Anyone interested in getting an E200, dated 1973, with 1700 hrs on the
clock?

Clive

wrote in message
ups.com...
Anyone interested in getting an E200, dated 1973, with 1700 hrs on the
clock?

Clive


Yes I could be. I loved the E200 all those years ago.

Whereabouts are you?

S.

--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...


wrote in message
ups.com...
Anyone interested in getting an E200, dated 1973, with 1700 hrs on
the
clock?

Clive


Yes I could be. I loved the E200 all those years ago.

Whereabouts are you?


Perhaps this bloke could have a tip or two:

http://www.kolumbus.fi/iain.churches...projects1.html


:-)

Anyone interested in getting an E200, dated 1973, with 1700 hrs on the
clock?

Clive


** Like this pile of junk belonging to Iain Churches ??

www.kolumbus.fi/.../Projects/projects1.html





........ Phil

"Phil Allison"


** Like this pile of junk belonging to Iain Churches ??

http://www.kolumbus.fi/iain.churches...projects1.html

On Aug 4, 4:53 pm, "Serge Auckland"
wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...

Anyone interested in getting an E200, dated 1973, with 1700 hrs on the
clock?

Clive

Yes I could be. I loved the E200 all those years ago.

Whereabouts are you?

S.

--http://audiopages.googlepages.com

Serge
I'm in north London

Clive

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
** Like this pile of junk belonging to Iain Churches ??

http://www.kolumbus.fi/iain.churches...projects1.html

They were actually a quite decent workhorse for basic radio and TV
operations. Not the finest analogue tape machine around - an A77 would out
perform one - but a nice machine to edit on which was probably their main
purpose. For 'important' recordings the BBC used Studer at that time. The
last 1/4" machine L-R produced - based on a Klark Techniques design - was
a far more interesting machine. And rather rarer. It had one of the most
stable tape transports ever made - it could be colour field locked.

--
*Gaffer tape - The Force, light and dark sides - holds the universe together*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

http://www.kolumbus.fi/iain.churches...projects1.html

They were actually a quite decent workhorse for basic radio and TV
operations. Not the finest analogue tape machine around - an A77 would out
perform one - but a nice machine to edit on which was probably their main
purpose. For 'important' recordings the BBC used Studer at that time. The
last 1/4" machine L-R produced - based on a Klark Techniques design - was
a far more interesting machine. And rather rarer. It had one of the most
stable tape transports ever made - it could be colour field locked.



Hmm. Interesting comparison Dave - the Leevers Rich E200 vs A77.
I have one of each machine.

It's a bit like comparing a Scammel prime mover with a Ford Transit.
The build-quality of the E200 is *far* superior, and by
comparison theA77 is a lightweight, and having been built as
a semi-pro.machine certainly does not outperform the E200
without constant tweaking. It could never have performed
the workhorse role of the E200, of which 1500 were in
professional use in the London area alone in 1972.
The Leevers Rich capstan motor probably weighs
more than the entire Revox machine.

As regards the ProLine (the Clark brothers machine to
which you refer) I recall that the people at Studer in
Stockholm thought that the frame was built out of
offcuts of Dexion, and commented about the "clunkiness"
of the transport controls.

To each his own:-)))

Iain

In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
They were actually a quite decent workhorse for basic radio and TV
operations. Not the finest analogue tape machine around - an A77 would
out perform one - but a nice machine to edit on which was probably
their main purpose. For 'important' recordings the BBC used Studer at
that time. The last 1/4" machine L-R produced - based on a Klark
Techniques design - was a far more interesting machine. And rather
rarer. It had one of the most stable tape transports ever made - it
could be colour field locked.



Hmm. Interesting comparison Dave - the Leevers Rich E200 vs A77. I have
one of each machine.

It's a bit like comparing a Scammel prime mover with a Ford Transit. The
build-quality of the E200 is *far* superior, and by comparison theA77 is
a lightweight, and having been built as a semi-pro.machine certainly
does not outperform the E200 without constant tweaking.

I simply said it out performs it. Quite common with high end domestic
equipment over low rent pro - and that's exactly what the Levers were. I
doubt any decent recording studio ever bought one - they were built down
to a price for hack broadcast use.

It could never have performed the workhorse role of the E200, of which
1500 were in professional use in the London area alone in 1972. The
Leevers Rich capstan motor probably weighs more than the entire Revox
machine.

Note I said it was a decent machine to edit on - probably its main reason
for existing. The Revox wasn't designed for this role.

As regards the ProLine (the Clark brothers machine to which you refer) I
recall that the people at Studer in Stockholm thought that the frame was
built out of offcuts of Dexion, and commented about the "clunkiness" of
the transport controls.

Nevertheless it out performed Studer in some ways when it was introduced.
Only when the A810 came along could they match its transport for this type
of machine. And as regards 'chunkiness' it was a machine well suited for
playing in cues. Some Studer machines were a bit slow for this job -
perhaps because of the slow reacting but smooth control mechanisms. Horses
for courses.

To each his own:-)))

Indeed. However, Levers ceased production while Studer carried on.

--
*Sherlock Holmes never said "Elementary, my dear Watson" *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
They were actually a quite decent workhorse for basic radio and TV
operations. Not the finest analogue tape machine around - an A77 would
out perform one - but a nice machine to edit on which was probably
their main purpose. For 'important' recordings the BBC used Studer at
that time. The last 1/4" machine L-R produced - based on a Klark
Techniques design - was a far more interesting machine. And rather
rarer. It had one of the most stable tape transports ever made - it
could be colour field locked.



Hmm. Interesting comparison Dave - the Leevers Rich E200 vs A77. I have
one of each machine.

It's a bit like comparing a Scammel prime mover with a Ford Transit. The
build-quality of the E200 is *far* superior, and by comparison theA77 is
a lightweight, and having been built as a semi-pro.machine certainly
does not outperform the E200 without constant tweaking.

I simply said it out performs it. Quite common with high end domestic
equipment over low rent pro - and that's exactly what the Levers were. I
doubt any decent recording studio ever bought one - they were built down
to a price for hack broadcast use.


It could never have performed the workhorse role of the E200, of which
1500 were in professional use in the London area alone in 1972. The
Leevers Rich capstan motor probably weighs more than the entire Revox
machine.

Note I said it was a decent machine to edit on - probably its main reason
for existing. The Revox wasn't designed for this role.

First of all, let's get the name right, Dave. It's Leevers Rich. You
would not write "Stooder" would you? :-)))

In those days, I used to visit film dubbing facilities quite often, Wardour
Street etc. There were some ten or twelve large film dubbing facilities.
They all had LR E200 machines, including the Pathe, Crown and
Mercury complexes. They also used the LR mag film recorders.
So your supposition that the E200 was bought for editing purposes
is largely incorrect. There was indeed a version of the machine for
editing -
without bias oscillator and record cards. The headblock was minus
erase and record head too. These seem to represent a fairly small
percentage of total sales.

As mentioned above, there were 1500 E200s in use in the
Greater London area alone. From feedback I got while
refurbishing my own machine, I know from people at the BBC,
Pye, CBS, the COI etc that these machines performed primarily
in a mastering role reliably. The modular design was also praised
for ease of maintenance.


To each his own:-)))

You probably don't know the history behind the LR series of
mag recorders and tape machines, Dave.

LR were essentially a film dubbing company, with
premises at 80-82 Wardour Street. Studio director
Fred Fleming and chief engineer Peter Lewis expressed
a need to co-director Norman Leevers for a range of
machines better suited to their needs. They were initially built
for in-house use (just like the Decca and EMI consoles
were in those days) but third-party interest was considerable,
so Norman Leevers decided to build these machines on a
commercial basis, particularly when the BBC expressed
an interest.. Sales far outstripped expectations.

Indeed. However, Levers ceased production while Studer carried on.

When LR had satisfied the demand for their machines on the home market,
there was no point in continuing production.

Interestingly, the same transport was used on the G series multitrack
machines, which rather negates your statement that the machines were
bought for editing:-)

With the exception of the legendary Studer J37 (of Sgt Pepper fame)
the LR G series is the most sought-after 1" European multitrack.

Best regards
Iain