My first week using REAL TAPE (vs plugins)

[bmanic]

A high quality reel vs another high quality reel the difference can be what most people would call subtle, as long as you calibrated the machine for the brand of tape used (each tape manufacturer and tape type would have it's own calibration). A non-calibrated HQ reel vs a calibrated HQ reel can have quite a difference.. also one worn tape of a specific brand vs another brand with a worn tape can have really quite obvious differences.

.. and then the differences also vary wildly depending on how hot you run the tape. Reel to reel recorders can be quite difficult to predict. So many moving parts and things to consider but the basic gist of it is: Well maintaned high-end machine + good quality tape (and machine calibrated for this exact tape) -> Good transparent sound, no matter what the brand/type the tape is.

Having said that, there's an additional thing to consider and it's the quality of the batch of tape you get your hands on. You don't always get lucky. Some completely sealed new-old-stock tape, even from very reputable brands, can be sticky and in horrible condition.. or just sound like crap. So beware of buying big batches of tapes from ebay if you can't get the batch number (usually a kind of serial number which makes it possible to figure out what year the tape is manufactured).

At least this is my experience with it. I have experience with both BASF 900 and BASF 468 on the telefunken m15.

[plexuss]

Also, every time you play a tape it deposts junk on the head and also changes the magentization of every metal part it touches, most critically the playback head. So to get more consistent tape-to-tape performance it's important to clean the heads and demag before every critical playback or record session.

[Recordatbludotcom]

I think there is a huge point being missed in the thread. We like to bring always older technology and frame it outside of its time to compare it to newer things, but the comparisons are and will never be on the same footing. One thing Reel to Reel tape revolutionized was the fact that for the first time audio was being manipulated physically - slicing etc -
That was the reels major wow factor in its time.

Allot of advancements were made to decks over the following decades - they all wanted cleaner sounding, and more defined audio. It was never our pinnacle, just a mountain top.

I think the author should have noted that this thread is more about his first experiences with analog tape, but cannot be a comparison, such a thing is truly impossible.

Practically every machine is different, and every tape recipe is different. Was this tested using “baked” Ampex 456 Grand Master, or newer ATR master tape, these two items themselves bring differences to the table. Are we testing on a freshly biased and calibrated machine? Even then they not all handled the signals the same ways.

I guess what matters is that if you know tape, familiar with it, the machine, etc then you have a set of tools that can be added to your recordings not in a vanilla sense but by manipulating the medium and machine you can get some interesting results, not available anywhere.

What is referred to as warmth these days is mostly an eq curve that was consistent across most machines from high-frequency attenuation, the sane way tube saturation creates a warm sound from low-frequency amplification. Have you heard early digital releases? All thin and treble heavy sounding? Back in those days we had to compensate for what you all refer to as tape saturation by boosting the highs. We were so used to it that it was not immediately realized the reasoning. We fought the hiss with DBX and Dolby noise reducers, digital is the evolution of tape not a competitor.

Cheers!

[adl]

I think the bigger point is:
WHY DID YOU BRING UP THIS NECRO THREAD FROM 2018?!

[Recordatbludotcom]

Well just cause you have no interest does not mean anyone else might, or are you the AES of the forum?

[Dirtgrain]

I don't get disdain for reviving the dead--doesn't it make the forum more consolidated and less polluted with excess threads?

[TMaudio]

I don't get disdain for reviving the dead--doesn't it make the forum more consolidated and less polluted with excess threads?

Because it's something cool parrots like to parrot: "necro" thread.. it's so cool to be a parrot

[vurt]

I don't get disdain for reviving the dead--doesn't it make the forum more consolidated and less polluted with excess threads?

i think it depends on the how, the above seems like a reasonable, relevant comment.
often times however, it's just "great comment" and they're the ones to watch!!

[plexuss]

Back in the day when I was mastering to DAT, I would always/often record the source on tape first and then to DAT. It just sounded better. Well, it sounded more like I was used to using 100% tape. The DAT->TAPE->DAT workflow gave my masters a nice feel. In fact, I agree with the OP's observations in general with tape. Tape formulation also matters and I prefer to use Ampex 456 at 15ips or 30ips. 15ips on the right machine can sound great, full.

[v1o]

I think the bigger point is:
WHY DID YOU BRING UP THIS NECRO THREAD FROM 2018?!

Its a boon for some of us who might have missed this thread in 2018 and just happened to stumble upon it today.