I am curious about that statement. Are you saying that all the Tascam and Otari machines were IEC and not NAB?
Hi dotneck335,
Interestingly, Tascam decided to chase Studer. But there was a basic difference between them that would have required a complete rethink to how the Japanese machines were designed. With Studer and probably more, if the tape didn't run through the tape path properly, it was usually time to replace something. There weren't a lot of adjustments in a Studer. Maybe, maybe a light shim, but generally speaking parts were replaced and they fit almost perfectly. I would normally say perfectly but there is a manufacturing tolerance. With Tascam, being a typical Japanese product, almost everything was adjustable. Everything was referenced to the head block and either had an adjustment screw, or you were supposed to shim it. Reel motors for example were shimmed with Tascam and it wasn't abnormal to have needed shimming. Once you got a Tascam all set up, it was extremely smooth in operation. Studer machines just naturally are gentle with tape. Folks who used the Studer will agree with that. Folks who used Tascam machines, if they were ever completely aligned, would agree to how much smoother they ran.
I'm not saying that Tascam machines were junk, because they were sounded very good and they seemed to be the best from Japan at the time. Too bad Nakamichi didn't make an open reel machine! They were also reliable from my standpoint as a service center.
I didn't work on enough Otari machines to remember where they were manufactured, but they are also excellent machines.
Now, as for Ampex machines, any I saw were ancient and not production machines at all. Being American, I have no doubt they were built well and for service. Then there are MCI machines and the ever present Scully machines. I have restored a few of those in the past when I had the shop. However I do have to disagree with you on one point. The Studer machines were the best ones, and much more modern than an Ampex would be. Ampex did make great tape, and 456 was as much of a standard than Scotch 226 was. Didn't Ampex come out with 499 late in the game? That was supposed to be a lot better, but I only bought one or two pancakes of the stuff and can't remember in much detail.
-Chris
Unless the machine was built in the 'States or ordered differently, they were normally IEC. No, my experience was in the days of the MS-17, 52, BR-20 for Tascam and I serviced them under warranty. Back in those days my statement was accurate. So, if you run across a European or Japanese machine, it is very likely IEC
Interestingly, Tascam decided to chase Studer. But there was a basic difference between them that would have required a complete rethink to how the Japanese machines were designed. With Studer and probably more, if the tape didn't run through the tape path properly, it was usually time to replace something. There weren't a lot of adjustments in a Studer. Maybe, maybe a light shim, but generally speaking parts were replaced and they fit almost perfectly. I would normally say perfectly but there is a manufacturing tolerance. With Tascam, being a typical Japanese product, almost everything was adjustable. Everything was referenced to the head block and either had an adjustment screw, or you were supposed to shim it. Reel motors for example were shimmed with Tascam and it wasn't abnormal to have needed shimming. Once you got a Tascam all set up, it was extremely smooth in operation. Studer machines just naturally are gentle with tape. Folks who used the Studer will agree with that. Folks who used Tascam machines, if they were ever completely aligned, would agree to how much smoother they ran.
I'm not saying that Tascam machines were junk, because they were sounded very good and they seemed to be the best from Japan at the time. Too bad Nakamichi didn't make an open reel machine! They were also reliable from my standpoint as a service center.
I didn't work on enough Otari machines to remember where they were manufactured, but they are also excellent machines.
Now, as for Ampex machines, any I saw were ancient and not production machines at all. Being American, I have no doubt they were built well and for service. Then there are MCI machines and the ever present Scully machines. I have restored a few of those in the past when I had the shop. However I do have to disagree with you on one point. The Studer machines were the best ones, and much more modern than an Ampex would be. Ampex did make great tape, and 456 was as much of a standard than Scotch 226 was. Didn't Ampex come out with 499 late in the game? That was supposed to be a lot better, but I only bought one or two pancakes of the stuff and can't remember in much detail.
-Chris
The Studer machines were EXCELLENTLY machined, as you say. I was fortunate enough to get a tour of the factory in Zurich, and their cleanliness, exacting tolerances, and attention to detail were impressive! I have a Studer A810 and it is all of that. HOWEVER---the KING of analog tape machines is undoubtedly the Ampex ATR-100---the best electronics and tape handling (NO pinch roller!) and the best heads.
Hi dotneck335,
We will agree to disagree on that point. As for the electronics, I don't know enough about the ATR-100. Also, not having a pinch roller might be a benefit, or a hindrance to performance. You have seen how the Studer handles tape and I'll trust there are no complaints about that.
However, this thread is about Otari machines and we should really get back on point here. I have seen a lot of Otari and Tascam machines in use in small studios, but not much else.
-Chris
We will agree to disagree on that point. As for the electronics, I don't know enough about the ATR-100. Also, not having a pinch roller might be a benefit, or a hindrance to performance. You have seen how the Studer handles tape and I'll trust there are no complaints about that.
However, this thread is about Otari machines and we should really get back on point here. I have seen a lot of Otari and Tascam machines in use in small studios, but not much else.
-Chris
I'll have to disagree with you too Chris, the ATR-102 is just about the pinnacle of what can be done in terms of tape recording and playback, and that's why almost everyone in the business of producing duplicates of master recordings uses them today. They are in another league from the A810, and yes I have seen and played with one. Out of my reach.
Yup, no capstan and it easily matches the performance of a Studer A80 which is another excellent deck I am somewhat familiar with. Fool that I am I turned down a free A80 years ago, but there was nowhere for me to put it.
The Otari will play and record NAB or IEC at the flip of a switch, for recording you do need to calibrate it for the EQ used which takes a couple of minutes at most. You can put SRL calibration tones on it at 1kHz or 10kHz if you want. (I don't recommend 10kHz!)
Otari machines live in a niche somewhat below the Studers and Lyrecs. The MX-50N and MX-55N are worth a look, but will need some mods to be competitive. The MTR series stuff is competitive with Studer decks and priced quite accordingly.
Yup, no capstan and it easily matches the performance of a Studer A80 which is another excellent deck I am somewhat familiar with. Fool that I am I turned down a free A80 years ago, but there was nowhere for me to put it.
The Otari will play and record NAB or IEC at the flip of a switch, for recording you do need to calibrate it for the EQ used which takes a couple of minutes at most. You can put SRL calibration tones on it at 1kHz or 10kHz if you want. (I don't recommend 10kHz!)
Otari machines live in a niche somewhat below the Studers and Lyrecs. The MX-50N and MX-55N are worth a look, but will need some mods to be competitive. The MTR series stuff is competitive with Studer decks and priced quite accordingly.
I'm learning to splice leader tape to my reels of SM900, yes you really do need the razor blade, I tried my Xacto knife and it does not work at all. (I am afraid of razor blades.)
I guess the old head cover with splicing block needs to stay.. LOL
I'm making decent splices already using RGM leader and splicing tape. Some technique is involved, but I figured it out quite by mistake.
I guess the old head cover with splicing block needs to stay.. LOL
I'm making decent splices already using RGM leader and splicing tape. Some technique is involved, but I figured it out quite by mistake.
> with a blunt metal edge on one side.
"Single edge razor blade".
Home Depot sold me a pack of 50. If you do more than leader-splicing, you learn to throw-out the blade every so many cuts. (Does depend on the quality of the blade.) The plastic 50-pack even has a place to put the discards. However I don't endorse it because if you are not scraping a house full of old paint-slop windows, the factory oil turns to gum in a year and you have to pry the case apart and pry each blade from the next. The usual 10-pack individually wrapped, plus a pill-bottle for discards, is probably a better plan.
"Single edge razor blade".
Home Depot sold me a pack of 50. If you do more than leader-splicing, you learn to throw-out the blade every so many cuts. (Does depend on the quality of the blade.) The plastic 50-pack even has a place to put the discards. However I don't endorse it because if you are not scraping a house full of old paint-slop windows, the factory oil turns to gum in a year and you have to pry the case apart and pry each blade from the next. The usual 10-pack individually wrapped, plus a pill-bottle for discards, is probably a better plan.
The splicing tape came with a blade which should last a bit. We have lots of new ones still lurking somewhere down here from the long ago days of my wife's trolley car clerestory light restorations. LOL
I find the more I do the worse I get.. Odd. I do just one or two at a time as it gets harder with each successive attempt. Not enough light down here either..
Only updates are I purchased a scrapped unit and pulled a lot of good mechanical parts out of it, I also have another audio electronics module which I will use for more radical experimentation.
I find the more I do the worse I get.. Odd. I do just one or two at a time as it gets harder with each successive attempt. Not enough light down here either..
Only updates are I purchased a scrapped unit and pulled a lot of good mechanical parts out of it, I also have another audio electronics module which I will use for more radical experimentation.
I've got an MX-5050 sitting on a bench that will need servicing, eventually.
It's the 2nd one my neighbor brought me, I overhauled and upgraded an identical one for him last year.
Both came from a radio station, including 10 inch reels of broadcast music.
He's just dipping his paws into RTR stuff, and insists on having "the best".
Me, I'm quite content with my Akai 4000D, rarely even used these days.
It's the 2nd one my neighbor brought me, I overhauled and upgraded an identical one for him last year.
Both came from a radio station, including 10 inch reels of broadcast music.
He's just dipping his paws into RTR stuff, and insists on having "the best".
Me, I'm quite content with my Akai 4000D, rarely even used these days.
I hate to admit it but I just purchased a broken MX-50NII a few days ago. It's on its way here and reportedly does not power up at all. Just a different challenge than the other two which were also broken, but lit up when powered.
Provided it gets here reasonably intact it will be my next project deck. The MX-50N has a fancier transport and is supposedly a lot gentler on tape, particularly old fragile tape. 2 Track only and the head block is not removable.
Audio path is much simpler but amenable to most of the same modifications I have made on the two MX-5050 I own.
Provided it gets here reasonably intact it will be my next project deck. The MX-50N has a fancier transport and is supposedly a lot gentler on tape, particularly old fragile tape. 2 Track only and the head block is not removable.
Audio path is much simpler but amenable to most of the same modifications I have made on the two MX-5050 I own.
Currently my focus has been on tweaking and modifying the original Otari electronics, but indeed I do plan to design and build a tape pre-amp eventually. There will be some level of integration at least with the deck logic so it switches to the correct EQ for the speed selected. I may do my own record electronics at some point as well.
I have a donor MKIII audio module to experiment with, that might ultimately might become home for some new electronics. It will be a while.
I will tackle the broken MX-50NII shortly. This machine has a much more sophisticated transport, better tape handling and rather simpler audio electronics which may be capable of slightly better performance with mods than the 5050.
I have a donor MKIII audio module to experiment with, that might ultimately might become home for some new electronics. It will be a while.
I will tackle the broken MX-50NII shortly. This machine has a much more sophisticated transport, better tape handling and rather simpler audio electronics which may be capable of slightly better performance with mods than the 5050.
Just enough to force it into the groove in the splicing block, I was warned that cheap razor blades are not good for many splices. The tape and leader is pretty tough actually - which is encouraging for durability.