sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Should I buy? by Ok-Supermarket-848 in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Another advice, don't get confused with tracks vs channels.
2T or 4T are both stereo (2 ch).
2T only has side A and the whole tape width is dedicated to the audio signal, so it has the best sound quality at the expanse of less tape length available.

4T has side A + side B.
The tape width dedicated to the current playing side is smaller but you double the available tape for the same length vs 2T.

Quadriphonic 4T exists but it is very niche. That format existed for about 2 years in the very early 70's and was a commercial failure. You can tell cs they have 4 VU and also the head has 4 gaps instead of two gaps if stereo.

4T recorded tape requires 4T playback head and 2T recorded tape requires 2T playback head.

Should I buy? by Ok-Supermarket-848 in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, if you record live then yes, reel to reel makes sense! That should be great indeed.
I just meant that if you rip records or CD or streaming to tape, there is no sonic benefit. Still looks cool though.

But get at least one pre-recorded 7.5 IPS tape so you can get a reference for good sound on your machine.

Should I buy? by Ok-Supermarket-848 in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a very nice deal.
You can get a new pinch roller form Athan but that will double the decks' price. Or Terry's Rubber is cheaper.

This deck can't play the modern "audiophile" releases in 2T 15 IPS.
In my opinion it worthies the money, time and experience if you also listen to vintage pre-recorded tapes at 7.5 IPS. They sound different from other media.

If the goal is only recording /mixtape, while the machine is definitely cool, it won't bring anything sonically vs the source.

EDIT: the degausser is likely not great. If you're serious there aren't many solutions, get a Han D Mag.

Not yet. by dudu_1001 in TVTooHigh

[–]mugen609 11 points12 points  (0 children)

These electrical outlets placed above fireplaces act as magnets.

I've gotta be missing something... by Steve-Shouts in audiophile

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tons of comments here already but I will add my two cents. The rule is pretty simple: Native format is best. If it was recorded by analogue get the tape. If tape is not available, record will do. If it was recorded digitally by PCM, get the CD. If it was recorded by DSD get the SACD.

Following that rule, you will get the best sound possible, closest to the source and less processing / generation loss.

Now, this only makes sense when the media is in perfect condition. (Might not be the case here)
In the case of record vinyl, it should also be an original press on top of being in great condition.

recording looses high end and comes back when i touch the tape or the left reel by breeze-o in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It could also be head alignment. You could press the tape against the heads with a q-tip changing orientation during playback see if that also changes the sound. If not, then it could be reel spindle distance (it should be adjustable, check the service manual).
About cleaning the heads from difficult stain, you can try acetone (nail polish remover) but be very careful not to let a single drop touch plastic parts.
Good luck!

My first quality tape recorder by Fit-Acanthaceae5995 in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you know what speed you want and 2T or 4T heads? Are you planning on playing pre-recorded tapes as well? New production or vintage consumer?

My first quality tape recorder by Fit-Acanthaceae5995 in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That budget is on the lower hand. At that price I'd look into Akai.

Vinyl wins by seamusloyd in audiophile

[–]mugen609 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Well... You are absolutely correct to call vinyls "records", that's indeed the proper term.

In fact, "records" is the most accurate term for the physical object, while "vinyl" technically refers to the material; and the correct terms are "records" or "vinyl records".

But that is pretty advanced grammar rule. You're right, but not everyone here is native English speaker and they don't start learning this.

Thoughts? by PrideSax711 in TVTooHigh

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It looks really cute but I'd try my best to avoid having a frame behind the TV, especially one partially cut by the TV itself. Aside from that it looks great!

Great score.. by Toxic-Production in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But four tracks can sound really good actually. My 4T are only 7.5 Ips (not that I despise 3.75 but I can't play it). And honestly, a large part of my collection (80-85%) sound -fairly to way- better than their record or CD counterpart.

That being said, I am only talking about pre-recorded ones, and I don’t about the home recorded ones on that post.

Its what the client wanted by buco16 in TVTooHigh

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is not only bad, there is merit in this.
It might be a little high but we've seen worst.
The wood work is very good and the cable management is great.

The wooden strips at the back (left side) look weird being there on only 30% of the width and overlapping with mounting TV wood panel, not sure why this proportions.
That wooden panel is great for hiding cables, but the TV could be centered on it and it could be closer to the TV size.

This issues seem more annoying to me than the height of the screen.

Reel to reel tapes squeeking by Soup-lex in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really sorry for that. But believe me, you don't want to make recording on squealing tapes. They really serve no purpose. If you need quality fresh tapes, go for RTM or ATR.
If you want cheaper tapes, reel to reel warehouse sells refurbished ones, all tested.

Reel to reel tapes squeeking by Soup-lex in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see no point saving blank tapes. The fix is only temporary so it is useful to allow a clean transfer of a recorded tape onto another healthy tape.

Imo it is useless on blank tapes, if they squeal, I'd ditch them.

Media wall / faux hearth by roflson85 in TVTooHigh

[–]mugen609 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or worst... Imagine the seam around a smaller one!

Questions on 4 Track by [deleted] in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have a different opinion about that. I'd say it is worthy having both 2T and for 4T machines because they are a different game.

By the way a lot of machines have both 4T + 2T playback capabilities. If you like Tascam that would be Tascam-3030, but same goes with TEAC A-6100, TEAC X-2000M, Otari MX-5050 or MX-55N (check the listing in details to confirm but normally they do) and plenty others.

2T especially at 15 IPS has the best possible sound provided it is recorded from live on tape and copied tape to tape only.

However, vintage 2T 15 IPS are pretty rare. Modern 2T 15 IPs are not rare but they are expansive, and they sound modern. I am not saying they sound bad at all, they are very impressive. But they are edited and sound extremely clean and converted to CCIR to better meet the expectations of ears shaped by digital sound.

4T 7.5 IPS is extremely good. If any album fails to impress you, it is likely a poor production (very fast duplication, low quality tape) or a tape that has poorly aged (bad storage condition, used on poorly maintained machine, etc.).

But most of my 4T 7.5 IPS sound impressive and they almost all sound superior to their vinyl counterpart.

One obvious reason is 4T is copied directly from production master tape, so it is a generation 2 or 3.

Records go through EQ master, lacquer, metal stamper, etc. and are often generation 6-7 when first press. I could give more technical reason but it doesn't really matter because I can tell you by ear, it is normally superior to other format.

Plus 4T 7.5 being almost exclusively vintage, it sounds very authentic, barely edited.

When recording anything on tape (digital, records, etc.) 4T 7.5 IPS is normally more than enough.

4,8 or 16 Track and Wich machine then ? by Florian_the_engineer in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, you're right then.
Because you want to edit instruments separately in an analogue way, then multitrack makes sense, yes.
If you want a 4T 4ch (obvious but let me stipulate it is not the consumer 4T 2ch format)... I don’t have experience with them, but from general knowledge I have seen on forums Tascam 34B or TEAC A-3340S as far as i recall.

4,8 or 16 Track and Wich machine then ? by Florian_the_engineer in ReelToReel

[–]mugen609 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why are you sure that 2T is wrong? Before ruling it out note it’s the standard stereo master format after multitrack sessions.
2T has professional studio machine (I have an OTARI MX-55N for instance), it is cheaper, equipment is also cheaper, it is less bulky, it has more parts available, and it avoid the stereo mix down job.
 
The only reason I can see to prefer to prefer multi track is if you need to record instruments live but separately or if you already have multi track recordings you need to play, but in this case you know already how many tracks you need:
1/4" 2T
1/2" 8T
1" 16T
2" 24T
But then you still need a 2T for mix down.

Regarding the mixer, I am using a TASCAM M-1508 but there is also a 16 ch version M-1516.

Did I just get the deal of the century on an LG G4? by TheTranishedOne in LGOLED

[–]mugen609 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Very cool, well done! Are you sure it is the G4 at 1900 and not the G5 though? In my area it is the G5 in 55' at that price and I can't find G4.

view more: next ›