Richard, What type of machine actually made the recordings used for the test ? I would think that the small variations in the original record characteristics might lead to more or less tracking errors in the Dolby A decoders, when compounded by the playback characteristics of the different machines. Why use Dolby tapes at all ? Also, did you try 30 ips as well..? Just curious as to your reasoning on these points, I'm not criticizing.... Scott -----Original Message----- From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Richard L. Hess Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 1:54 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] 1/4" tape player At 01:55 PM 2008-01-07, Eric Jacobs wrote: >On Monday, December 31, 2007 1:08 PM Richard L. Hess wrote: > > > The A810 didn't fare as well in a shootout with the Studer A80RC as > > I had hoped. > >Is there any report from this shootout? For example, what do they >compare and how was the test conducted? Were the tests qualitative or >quantitative? Hello, Eric, The shootout compared sections of two master tapes (15 in/s Dolby A) played on three different machines: A80 RC A810 with Trafoless output cards APR-5003 with wideface Applied Magnetics heads The files were labelled A B Cn The listeners did not know which file was which machine. The A80 won with the half dozen or so listeners. The APR won with one listener on one of the two selections The A810 did not win with anyone. Care to try the test? The next test will be to make head cables that will permit the A810 electronics to be used with the A80 transport and vice-versa. This would permit us to better isolate the electronics-vs-transport question. Cheers, Richard Richard L. Hess email: [log in to unmask] Aurora, Ontario, Canada (905) 713 6733 1-877-TAPE-FIX Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.