There are so many EQ networks involved in mass duplication that it is going
to be next to impossible to determine the optimal phase response required,
which is basically what this is about. Generally speaking, the simple
networks for record characteristics will have phase lead at HF and those for
playback phase lag. Factor in the various peaking networks for correcting
head responses, however, and the whole thing becomes as clear as mud. I
think the only useful thing one can say is "suck it and see" - there may
well be an audible difference, but determining whether that is an
improvement or not is a whole 'nother thing...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2016 1:48 PM
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Playing reels backwards - separating myth from fact
> Hi All:
> I am about to transfer a small pile of Quad reel tapes, and wanted to
> revisit this question -- which also applies to full-track and 2-track
> tapes -- will I get better results playing the tapes tails-to-heads (in
> reverse) and then reversing the digital file (back-to-front), and of
> course assigning the correct tracks to the correct channels (the tape
> would be upside-down if played backwards, so 1=4, 2=3, 3=2 and 4=1). I
> have read commentary that playing a reel backwards allows for sharper wave
> fronts and thus crisper dynamics. It seems like it wouldn't _hurt_
> anything to play the tapes backwards, but I would like more info from the
> tape-playback experts.
> Important to note - I know this can't be done with NR-encoded tapes, that
> those must be played forward (the regular way) for the NR decoder to work
> properly. But what about if I transferred the tape backward and then send
> the digital audio out to the decoder, is there any reason that would work?
> (I don't think so, but wanted to ask the experts).
> Thanks in advance for facts/discussion about this topic.
> -- Tom Fine