ampex AG-350. There may have 
> been a Scully or Ampex 2-track elsewhere in the control room in the 
> pictures I've seen.
>
> 2. Fine Recording -- Scully 8-track installed in Studio B in 1967, 
> along with one of the first Audio Design and Manufacturing modular 
> solid-state consoles. Later swapped or upgraded to a Scully 12-track. 
> I don't think the Scully machines were in service very long, may have 
> been leased. Walter Sear's Moog room upstairs had an Ampex AG-440B-8. 
> When Studio A was rebuilt in 1969 for 16-track, it was with Ampex 
> MM-1000's and a huge ADM board featuring early routing automation.
>
> I've also heard of Scully machines in several different radio 
> stations. From what the Ampex veterans tell me, Ampex basically shut 
> down manufacturing for a year or more while moving the facilities to a 
> new factory. Furthermore, the 300/350 type machines, updated in an 
> early solid-state design with AG-300/AG-350, were very long in the 
> tooth by the mid-60's -- and the MR-70 was a bomb in the market due to 
> too-high price. Here comes Scully with a new machine and more modern 
> solid-state designs at a time when Ampex was producing zero machines, 
> and priced competitively with good leasing terms from what I've been 
> told. Zappo, they get a toe-hold, especially in the northeast near 
> their Connecticut base (remember that many northeast studios already 
> had Scully cutting lathes). Then in 1967, Ampex finally gets back in 
> the market with the AG-440, which was a very durable machine with then 
> modern solid-state design, and priced to be in the heart of the 
> market. I believe Scully was out of the tape machine business less 
> than 5 years later. Remember also that in the late 60's/early 70's 
> era, 3M was working hard to sell tape machines outside of the West 
> Coast (they did get a small toe-hold in some northeast studios, but 
> Ampex was still king). Then Studer and MCI came along by the late 
> 70's. Most 80's and onward upgrades or new studios I saw in NYC had 
> Studer tape machines, a few MCI's.
>
> Question for Steve P -- do you have any idea how many 12-track session 
> tapes there are out there? How many studios actually used 12-tracks? 
> It was actually a forward-looking format (precursor to 24-track with 
> roughly same specs), but didn't have time to catch on before 16-track 
> appeared.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Olhsson" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 8:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Yahoo discussion group for Scully tape machines
>
>
>> Steve Puntolillo writes:
>>
>>> There is a puzzling lack of information on the web about Scully
>>> professional tape recorders.
>>
>>
>> It's not that puzzling to me. They only had around a five year heyday 
>> 40 years ago in maybe a hundred US music recording studios. Scullys 
>> had mostly been replaced by Ampex and 3M 2" machines by the time 
>> recording studios became a common part of popular culture. Everybody 
>> had to build their own one-off recording consoles back then too and 
>> we see very little about this on the web.
>>
>> -- 
>> Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
>> Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
>> Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
>> 615.385.8051    http://www.hyperback.com
>>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager