What the Fuhrer said.........
 

"Keith G" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Mine is on its 2nd second head block but is still only
-1dB (replay) and -2dB (overall) at 18kHz. An A77 had
to be constantly tweaked to maintain this level of
performance.

Noticed no such thing on my A77 which I used routinely
from 1970 to 1984.

'I was talking to the Revox rep because his tech was
tuning up my A77.'

??

It was a free offer that I took advantage of shortly after I bought it. I
was using Scotch 203 knowing full well that the machine was sold set up for
Agfa PE36.

FWIW Revox sold rebranded PE36 under their own brand. Scotch 203 is
competitive but different.

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"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.

I wasn't trying to suggest that the Ampex was a clone of
the magnetophone. Yes it was re-engineered, but it was
firmly based on magnetophone technology and was no better
than some other machines of the period.

Yes, the Nazi Magnetophone set the pace.

At that time there really were two technologies for magnetic recording,
wire and tape. I don't know where Germany was with wire. It was pursued for
about a decade in the US. It was crude stuff - to splice it you tied a
knot, I think a full hitch.

The German and American tape recorders were pretty similar, but the tape
seemed to be more diverse. I know that they were doing things in Germany
with kraft paper, probably driven by materials constraints. I think that
they also were using actual metal powder at times.


What it was, was
the first American-made pro tape recorder to sell in any
significant numbers. It's significance was that it
introduced the American recording and broadcasting
industries to the advantages of tape, not that it
significantly advanced tape recorder technology (which it
didn't).

Right, and that introduction was not apparently overnight. Bing Crosby and
all that.

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"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.

That's precisely the reason why build quality was
important. For overseas sales, the main agent was
responsible for sales and service, and organised courses
for studio maintenance personel. There was certainly no
shortage of well-trained staff.

Ampex had huge problems with reliability compared
with Studer, or Lyrec. Even Scully had a better
reputation, and made some sales headway in the UK
following the considerable interest in their machines after the
British audio press wrote articles about John Lennon
recording "Give Peace a Chance" in a Canadian studio
using Scully.

Interesting because in the US the Scullys were considered by many to be junk
compared to the competitive Ampex boxes.

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

Not quite sure what you are implying here.
Are you saying that it cost more to build an inferior
machine in the US?

It cost more to build up similar collections of parts in the US because
labor in the US was very well paid.

(3) One word: tariffs.

Ampex was quite a bit cheaper than the European products
with which it was trying to compete. But, it's not really
about initial cost Arny. Down time due to a broken
machine with parts coming from the US by UPS tortoise, is enough
to deter anyone from future purchases from the same
manufacturer. And having to cancel sessions is the
fastest way to lose your clients. Once gone they will
probably never comne back.

I think you've said one thing that is believable Iain, and that is the issue
of parts supply.


The Japanese solved this problem, with a considerable investment. They all
had offices and parts caches, mostly in the LA area. The Japanese companies
were industrial giants with a wide technological, financial, manufacturing
and marketing base.

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote

Yes, the Nazi Magnetophone set the pace.

At that time there really were two technologies for magnetic recording,
wire and tape.

Wire recording dates back to the end of the 19thC, but only became prectical
with the invention of the valve amplifier. In the 1930s there were machine
that recorded on steel *tape*, such as the Blatnerphone and the
Marconi-Styles machine used by the BBC. But these machines were crude by the
standard of the German machines that recorded on flexible tape covered with
oxide.

I don't know where Germany was with wire. It was pursued for about a
decade in the US. It was crude stuff - to splice it you tied a knot, I
think a full hitch.

With the steel tape machines splices were welded (and a splice detector was
needed to ensure that the tape was lifted off the heads while the splice
went through, otherwise the splice would damage the heads).

The German and American tape recorders were pretty similar,

Well indeed, since the American (and British) machines were firmly based on
the German technology.

but the tape seemed to be more diverse. I know that they were doing
things in Germany with kraft paper, probably driven by materials
constraints. I think that they also were using actual metal powder at
times.

There were many experiments with tape base and coatings both during the war
in Germany, and after it in Britain and the US as well.


Right, and that introduction was not apparently overnight. Bing Crosby and
all that.

Indeed.

David.

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
Wire recording dates back to the end of the 19thC, but only became
prectical with the invention of the valve amplifier. In the 1930s there
were machine that recorded on steel *tape*, such as the Blatnerphone and
the Marconi-Styles machine used by the BBC. But these machines were
crude by the standard of the German machines that recorded on flexible
tape covered with oxide.

Think your spell checker has been at work. The device I remember seeing
was a Marconi-Stille. Which was simply a relic by the time I started in
broadcast in the early '60s. Tape based systems having been the norm for a
decade or so by then. Although the BBC continued with disk cutting rather
longer than might be expected due to them being geared up for such things.

--
*Time is what keeps everything from happening at once.

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

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eiron" wrote in message


On 16/02/2011 14:00, Arny Krueger wrote:

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

I was talking to the Revox rep because his tech was tuning up my A77.
A77s were sold in the armed forces audio clubs (available to all with a
military ID card, including those from the UK) for under $300. I sold
my A77 in 1984 to pay off the CDP 101 that pretty well ended my
involvement with analog media.

Revox also did a 'pro' version of the A77 which sold in the UK without
attracting purchase (sales) tax. The only difference was it had 'fixed'
adaptors for NAB 10" spools. I got my first one this way, with a saving of
about 1/3rd over the normal retail price. Strangely, it wasn't limited to
the high speed model - you could get the 7 1/2 and 3 3/4 ips version. And
3 3/4ips was pretty well never used for pro purposes.

--
*I'm not being rude. You're just insignificant

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

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
Interesting because in the US the Scullys were considered by many to be
junk compared to the competitive Ampex boxes.

The first multi-tracks BBC TV bought were 8 track Scullys. I doubt cost
came into it. So wonder why?

But then video dubbing came in based on the Studer TLS system which of
course used a Studer multi-track, so all such subsequent machines were
Studer.

--
*If a mute swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap?

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

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote


The German and American tape recorders were pretty similar, but the tape
seemed to be more diverse. I know that they were doing things in Germany
with kraft paper, probably driven by materials constraints. I think that
they also were using actual metal powder at times.


When I was a kid in the 50's my Scoutmaster who had business
associations/dea;ings with Germany had a 'dictating machine' which looked
like it was made from brown Bakelite, had a large square microphone and
appeared to use pinky/bluey paper disks rather like 'pre carboned' paper.
Does this sound familiar? I never saw it being used.

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote


The German and American tape recorders were pretty similar, but the tape
seemed to be more diverse. I know that they were doing things in Germany
with kraft paper, probably driven by materials constraints. I think that
they also were using actual metal powder at times.


When I was a kid in the 50's my Scoutmaster who had business
associations/dea;ings with Germany had a 'dictating machine' which looked
like it was made from brown Bakelite, had a large square microphone and
appeared to use pinky/bluey paper disks rather like 'pre carboned' paper.
Does this sound familiar? I never saw it being used.


No, it's come back to me: the large square thing was a read/write head -
rather like the fake pickup on this toy 'record player:

http://www.toys-2u.co.uk/ProductImag...IG/BIG/849.jpg

What the Fuhrer said.........
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,

David Looser wrote:
Wire recording dates back to the end of the 19thC, but only became
prectical with the invention of the valve amplifier. In the 1930s there
were machine that recorded on steel *tape*, such as the Blatnerphone and
the Marconi-Styles machine used by the BBC. But these machines were
crude by the standard of the German machines that recorded on flexible
tape covered with oxide.

Think your spell checker has been at work.

Much as I'd like to blame this on the spell-checker, I have to admit that I
forgotten how "Stille" was spelt and didn't take the trouble to check.

The device I remember seeing
was a Marconi-Stille. Which was simply a relic by the time I started in
broadcast in the early '60s.

It would have been!

David.
..