Reel-to-reel tape is the new vinyl

I have said before that these Acoustic Sounds, Tape Project issues are for the very few...The catalog is beyond minimally limited, I would never plop down $400 for something I have zero interest in. Also most are 15ips which not all decks can do.
I also have said and suggested if some of these companies would issue for example a 7.5ips Floyd, Yes, Genesis, Rush, Can, JTull and ask $200-$300 (or less of course) I think they would sell quite easily.

 

I like the approach the guys are taking, I wonder thou how they justify $450.
Tape is expensive, as it always has been, but for one reel, that's very pricey.
I would pay more around the 100 - 150 range, then I'd be all ears.

 

All this for Janis Ian? Aren't her records populating thrift stores and Goodwills everywhere? What's next? Herb Alpert? 101 Strings? Babs greatest hits?

 

exaaaaactly

 

There is more than $100 of tape alone in each one of these. Pricing is really right on the nose, I honestly don't see how they're making profit at all at this pricepoint. Factor in packaging, licensing, and studio time - these are practically being sold at cost.


I did some more research, and it appears they are dubbing these titles onto 2 reels of SM900 (I would have preferred ATR Master for its cleaner sound more transparent, higher output and lower noise, but sm900 is the next best thing)

This isn't exactly concrete, but from some promo shots it appears they are using 1/2" running masters - ironically, they may be using ATR for that.

 

I was watching Ozzy & Jack's World Detour, in particular an episode where they go inside the Iron Mountain storage facility. Among many many other things, they are shown a lot of pictures of Ozzy, and then tapes from some shows of his. How surreal.

They play the tape on a reel-to-reel, but this is not a little 1/4" consumer job. It's a platters-on-their-sides 2" pro job, and it looks incredible as the tape unspools and runs past the head.

I read a comment somewhere that folks forget vinyl cannot be considered the ultimate fidelity medium; that for most of recorded history the TAPE is really the ultimate medium since it IS the master.

 

Thanks for reading my profile! Hope it was enlightening to you!

 

Bahaha. Sure. Go for it. I hope you find vinyl super easy and not at all inconvenient in anyway. Because.... Well tape can be great if you can find some recordings your interested in that were recoded decently and not 100th copy of the 50th copy or some such deal and in good shape so they will last for more than a few plays. Then of course there is getting and maintaining a machine. Oh and I've never understood why people use reel to reel to make copies of their records.

It is really cool though. There's still an old Tandberg that belonged to my dad tucked away in the attic at my mom's house. Really neat but eminently impractical.

 

Yes reel to reel can be higher fidelity than vinyl with a good quality machine and tapes (so too the hi fi vcr for that matter) but it is an expensive hassle/hobby and not many great pre recorded titles available, been there done that. It still won't match a well mastered CD or hi res.

 

You don't really believe this do you?*


*

 

I'll pass. Even harder to store that vinyl -- easier to damage, more environmental sensitive, easier to damage through something like stretching or pulling. Even more tweaky to play back than vinyl in terms of the mechanical care required for ideal playback. And tapes degrade much more substantially with every play than vinyl. And of course, to your point above, unless you're literally in the tape vault playing back the master, then, no, the reel to reel you're playing at home is not the master, it's a copy. Cool? Maybe. Practical for long term storage and playback of music at home? Nah.

 

That is one format I never got into. It is cool though.

 

I have an Akai R2R I bought off Craigslist for $40. And a few tapes I bought off eBay. But I never hooked up the Akai and never played the tapes! Maybe I will one day.

One thing I look for when buying tapes, if possible, purchase prerecorded tapes recorded at 7 1/2 ips. They're better quality than 3 3/4 ips tapes. And I avoid tapes that are not recordered by the manufacturer. Too much ambiguity regarding the source material for "home made" tapes. Finally, always clean and demagnetize your heads.

 

I didn't even have to read your profile. Do you own a stereo system? Do you own physical media, or purchase music? In 2016? How quaint and old fashioned. Nearly anything anyone would care to listen to can be streamed for less than the cost of one album per month. Must have more dollars than sense.

What makes perfect sense to others doesn't need to make sense to everyone.

 

It's funny you say this because I actually find tape infinitely less tweaky and cumbersome than vinyl. It's certainly less of a chore. All I have to do is clean the head, open the box, mount the reel, thread it, rewind, thread again, and hit play.

Compare that to fiddling with getting a disc out of a sleeve (which is much more nerve wracking since the disc is much more sensitive and must be handled carefully, whereas you can just grab a reel or even a pancake) and then having to remove static, brush off the disc, clean the stylus, and then repeat for the 2nd side. And there's all the variables in playback and trade offs. Cart alignment, tonearm setup. All the variables in sound that would never fly on a professional standard that's designed to adhere to a very strict set of tolerances… and I think a tape is much less at risk of damage than a disc that can be scratched, or cracked. Not that these things happen to my records, but at the same time I don't attempt to stretch or pull on my tapes either. I guess it's all about perspective.

Of course there are some situations where people very well may be playing masters at home. But those of course are not the norm, you have much less of a chance of building up a personal library of legitimate master tapes than you would have for getting these copies. The idea is that these copies come closer than anything else available and that's an idea I would subscribe to.

If a CD or hi-res is somehow better than, or at least as good as the master tape, then someone should alert all the major labels. They're losing millions on storing and maintaining vaults of these things that would be just as well served by a small percent of the space on their servers. Best to recycle them, there are many precious materials in a reel of tape that can be renewed. It's good for the world. Better yet, let them end up in the dumpster, and then maybe into the hands of someone who knows better!

 

While I totally agree a Revox or a Tandberg would look way cool, and I have heard some really nice things played on them (albeit years ago), they are an even bigger PITA than cassettes (and I did love my old Nakamichi). If there were a good selection of extremely high quality source material that was not extremely expensive I might consider dealing with the hassle, but it seems that for I'll be maxing out on inconvenience with my dearly beloved vinyl. I will say that if you were not wealthy and wanted to build a library of ready choices, taping off of radio was a nice option in big cities with good FM, but it seems to me that Spotify and its ilk are a better choice for that solution today.

 

Amen to that.

 

$450?

 

If £450 is 'cost' price per album,then can the format really flourish or make any sort of significant comeback?

 

not really practical .
brought up on tape recorders. have a couple.
fun and retro.
Don,t get me wrong. the master of all sources is a TAPE,
if i am a typical music fan, i may listen to Mahler ,s 1st, then Fleetwood mac,
i can just lift off LP , or eject CD.
replace in jewel case, and put back on cd rack( have to say that )
with reel to reel . ideally you should play all the way through, to ensure neat spooling.
failure to do this can result in drop outs on tape.
no , the ultimate in sound quality no doubt , but not too practical.
besides, i would miss the distortions prevalent in vinyl.

 

This is as much of a comeback as there needs to be. I'm not expecting there to be a Studer in every home by 2020. So long as there are enough people supporting the format for the people who want it to be supported, then all is good and well as far as I'm concerned. The fact that there is enough of a demand for Analogue Productions to start offering up a new product line says everything. I wouldn't mind seeing MoFi get in the game too. The more software available to order, the merrier.


Having heard a stunning (albeit flawed) 60's era cutting master of Kind of Blue, I can only imagine what that might sound like if they gave it the 3-track mixdown treatment like they are doing for the RCA titles here.




Let's make this fun. Which titles, if any, would make you seriously consider biting the bullet on a playback system? Hypothetically speaking of course.

I think Pet Sounds would do well, if they managed to run full track dubs from the tape Steve prepared for the DCC restoration in the early 90's

 

It's funny you say this because I actually find my iPod infinitely less tweaky and cumbersome than vinyl, CD or any tape format. I guess it's all about perspective.

 

Convenience takes priority over quality for most people. I think market trends over the past 15 years have proven that. Some people enjoy the cumbersome tweakiness inherent to high end playback systems. Others merely tolerate it if it means they get to enjoy it in the end! I think I fall under the latter. I always hear people waxing poetic about the ritual of vinyl… I personally couldn't care less about the ritual. It's not enjoyable to me. Enjoying it is incomprehensible because I actually see it as a nuisance. What is enjoyable is the music and sound that results from doing such.

 

Amen!

 

I have also said........chicks dig R2R