Hi Rod:
Those early Teac pro-sumer decks are tanks, but they sound a bit "Japan 1970 solid-state" to my
ears. Still, though, they stand up over time and they don't abuse tape. Being a fan of the late 70's
punk/new wave scene, I can name some decent-sounding albums that started out on those Teac 4-track
reel decks.
Tascam got much more sophisticated with their tape path as time went on, fewer and fewer static
parts and really solid chasis and faceplate construction so the things were _rigid_ (and damn heavy,
the 48-OB or whatever the 8-track 1/2" version was called, weighs well north of 100lbs). They also
had a reliable digital time counter and return-to-zero, plus library-wind mode, all good stuff not
seen on most competitors.
And of course Tascam made Ampex's last two priced-for-mortals models, the ATR-700 and ATR-800. Not
in the same class as the ATR-100, but much cheaper.
Regarding Dave Dintenfass's comments, I agree except that I'd say anyone who can afford a restored
ATR machine can afford to pay to have it maintained, so the fact that it's a complex beast is
irrelevant to that user.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roderic G Stephens" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Tape Project playback. Was: [ARSCLIST] Otari MX-5050 manual
Hi Tom,
I have to agree with you, since I've got both a TEAC A-6100 and a TEAC 2340R which are good sounding
and tireless performers. From an online article: " This model was the foundation upon which TASCAM's
multitrack business was built.(2) The TEAC A-6100 (a 1/4 inch 2 track reel-to-reel mastering tape
recorder with Simul-Sync). One of the key features of the TEAC A-6100 was its rugged and durable
transport. This product was significant as it was to become the basis for the very successful TASCAM
80-8 recorder."
The only caveat I have is that the transport logic relays on the 6100 don't always activate when
it's first powered up if it hasn't been used for a while. By randomly punching the various transport
control buttons, I then get them responding without any problem. Any maintenance ideas on freeing
them up?
Rod
--- On Wed, 9/22/10, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Tape Project playback. Was: [ARSCLIST] Otari MX-5050 manual
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Wednesday, September 22, 2010, 11:41 AM
By the way, also in the category of "silk purse from sow's ear" is the mods people are doing to the
Tascam reel decks
http://www.unitedhomeproducts.com/the_absolute_sound_blog_the_.htm
I would take a late-era Tascam 2-track deck over an Otari any day, but that's just my own preference
based on Tascam's heavier-duty mechanics and chasis. I have a Tascam 44-OB 4-track quarter-inch deck
and it's built super-solid, much more so than my Technics 1520, but it doesn't sound nearly as good
with no mods done to either deck. "Golden ears" wise, the best-sounding machine in my fleet, in my
opinion, is the 96/24 DAW, but as far as reel decks go, none of the Japanese decks beat the Ampex
AG-440B's. The only reason I keep those monsters around is that they sound so darn good.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Sam" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 2:18 PM
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Tape Project playback. Was: [ARSCLIST] Otari MX-5050 manual
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 9:53 PM, carlstephen koto <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>> The 5050 has become the de facto favorite among Tape Project members. And
> while many of the used machines you'll find on auction sites have been
> woefully neglected or abused, they're remarkably resilient and respond very
> well to a little patience and TLC.
>
> (snip)
>
> As someone with a working familiarity with the audiophile community, this
> surprises me. Not because 5050 machines are awful, but because I think of
> them primarily as the only tape deck still manufactured. Given the vast
> amounts of money some audiophiles spend on their system, Steve, can you
> elaborate on why these audiophiles that choose the 5050 aren't putting this
> TLC into Ampex, Studer, MCI, etc. machines?
>
|