The 482 is a legend. A warrior of cassette decks. If you have the 482 up to spec then you shouldn't even need a RTR. And if you think buying Type 2 is expensive, wait until you start buying RTR quarter inch tape. Fun!!
I'm not sure if you're the one that ask me before on did I was able to get in on tapeheads about the member confirmation. They answered me today and te straightened it out so I'm in. Here is the Contact in case.
I bought my 482 with the intension of using it for mostly recording my friends vinyl building a nice library of both tapes and LP's. In addition at the time I wanted this machine not only to get fantastic recordings of LP's from friends increasing my music library I found cassettes were great for mobility listening in my vehicles, and or Walkman. Sure not a huge storage media but worked great for many years. It went into storage back in 2010 being I wasn't recording with it much being I was still under the ether of CD's being far better per sound and mobility. Both have been proven incorrect and less superior than cassette. I have now added it back to my system and am going to still use it as a recording device when friends come over for vinyl music appreciation parties. I just need to find some TDK SAX 100 or Maxell equivelent to pick up where I left off. As per the Reel to Reel I should have mentioned that desire was for an additional tool for recording mostly. I have a recording studio in my home which is all digital ADDA conversion type. I wanted to incorporate some analog recording. Thus will be shopping for a nice 16 track machine.
A nice 16 track machine? Not possible. Poor machines. They all went to protest the use of Pro Tools in South Africa. They never were seen again. They all died in that violent protest. Seriously.....Going to analog 16 track will be costly and headache. And it is not the same as using a quarter inch half track. Advice: 1. Always get a head report. ALWAYS 2. DO NOT buy a narrow track format machine.. 3. DO NOT buy a tape machine that was made before 1973. This begins the modern age of analog multitracks. 4. And NEVER buy any multitrack before 1970. All those great classic multitracks back in the 60's were limited to 30 - 15 000 hz +1/ -2 db @ 15 ips NAB EQ, Record/Play. 5. A good modern (1973 or after) 2 inch 16 track should give you at least 66 db 'A' weighted signal to noise ratio. With today's modern tapes you might even get 68 db! Don't bother with NR. Unnecessary. If you are gonna buy some 1972 MCI JH24 then NR away with my blessings.
I hate being a kill joy but a half inch 16 track (ahh Jesus! Mother Mary...Saints persevere us!) was NOT a Pro format. A 1 inch 16 track might be considered a lower end pro format. I know Grant and Mclover would say that a 1 inch 16 track is a semi-pro format. And I agree. But a half inch 16 track will be the same quality as a quarter inch 8 track. Please, don't buy it. You will regret it. A 1 inch 16 track o.k. maybe but not a half inch 16 track. You will not get that classic analog sound out of it. The narrow track formats are notorious. Ask around and find out about the machine you are going to buy. They can call it professional all they like but a half inch 16 track is not a pro format. I work with analog machines all the time sir. I know a used 2 inch 16 track is a lot of money but if you get a half inch 16 track you will need DBX. Trust me, this is not the analog you looking for.
O.k. one more time. You can get a Tascam 85 -16B 1 inch 16 track on Ebay for $2 325 USD. Check it out.
Note: That is a "sold as is" sale. And the Dbx does not work on a few channels. Also look into a Tascam MS-16. Rock solid built. The 15 ips model does not come with DBX. And you will want to run your 1 inch 16 track at 30 ips to get good high end repsonse and signal to noise ratio. If you can get at least: 40 - 15 000 hz +1 / -2db Record / Play 62 db 'A' weighted you should do o.k. Without DBX a half inch 16 track even at 30 ips will.be noisy as freak.
You didn't need a 3 head deck back in 1992 to get great sound. Any $300 mid priced deck was excellent. My crappy Kenwood: Type 1........30 - 17 000 hz +-3db Type 2........30 - 18 000 hz +-3db Type 4........30 - 19 000 hz +- 3db. Almost full range with Metal tape. And with Dolby B and C you were ready to play back most tapes.
Back in 1992 a $300 midpriced deck with Type 4 tape should get you 30 - 19 000 hz +-3db. Well, my crappy Kenwood did. And the frequency response listed is equal to many cutting lathes. At least for the top end. If you owned a 3 head machine back then your tapes should be pretty much like the source. My Nak 581 always made perfect copies of the source. 20 - 20 000 +-3db is not really needed. Even 30 - 18 000 hz +-3db would do the job on most recordings. Maybe you fiddled too much. I always added a little extra low bass and top end to my tapes but I did often get carried away.
1" 16 track Tascams seem to have been quite popular with Reggae producers so I've heard what they could do when new, my advice is don't bother, when I've compiled albums from raw unmastered transfers they stood out like a sore thumb compared to 2" sourced masters, mastering helps, but it's still a very compromised format, if people want to do tape they need to find the budget to do it properly or else they're better off using digital after all the goal should be to achieve the best recording you can.
Yes, both of us agree but the Gary (super cool guy) doesn't want to buy a 2 inch 16 track or even a 1 inch 16 track. He wants to buy a half inch (yep, you heard it here) 16 track. I was trying to convince him to move up to 1 inch 16 track at least. Without some form of NR that half inch 16 track will be noisy as freak. And even a 1 inch 16 track needs help. And DBX is not a NR system I would advise anyone to use.
John, If you every find an 80's jvc 2 head deck like the "kd' series in like close to new condition, let me know. I have one that I really like the way how it sounds, but to maintain it looks like a nightmare. its got over 100 capacitors and the belts are hiding in the transporter cave.
Update: Dolby "A" provides 10 to 15 db of noise reduction. But that is theoretical. Back in 1973 the average 2 inch 24 track would give you 64 db A weighted signal to noise ratio at 0VU at 15 ips. 66 db at 30 ips. So you would think thst Dolby A would shoot it up to 74 db easy. Not really. One spec that is hardly ever published is the noise level of a tape machines in the stop mode. Fortunately, Stephens did publish this spec. It was 70 db. So despite the claims of Dolby Labs you would only get another 6 db of signal to noise ratio back in the the early 70's. By the time we got to a Studer A827 you were looking at 90 db if not more. Today signal to noise ratio of 120 db is routine. Not back in 1973 it wasn't. Keep in mind most audio engineers will not be aware of this because this particular spec was rarely ever published by manufactures. Doubt me? Check the specs of Stephens multitracks on line.
Yep ohhh! YES! this is the 4 track that could pull off 30 - 16 000 hz +-3db instead of the usual 40 - 12 500 +-3db
I bought a luxman dbx cassette deck (dbx eliminated the hiss etc ) it worked awesome for 25 % of the time . I must have spent 500 bucks repairing it. It was like a 150 charge just to bring in any equipment. I should have kept my wollensak one.
Waste of time? The best you are going to get from a top notch 3 head deck with metal tape ($60 and up now) without any NR is 62 db 'A' weighted which is 60 db unweighted. That is the crappy noise spec from an Ampex half inch 3 track from 1958. Noisy as hell. Hissssssssss! Maybe that is good for Metal music which has no dynamic range at all but try recording Dark Side of The Moon or Bethoven's 9th without any form of NR. You make think your 3 head cassette deck is great but compared to a pro half inch quarter track machine even the best Nak comes up super short. The Pros like The Caveman can get away without using Dolby SR on his 24 track tape machines. Why? He gets 70 db 'A' weighted out of his Studer. And similar out of his half inch, half track running at 30 ips. You do not have this equipment. You make me a tape of a CD it better be Dolby B or C encoded. You may think your cassette tapes are quiet but they are not. Dolby mistaking is really only a problem for Dolby B. Any error would be 1.5 db at most. Every cassette deck has at least Dolby B. And any casstte deck after 1990 should have Dolby C.
Never have had good results with any kind of Dolby. I always ended up liking the overall sound (even with some "hiss",) better than Dolby recorded tapes. It took the "hiss" away, but seemed to soften the sound too much (imo). Just easier for me not to deal with it (the "right" Dolby?, is it switched on?, was it recorded with the "right" Dolby? "which" type of Dolby should I play the tape back with? etc.) I just use the best tape available, tweak the azimuth, set record levels as high as I can get away with, and make sure my source (vinyl usually,) is clean and the connections are good. Also "metal" tape is over-rated (imo,) Maxell XL-IIS or TDK SAX are preferred here.
The issue is sync response. You know when you take Tracks 1-3 and mix 'em down to Track 4. It wasn't an issue to have a 4 track cassette recorder that could record and playback 4 tracks at 30 - 16 000 hz +-3db. But when you are in sync mode the top frequency end will cause distortion and feedback.. This is why most 4 and 8 track cassettes bottomed out at 12 500 hz. It is quite engineer marvel to pull this off. This is the reponse in sync mode as well. Incredible. Nakamichi did make a cassette 8 track prototype in 1992. It ran at 5 ips. 30 - 18 000 hz +-3db. 74 db A weighted using Dolby C NR. Apparently 7 ips didn't work too well. But it never went into production. At $2500 it was too expensive too produce. * fully parametric 3 band eq. * 2 Aux sends with pan/mute on return channels. Pre/post fader. * 100 hz low cut filter * In line monitoring * group function * solo button * Mechanical average peak meters. * bias/eq set for TDK MA 100 / 110 * specially designed motor/transport system capable of pulling a 110 tape with no issues.. * Dolby HX Pro on/off They built the prototype but it never even made it to the Pro trade shows. Nackamachi's only time in the Pro music market..
I always preferred DBX Type I. I thought Dolby chopped the top a bit, and the more consumer/cassette oriented DBX-II seemed to have an issue with "breathing." Not sure of a better way of describing it. The DBX on my Teac X-1000R Reel to reel was excellent. Though this is a hotly contested opinion. (It's audiophile stuff after all!)
