R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down

Author Topic: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal  (Read 10218 times)

lek

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« on: December 13, 2005, 09:26:17 PM »

My (newly acquired) ATR 102 is being serviced at ATR services, and I have the opportunity to replace the ferrite heads with metal ones, which someone there tells me will sound far better than the ferrite heads.

Is the difference substantial? - I'm putting a lot of time and money into this so I want to 'do it right'.
Logged
don't forget to eat your khao niao

Lek
www.lekmusic.com

lucey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1043
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2005, 01:24:35 AM »

lek wrote on Tue, 13 December 2005 21:26

My (newly acquired) ATR 102 is being serviced at ATR services, and I have the opportunity to replace the ferrite heads with metal ones, which someone there tells me will sound far better than the ferrite heads.

Is the difference substantial? - I'm putting a lot of time and money into this so I want to 'do it right'.


Yes, well worth it.  Are you going with Ampex or Flux heads?

Trust ATR, they have great ears.
Logged
Brian Lucey
Magic Garden Mastering

"the economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the ecology" - unknown

lek

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2005, 10:00:52 AM »

lucey wrote on Wed, 14 December 2005 01:24


Yes, well worth it.  Are you going with Ampex or Flux heads?

Trust ATR, they have great ears.


No idea, which do you recommend?
By the way, can anyone tell me the differences between using 1/4" and 1/2"?
Any other comments on ferrite vs. metal would be appreciated as well.
Logged
don't forget to eat your khao niao

Lek
www.lekmusic.com

thedoc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1218
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #3 on: December 14, 2005, 10:08:12 AM »

I have seen issues with ferrite heads chipping....metal is good.
Logged
Doc

Bob Olhsson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3968
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2005, 10:49:44 AM »

When the ferrite chips (due to temperature changes) it is not very kind to your tapes.

lucey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1043
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #5 on: December 14, 2005, 11:20:33 AM »

Ferrite is a hard metal with a cold sound.  Stock Ampex heads are very nice, and most people are happy there.  Flux and EMG Heads are advanced technology ... technically a better sound, but may or may not be better to you.

Ferrrite is used in many erase heads and a lot of duplication machines for rec/play heads.  

The guys at ATR can set you up on Ampex metal or Flux and tweak it out either way.
Logged
Brian Lucey
Magic Garden Mastering

"the economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the ecology" - unknown

electrical

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 674
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #6 on: December 14, 2005, 12:38:39 PM »

Ampex used both metal and ferrite ("glass" in the day) heads. Their glass heads were seen as a tremendous benefit for radio stations, because they were hard enough not to need lapping, except many moons down the pike. They didn't sound spectacular, but they were dead reliable. If a ferrite head cracks, as can happen if they are over-heated by an oscillation in the audio circuit or something, or if someone bangs a flange into them, they can literally scrape the oxide off a tape or cut it in two.

Ampex metal heads sounded great, but were quite soft and needed lapping regularly. The newer Flux Magnetics heads sound better yet in my opinion, and I would recommend them.

Bear in mind that your playback head only matters to the extent it allows you to listen to your recordings, unless you intend to master from that machine as well. It pays to make sure your record head is in impeccable shape first, because that's what is making the recording.

Half-inch gives better bass response and less noise than quarter-inch, all else being equal, but may have slightly less stable azimuth. That's about the only trade-off, and I think it's a worthwhile one.

Good luck.
Logged
best,

steve albini
Electrical Audio
sa at electrical dot com
www.electrical.com

thedoc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1218
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2005, 12:51:53 PM »

I will say that different brands of ferrite heads acted diffently.  One brand went south and chipped really fast...One didn't.

hmmmmmm

The metal heads that I have seen recently are very well made.
Logged
Doc

Mark Donahue

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 159
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2005, 05:46:43 PM »

Dear Greg,
While I whole-heartedly agree with everything that Steve wrote in his reply, I'm going to add one more variable to the mix for consideration.
I would consider the purchase of a used set of 1/2" heads from either Mike Spitz at ATR or John French at JRF Magnetics as a wise investment, especially if money is a factor. At this point in time, given that these machines will see limited use (Compared with the old days when they ran 'round the clock), a set of heads with around 50% life will last you for a good long time and probably cost half what new heads will go for. And as a bonus, the performance of analog heads reaches their peak just before they wear out, so you gain the benefit of a little use by the previous owner.
And like Steve said, there is no reason to go for the Extended low frequency mastering playback head if you don't intend to be mastering from this machine. Also, AFAIK, Ampex and Flux never made a ferrite 1/2" head, the only ones you will find are from Saki Magnetics.
All the best,
mark
Logged
************************
Mark Donahue
Chief Mastering Engineer
Soundmirror, Inc.
Boston, MA
http://www.soundmirror.com
************************

lek

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2005, 01:18:46 AM »

Thanks Steve, Brian, Mark, Bob, everyone else for all the advice.
I think I will be looking into the 1/2" metal heads (flux, etc) see what I can get.

I will not be doing mastering, just mixing down to the machine. Mastering will be done by an outside source (most probably one of the names in this thread or PSW forum!)
Quote:


And like Steve said, there is no reason to go for the Extended low frequency mastering playback head if you don't intend to be mastering from this machine.

Mark, I thought that the low frequency difference had to do with the size (1/4" vs 1/2") - not ferrite vs metal?
Anyway, wouldn't it be better for more accurate monitoring purposes to use a play head with the same frequency response as the record head? - or when mixing do you guys monitor the signal pre tape instead of after?
Logged
don't forget to eat your khao niao

Lek
www.lekmusic.com

Mark Donahue

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 159
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2005, 07:19:06 PM »

lek wrote on Thu, 15 December 2005 01:18


mpdonahue wrote:


And like Steve said, there is no reason to go for the Extended low frequency mastering playback head if you don't intend to be mastering from this machine.

Mark, I thought that the low frequency difference had to do with the size (1/4" vs 1/2") - not ferrite vs metal?
Anyway, wouldn't it be better for more accurate monitoring purposes to use a play head with the same frequency response as the record head? - or when mixing do you guys monitor the signal pre tape instead of after?


Greg,
There are 2 different things in question here. One has to do with the attributes of 1/2" tape compared with 1/4" tape, the other has to do with playback head construction.
In my quote above, I'm talking about the different types of 1/2" playback heads available for purchase. If you go to the JRF or ATR websites you will see them talk about 2 different types of playback heads, Standard and Extended Low frequency (Mastering). The mastering head will typically set you back 50% more than the similar standard 1/2" head. This is only a playback issue, there are no such limitations in the record head.  
All the best,
mark
Logged
************************
Mark Donahue
Chief Mastering Engineer
Soundmirror, Inc.
Boston, MA
http://www.soundmirror.com
************************

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2005, 09:13:24 PM »

Mark Donahue wrote on Thu, 15 December 2005 16:19

If you go to the JRF or ATR websites you will see them talk about 2 different types of playback heads, Standard and Extended Low frequency (Mastering). The mastering head will typically set you back 50% more than the similar standard 1/2" head.


Fwiw, I didn't like the extended LF head and stick with the plain Ampex style.

DC

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2005, 07:30:25 AM »

lek wrote on Thu, 15 December 2005 01:18



Anyway, wouldn't it be better for more accurate monitoring purposes to use a play head with the same frequency response as the record head? - or when mixing do you guys monitor the signal pre tape instead of after?



Good questions. In theory, yes, but in practice, people get along very well mixing to a machine that does not have as good a low frequency playback response as the mastering machine will. It's pretty hard to mix while listening to the playback head Smile. Anyway, until you actually hit record, you have to listen to the mix bus, and by the time you do hit record, I doubt your mind will be into "oh my, the repro response from that machine is not quite as solid in the bottom end as the mix I remember." So don't worry, it all sorts itself out in the end, and you just saved youself a bundle on a reproduce head. The low frequency response is not primarily related to the tape width, but I believe to the integrity and number of windings in the reproduce head and how it is made. I am not an expert on that, I just let John French do that part of the dirty work. (But yes, I do know how to adjust zenith, penetration, centering, height, azimuth, tension, and tape path stability).

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2005, 07:46:13 AM »

dcollins wrote on Thu, 15 December 2005 21:13

Mark Donahue wrote on Thu, 15 December 2005 16:19

If you go to the JRF or ATR websites you will see them talk about 2 different types of playback heads, Standard and Extended Low frequency (Mastering). The mastering head will typically set you back 50% more than the similar standard 1/2" head.


Fwiw, I didn't like the extended LF head and stick with the plain Ampex style.

DC




Why do you think that is? Can you put into words what you heard as a difference? I've always used the extended heads as soon as I got into mastering, so I guess I've never heard anything "inferior."
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

Bob Olhsson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3968
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2005, 06:29:52 PM »

Many mixers decide what they are going to change based on playback.

There's a lot to be said for mastering to begin with duplicating exactly what the mixer was hearing including the head bumps.

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2005, 09:47:01 PM »

bobkatz wrote on Fri, 16 December 2005 04:46


Why do you think that is? Can you put into words what you heard as a difference? I've always used the extended heads as soon as I got into mastering, so I guess I've never heard anything "inferior."


I would call it the "extended midrange harshness" head if I had to put it into words.

No idea technically why it would be, but it was a fair test of the two heads.

DC

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #16 on: December 17, 2005, 10:58:38 AM »

Bob Olhsson wrote on Fri, 16 December 2005 18:29

Many mixers decide what they are going to change based on playback.

There's a lot to be said for mastering to begin with duplicating exactly what the mixer was hearing including the head bumps.



I'm not sure I agree with that. I would advise the mixer to just trust the low end of the console that went into the tape machine, or the sound of the machine on E-E. Any other approach could cause innumerable arguments over nothing. After all, he mixed the whole day without running the tape, didn't he?

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #17 on: December 17, 2005, 11:01:43 AM »

dcollins wrote on Fri, 16 December 2005 21:47

bobkatz wrote on Fri, 16 December 2005 04:46


Why do you think that is? Can you put into words what you heard as a difference? I've always used the extended heads as soon as I got into mastering, so I guess I've never heard anything "inferior."


I would call it the "extended midrange harshness" head if I had to put it into words.

No idea technically why it would be, but it was a fair test of the two heads.

DC



Thanks. It would be interesting to see if anyone else has had that reaction. I simply do not have the money and time to start putting in a "normal" head in my machine and see if it sounds "better". The head I had made is a special low impedance (low inductance) head designed to match the input transformer of the MR-70. So the old Studer Repro head would not even work.

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

lek

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #18 on: December 17, 2005, 11:32:41 AM »

deleted my response
Logged
don't forget to eat your khao niao

Lek
www.lekmusic.com

mcsnare

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 958
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #19 on: December 21, 2005, 04:31:02 PM »

Bob,
 I've found the same thing as DC. I posted about this subject right after I got my ATR refurbed by ATR Service. I had them put in a regular AND extended low freq playback head. It's switchable via a little togle switch in the headblock.
 My first reaction was that the norm head was more harmonically rich and "carbonated" sounding, the extended head a bit "drier". After several more projects I now feel like each head sounds best on different tapes, not on an absolute basis.
Dave McNair

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #20 on: December 21, 2005, 10:56:30 PM »

mcsnare wrote on Wed, 21 December 2005 13:31

Bob,
I've found the same thing as DC. I posted about this subject right after I got my ATR refurbed by ATR Service. I had them put in a regular AND extended low freq playback head. It's switchable via a little togle switch in the headblock.




How do you reset the head-loading for the two heads?  Or is it close enough?

DC

lucey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1043
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2005, 01:23:37 AM »

Bob Olhsson wrote on Fri, 16 December 2005 18:29

Many mixers decide what they are going to change based on playback.

There's a lot to be said for mastering to begin with duplicating exactly what the mixer was hearing including the head bumps.


Agreed ... especially with automated mixes, hitting Repro and having a little tweak is the way to go.  No way I would print a mix monitoring the Console or Input.
Logged
Brian Lucey
Magic Garden Mastering

"the economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the ecology" - unknown

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2005, 04:56:16 AM »

mcsnare wrote on Wed, 21 December 2005 16:31


 My first reaction was that the norm head was more harmonically rich and "carbonated" sounding, the extended head a bit "drier". After several more projects I now feel like each head sounds best on different tapes, not on an absolute basis.
Dave McNair


I wonder how much of that is directly related to frequency response. But it could also be related to the fact that more metal in the ELF head -----> less harmonic distortion, and we know that a little bit of "edge" makes things sound less "dry".

It's a complex relationship, also to the tape recorder electronics. The electronics of my tape machine's reproduce amplifiers have a direct relationship to the sound that comes out as well. And by the time I master, the master has yet another signature, so, very consciously, I may add (or take away) components in the mastering electronics that make a total signature (e.g., more "edge" added post transfer), combined with that of my reproduce head. Which is why I have observed how two different mastering engineers, each with completely different chains, can arrive at very similar (and equally goo) sounding product.

The work of the very best mastering engineers has more in common than is different. You can still hear the signature of Doug Sax's electronics in his work, but tonally, a good Sax master and a good Ludwig or Grundman master have more in common than is different.

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

mcsnare

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 958
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2005, 09:41:49 AM »

Quote:

How do you reset the head-loading for the two heads? Or is it close enough?

DC

I guess I trust that the folks at ATR Service have that figured out! I do have to tweak the lo freq pb tone from head to head.
Dave McNair

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: ATR102 head question - ferrite vs. metal
« Reply #24 on: December 22, 2005, 04:42:19 PM »

mcsnare wrote on Thu, 22 December 2005 06:41


I guess I trust that the folks at ATR Service have that figured out! I do have to tweak the lo freq pb tone from head to head.
Dave McNair


Check the difference between 10k and 15k on your MRL when switching from one head to the other.  The head-loading pot is on the padnet card.

DC
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up
 

Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.033 seconds with 19 queries.