Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Guillermo Piccolini]

Hello,

I´m restoring a Telefunken M15 1/4 (yes, the one with the heads looking to the cylinders) and I´m about to order a MRL tape. Now I need to decide if I should go with the RMG 900 or the 911 formula. because I need to order the tape +6db or +9db. Some years ago I didn´t like the GP9 that much in my Tascam 38, but not sure if it´s better to use something like that in a mixdown machine. Also I need to choose between NAB or IEC. The machine runs at 15 and 7 1/2.
Can you help me to decide?

[Fletcher]

I always order 250nWb/m test tapes... that way if I want to do "+6" I know it's 3db>250nWb/m and if I want to do "+9" it's 6db>250nWb/m.  

I reckon you could order a 355nWb/m test tape [which is a "true" +6... 3db>250nWb/m is actually +5.2 which works well for me because I'm often a bit heavy handed with my levels] and then add 3db if you want to do the "+9" alignment.

Make sense?

[Guillermo Piccolini]

Thanks a lot Fletcher!

This nWb chinese is beginning to make some sense here...

But,,, what about the eq?. MRL papers says NAB is not good and IEC seems better, but they propose their MRL SM (Studio Master) eq....

also: which tape you think is better in sound/durability?

[Fletcher]

Being an American I have always run the NAB curve... though many have told me the IEC curve is "very cool".  I can't really be of assistance there as I don't have extensive experience with the IEC curve to have formed a real opinion.

I think I remember Steve Albini telling me that it's "quieter" but I could very easily have misremembered the conversation.

Peace.

[Barry Hufker]

I recommend CCIR.  According to audio history (IIRC), the NAB standard came first.  Europeans saw its advantages and disadvantages and created CCIR.  For me a great analog recorder uses European heads and CCIR while running at 15ips (38cm/s).

[Schallfeldnebel]

As far as I know the machines from the German broadcasters, with the heads up, so the oxide on the outside of the tape, have only CCIR record and playback possibility. At least my M15 had only CCIR. NAB makes only sense when you work on AC with 60Hz. Off course you can modify to NAB, but I would not recommend that.

I still work with the old broadcast tape PER528, because all those other fancy tapes like PEM486, SPR50, 910 and 911 all start to powder when they get old. The PER 525 and 528 are like sandpapper for the heads, but have the best printthrough values and do not even powder after 40 years.

Schallfeldweber

[Guillermo Piccolini]

thanks everybody for the replies.  You helped me a lot in the process to make my mind. I was thinking about CCIR, but it seems I have no choice anyway , so that´s solved..  I´ll order the test tape to 250nWb as recommended by Fletcher, but regarding tape I´m curious about the ones Schallfeldnebel is using; although I´m more concerned with sound that extreme durability. I plan to mix on the machine and recapture on the fly to 44.1 and in a subsequent pass record the tape to 192khz or so for archiving purposes and then put the tape to sleep. I had the idea of the recorder because as I still work @ 44.1 I´d like to have my mixes (analog) with higher sample rates, which is not possible since my converters are clocked to 44.1 while mixing. Another possibility was to use another computer to record the mix, but the cost were even higher, and it seems a good idea to mix to tape...

[Schallfeldnebel]

I use BASF testtape, reference level 514nWeber/m. The American 250nW/m testtapes refer to VU meters, and smaller tracks, 2mm and your machine has 2,75mm tracks. In Europe 320-(for mono and for stereo with Telcom C4) and 514nWb/m levels is used.(for stereo) It is just what you're used to.

Whenever you need any spares for your M15(A) check:

http://www.hilpert-audio.de

Also if you need a 1/2 inch M15A, he has them in his workshop.

Schallfeldweber

[J.J. Blair]

CCIR curve for 15 ips, hands down.  All but eliminates the need for Dolby.  

Personally, I'm not sure the type of tape that the tones are on matters as much.  You're just zeroing out your meters to them.  As far as what tape you like to record on, give them a listen and see.  

[seedyunderbelly.com]

JJ  Have you tried Mike Spitz'z  new tape?

[Fletcher]

The type of tape that the tones are on doesn't matter at all... as long as the tape is relatively fresh [under 5 years old] you're fine.  Tape type only matters for the "sound" of the music... not for reference level.

I'm waiting on a reel of the new ATR tape... can't wait to give it a go!!

[Andrew Hamilton]

Yes, Jay describes the NAB situation as one where the curve was for typical 1950's heads to play the existing tape formulation (Scotch 111).  Now that heads and tape formulas have gotten better, they use the NAB emphasis/de-emphasis eq worse than before - so much so as to be what he considers, a misapplication, today!  IEC I is the flattest standardized curve for today's tape.  Of course, if your recordings are only for the one machine (only for in-house playback), you can roll your own curve, to a certain extent.

Interestingly, all you need (for rock and roll) is a 30 ips AES Calibration Tape and then play it at 15 ips for flat eq (Don't forget to change your settings.).  That is the same as IEC I (CCIR) at 15 ips.  

Andrew

[Schallfeldnebel]

Andrew Hamilton writes:"Interestingly, all you need (for rock and roll) is a 30 ips AES Calibration Tape and then play it at 15 ips for flat eq (Don't forget to change your settings.). That is the same as IEC I (CCIR) at 15 ips."

But then the highest test frequency will be 9KHz, rather low for adjusting your playback EQ above 10KHz.

Schallfeldweber

[J.J. Blair]

seedyunderbelly.com wrote on Mon, 31 March 2008 15:46

JJ  Have you tried Mike Spitz'z  new tape?

No.

[seedyunderbelly.com]

thanks JJ,

I talked to Mike the other day  he mentioned that A pile of it  ended up at JJP's place.  I am excited to hear it.   Fletcher,  Let us know what you think after you try it!