Print

Print


So, the same program was recorded on tracks 1 and 4?

Ellis

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Hi Ellis:
>
> No, I was just looking at a scope with spoken-word material on the top and
> bottom track. They were also recordings from transcription records, so
> there was quite a bit of record noise. I was surprised how many times there
> would be a loud sound at the same time for both tracks, often enough to
> verify that azimuth wasn't way off. This is inexact, to say the least, but
> everything sounded surprisingly good.
>
> The whole 4 tracks at once thing gets into craft vs. science.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ellis Burman" <
> [log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 3:18 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Tape dubbing backwards?
>
>
>  Hi Tom.  If is was a 4-track mono tape, how did you check the azimuth?
>> Was
>> there phase coherent tones or pink noise on all four tracks?  That seems
>> highly unlikely to me.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Ellis Burman
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  I've never tried doing all four tracks of a quarter-track stereo of
>>> high-fidelity music all at once using my Tascam 44-OB, but I have had no
>>> problems doing some OTR (4-track mono) tapes. The quality going in
>>> sucked,
>>> so the client was very happy to save money not paying for 4 passes across
>>> the heads. I was actually surprised at how good it did sound. He told me
>>> his dubs were second-generation from transfers of transcriptions (so
>>> either
>>> 3rd or 4th generation from the transmission line). He had been smart
>>> enough
>>> to use a good quality deck (I forgot he told me it was Pioneer or Teac,
>>> later-generation so with direct drive capstan and decent azimuth
>>> stability). On my scope, the azimuth looked OK between tracks 1 and 4,
>>> so I
>>> figured I was probably getting pretty good fidelity out of all 4 tracks,
>>> especially considering the relatively lo-fi source. His smartest moves in
>>> making the tapes were doing them at 7.5IPS and using well-slit Maxell UD
>>> tape. We also transferred at double speed (7.5IPS of 3.75IPS material),
>>> and
>>> again this did not effect the sound quality of OTR source material very
>>> negatively. The guy got 4 hours of transfer material for every half hour
>>> of
>>> tape machine on the clock time. As I said up front, I would never do this
>>> for high-fidelity musical recordings.
>>>
>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard L. Hess" <
>>> [log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:49 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Tape dubbing backwards?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  Some of the four-track in-line heads cheated down a little from the
>>>
>>>> standard 43 mil track width, but I think it was down to 38 mils to allow
>>>> for better crosstalk. This is not well documented...but then again we
>>>> have
>>>> a variation of at least 75-82 mils in "NAB" two track heads. At this
>>>> point,
>>>> if one is dealing with more than three tracks on 1/4-inch tapes there
>>>> are
>>>> usually larger issues than this.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2015-03-09 9:09 PM, Dave Radlauer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  Careful there, I don't think there's a one to one relation between
>>>>> 4-track
>>>>> and 1/4 track formats, but I'm sure more knowledgeable voices will
>>>>> chime
>>>>> in.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dave R
>>>>>
>>>>>  --
>>>>>
>>>> Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Aurora, Ontario, Canada                             647 479 2800
>>>> http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
>>>> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Ellis
>> [log in to unmask]
>> 818-846-5525
>>
>>
>>


-- 
Ellis
[log in to unmask]
818-846-5525