On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 10:04:42 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
I think you might have difficulty in convincing people on this side of
the world, particularly audio professionals who know the Studer
C37 and J37, that your assertion is true


I've noticed a definite tendancy in articles written by Americans to
wildly over-state the importance of Ampex in the development of the
tape recorder. One piece I read recently stated that Ampex had
"perfected" the tape recorder with it's 200 series, despite the fact
that the 200 series was pretty much a direct copy of "liberated" German
magnetophones.

Indeed. Domestic Ampex machines - or rather those which were available in
the UK - were also very down market compared to Revox, but with a similar
price.

The same applied to TV broadcast cameras. Those in the US never saw beyond
RCA - yet they simply didn't compete in any way on the international
market.

Ampex were market leaders in pro VRTs for many a year - but rested on
their laurels and didn't develop a decent cassette based system. And had
to go to Nagra to make a field recorder.

They did make the VPR20 before the VPR5 (Nagra) which was a sort of
field recorder - I have used one in a field!

In article ,
Bill Taylor wrote:
Ampex were market leaders in pro VRTs for many a year - but rested on
their laurels and didn't develop a decent cassette based system. And had
to go to Nagra to make a field recorder.

They did make the VPR20 before the VPR5 (Nagra) which was a sort of
field recorder - I have used one in a field!

Hope you had a 4X4 to get it there. ;-)

--
*Why doesn't Tarzan have a beard? *

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message

However, Ampex audio recorders were never popular in the
UK - and I'd guess the same applied to EMI in the US.

IME the only EU tape recorder brand to get any serious market penetration in
US was Studer/Revox. The Revox machines were relatively light duty boxes by
the standards we're talking, which is not to say that they lacked durability
as they were typically used.

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
However, Ampex audio recorders were never popular in the
UK - and I'd guess the same applied to EMI in the US.

IME the only EU tape recorder brand to get any serious market
penetration in US was Studer/Revox. The Revox machines were relatively
light duty boxes by the standards we're talking, which is not to say
that they lacked durability as they were typically used.

Studer pretty well took over the pro market here too - as others dropped
out. Revox were just about the only machine for high end domestic or semi
pro use - as again others dropped out of the scene.

--
*We waste time, so you don't have to *

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

"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

In 1964 Ampex came
out with the MR-70, arguably the finest tubed tape
recorder ever made.

I think you might have difficulty in convincing people
on this side of the world, particularly audio
professionals who know the Studer C37 and J37, that your assertion is
true

I've noticed a definite tendancy in articles written by
Americans to wildly over-state the importance of Ampex in
the development of the tape recorder. One piece I read
recently stated that Ampex had "perfected" the tape
recorder with it's 200 series, despite the fact that the
200 series was pretty much a direct copy of "liberated"
German magnetophones.

Check the pictures, check the schematics. On the one hand the technology of
the day was limited, and there were only so many ways to do the same thing.
OTOH, the Ampex 200 was thorougly re engineered, and went beyond mere parts
availability.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message


Indeed. Domestic Ampex machines - or rather those which
were available in the UK - were also very down market
compared to Revox, but with a similar price.

Probably not a fair comparison for several reasons.

(1) Analog tape recorders are high-maintenance items and highly dependent on
well-trained staff to use and maintain them. Supporting an analogcorder in
a foriegn country that was a really big ocean away was not perfected until
the Japanese did it in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

(2) In the 1950s and early 1960s Europe was a source of cheap labor by US
standards. You were still recovering from the war.

(3) One word: tariffs.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article
, Arny
Krueger wrote:
However, Ampex audio recorders were never popular in the
UK - and I'd guess the same applied to EMI in the US.

IME the only EU tape recorder brand to get any serious
market penetration in US was Studer/Revox. The Revox
machines were relatively light duty boxes by the
standards we're talking, which is not to say that they
lacked durability as they were typically used.

Studer pretty well took over the pro market here too - as
others dropped out. Revox were just about the only
machine for high end domestic or semi pro use - as again
others dropped out of the scene.

When I was in Germany in 1970, a Revox rep said that they were running (a
little scared) from the Japanese. They did a really good job of that for at
least 10 years.

On 16/02/2011 14:00, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article
, Arny
Krueger wrote:
However, Ampex audio recorders were never popular in the
UK - and I'd guess the same applied to EMI in the US.

IME the only EU tape recorder brand to get any serious
market penetration in US was Studer/Revox. The Revox
machines were relatively light duty boxes by the
standards we're talking, which is not to say that they
lacked durability as they were typically used.

Studer pretty well took over the pro market here too - as
others dropped out. Revox were just about the only
machine for high end domestic or semi pro use - as again
others dropped out of the scene.

When I was in Germany in 1970, a Revox rep said that they were running (a
little scared) from the Japanese. They did a really good job of that for at
least 10 years.

As teenagers we dreamed of the Revox A77
but the best any of my friends could afford was an Akai 4000DS

--
Eiron.

"Eiron" wrote in message
...

As teenagers we dreamed of the Revox A77
but the best any of my friends could afford was an Akai 4000DS

I dreamed of a Ferrograph or better still a Vortexion CBL 6.
The dream came true:-)

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Pics/VortexionCBL6.jpg


Then (much later) I dreamed about a Leevers Rich E200
This dream came true also.

http://www.mosabackabigband.com/Pics/LeeversRich02.jpg


I still have both machines.


Iain

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
However, Ampex audio recorders were never popular in the
UK - and I'd guess the same applied to EMI in the US.

IME the only EU tape recorder brand to get any serious market
penetration in US was Studer/Revox. The Revox machines were relatively
light duty boxes by the standards we're talking, which is not to say
that they lacked durability as they were typically used.

Studer pretty well took over the pro market here too - as others dropped
out.

It had a lot to do with reliability. Only major studios
had a service dept, and spare multitrack machines,
so the smaller studios needed a machine that would
work round the clock, seven days a week, with a bare
minimum of down-time.The Studer range were designed
to do this. A small studio could buy an A80 on credit,
and know that it would still be running for years after it
had paid for itself.

They have kept the same high level of reliabilty with their
consoles to this day.


Iain