Tape emulsion sonic "flavours"?

[Mo-Tech]

I consider recording to (real-) tape as somewhat not just a more forgiving medium but also a psychoacoustic treatment, not only mostly a very pleasant but a highly beneficial one too, at least to my ears.

I run a 1/4" Otari MTR-12 machine that I both track (using Time-Code) with DAW and final mix-print with. Who knows, maybe someday start mastering with it too. Tape is very affordable in this format.

While very hard to notice and subtle, I've tried to think of a words to describe the sonic signature of each tape I've used so far that are still in production:

RMG Studio Master 911: "consistent", maybe just very tiny bit of a "crunchy" glue on the final mixes - the most universal tape I've used, no matter how high or low you hit it or speed, it just sings it's song and you can hit it very hard.

RMG Studio Master 900: "silky" or even "supersmooth", sonically has a certain degree of "depth" or "3D" signature, the lowest noise I know with IEC eq. Synths, acoustic drums particularly I like tracking with it. Not liking to hit it too hot though, there's no need to. Love it for the final mix, it's the most transparent "glue" to my mixes I've heard so far.

Emtec (Basf) PER528 (broadcast tape): "dim", or slightly "through a wooden resonating door" sonic signature, gives the most "coloration" from all the brand new tapes still in production I've run. Love it for electronic drums and often like to hit it hard to induce the compression and harmonic distortion effect. Love this tape also for slow-motion drums effects. It's apparently also the strongest tape in production, you can almost abuse it forever to make loops.

ATR Master: just "right", or "transparent". It doesn't shine anywhere particularly, but has no weak links too. Love it for vocals tracks or final mix print. Very expensive here in Europe, so not convinced it's worth over SM900 that costs almost twice the less.

Always wondered what you guys think about what sonic "flavour" does one or another tape emulsion gives on your deck?

Would love to hear your thoughts on different tapes you've ran! There's not much info or experience shared on this, so would be nice to build a "database" for new users helping to decide what tape to use.

Keep it reel!

[honkyjonk]

Interesting.

You're re-biasing for the different formulations right?

At one point, I spent a day doing as close to an a/b test as I could, between SM911 and ATR tape. That is, re-biasing for each tape, using the same source material and making sure every other part of the calibration was equal/flat from one tape to the other.

This was on a Tascam 58 8 track.

I like the ATR tape a bit better than the 911. The 911 does saturate earlier, but doesn't sound as 3D to my ears. I came away thinking it sounded a bit more spitty too when being driven hard. ATR tape is a rad all around tape. You can print levels all over the place, high, low. A large margin of error. It always gives you back a nice wide deep picture.

Anyway, the tape machine electronics of course play a part at different levels.

I'd probably buy 456 if it was still being made though. Ah well. . . . I'm happy to even have the opportunity to buy any tape that consistently works. . .

[kslight]

I have to assume that cassettes have a particularly savory flavor because my old car ate them all the time, but it never occurred that I should taste them myself!

[Mo-Tech]

Interesting.

You're re-biasing for the different formulations right?

At one point, I spent a day doing as close to an a/b test as I could, between SM911 and ATR tape. That is, re-biasing for each tape, using the same source material and making sure every other part of the calibration was equal/flat from one tape to the other.

This was on a Tascam 58 8 track.

I like the ATR tape a bit better than the 911. The 911 does saturate earlier, but doesn't sound as 3D to my ears. I came away thinking it sounded a bit more spitty too when being driven hard. ATR tape is a rad all around tape. You can print levels all over the place, high, low. A large margin of error. It always gives you back a nice wide deep picture.

Anyway, the tape machine electronics of course play a part at different levels.

I'd probably buy 456 if it was still being made though.

Yes, all biased and EQ response matched as flat as I could. The differences is almost not audible as said since the tapes are so good anyway. Only really focussing you notice any difference between tapes when the machine is biased and eq-d correctly. And sure they play a bit differently on different decks, hence why I'm asking from others who run tape and notice sonical differences between emulsions.

SM 911 is NOT a competition for ATR Master. SM 900 is, which is a modern and the latest emulsion - designed soley for the best performance (SM 900 has also the thickest emulsion). SM 911 is a classic emulsion, giving a tiny bit of coloration and certain mix "glue" that many engineers particulary like or are used to, it's their most sold tape as far as I know. SM 900 is more of a "specialist" tape. ATR tries to do both I guess.

Make no mistake - I love ATR Master tape! But that being said I'll have to run more tests since so far I'm not convinced if ATR Master is worth almost twice the money over it's SM900 competition. So far I have to put them roughly on par in sonic quality, yet SM900 costs a lot less here in Europe: 50 EUR for ATR reel, 30 EUR for SM900 reel makes me ask serious questions, hopefully in US ATR pricing isn't that steep(?)

I don't have experience with Ampex 456 since I've had a bad experience with the "new" old stock tapes (excessive dropouts and/or shed syndrome). From in-production tapes RMG has a Studio Master 468, maybe worth a try? I don't have any experience with the latter though, hopefully someday I'll try it.

Never had a shed syndrome with any RMG, ATR or Emtec tapes that are still in production.

[Mo-Tech]

but it never occurred that I should taste them myself!

LOL, when I say sonic "flavour" it doesn't mean you have to eat your tape

[oneflightup]

I tasted some tape once..... not good.

Can't remember the formulation, I'm afraid

But in all seriousness, I've used 468 quite a bit.... no problems with shed or stickyness.

Nick