1" 8 track vs. 1/2" 8 track

[tiger vomitt]

what are the differences in sound between these 2 kinds of tape machines? which format do you prefer? not just for sound, but cost effectiveness too..

i run a project studio for hire and do all my work digitally with some decent preamps and mics. i seriously need to get back into tape but i remember very little about it (i learned how to record on tape way back when but almost immediately went all digital afterwards, this was in the early 90's). im just sick of digital sounding so fucking blah sometimes. i have to do so much extra crap to give sounds some character, im kinda sick of it

so what's a good 8 track deck, 1/2" or larger? how much do these beasts cost these days?

please help, im stupid!



evan

[Al]

tiger vomit!. Look out for a Fostex b16,around 400 g.b.p. "whatever that is dollars",you see them on ebay occasionally,1/2 machine. Or for 8 track Fostex R8 which is on 1/4 tape,and also has a very powerfull remote controler,i've seen these on ebay for as little as 150 g.b.p. again convert to dollars if you have to!!....I've got both of these machines and luv them both!!.

As far as tape width goes,the wider the tape format the better the quality,like a 2 inch machine is going to sound bigger and beefier than a 1 inch machine,as simple as that...of course the wider your tape format the bigger the cost.
1/4 tape around 15 g.b.p. and 1/2 at 30 g.b.p. etc. etc.. that's new prices,but you can get one pass tape,pretty cost affective,i've recorded projects dozens of times with the same tape,and it's fine.

I've been using tape for about 15 years,and there's no way i'm going digital,it sounds like shit to me!!

Hope this helps answer your question!!

Cheers
Al

[prince turbo lung]

yo evan throw down the cash for an otari mx 5050. it is half inch and sounds like a world of rock on drums and bass. 1 inch machines sound badd ass, butt they will be expensive, and tape will cost more. i just got a daw and use the mx5050 on the front end. they cost less than $1k, i do not think they can be beat in that price range. if you want to go nuts though i know someone selling a studer a80 1" 8 track for $1500, but it is in nashville and as big as a closet.


kerry

[j.hall]

As far as tape width goes,the wider the tape format the better the quality,like a 2 inch machine is going to sound bigger and beefier than a 1 inch machine,as simple as that...of course the wider your tape format the bigger the cost.

this is untrue

tape width has nothing to do with it
track width is what you are after

a 2" 24 track will have smaller space for the magnetic flux then a 1" 8 track

why do you think they build 2" 8 tracks?

the more "stuff" you can get on the tape per track, the "bigger" it will sound

tape width merely gives you the surface area for more tracks or more information

formats to avoid like the plague:
1/2" 16 track
1" 24 track

cross talk and thin sounds will make these formats a nightmare....plus they are rare

a 1" 8 track will typically sound better then a 1/2" 8 track

what are the differences in sound between these 2 kinds of tape machines? which format do you prefer? not just for sound, but cost effectiveness too..

sound quality is never cost effective

you must decide if switching to a reel to reel deck will increase your business or decrease it

i'm finding it pretty hard to get bands to buy tape.....not only do they think that i should work for free, but they think the recording medium should be free to.....

[Al]

'A 1inch 8 track will typically sound better than 1/2 8 track". You just contradicted yourself there mate!!!. Hahaha!!

I also find your arrogance laughable. Formats to avoid!!!. HAHAHA

[bobbydj]

Just out of interest where's the contradiction in the notion that the key factor is in track width - not tape width?

Yr point about affordable tape machines stands - I also got the feeling that the poster was after something affordable. Nevertheless I still think the point about track width is very relevant issue to make here. Also it's wrong to imply that it's necessarily expensive to shop for e.g. an 8 track 1". Studers weren't mentioned. I think one important issue is how long you're prepared to go on looking for a machine that's not necessarily going to soak up dough in maintenance costs. In other words you could be spying eBay for 18 months before an 'ex. cond.' 1" 8 track comes up for sale (even then maintenance is going to be an issue at some point).

If I had a choice between 8 track 1/4" and 8 track 1/2" machines in comparable condition and for similar price I'd definitely go for the latter, even though tape cost is significantly higher. And despite the fact that 1/2" machines are about as portable as a small fridge.

[takeout]

'A 1inch 8 track will typically sound better than 1/2 8 track". You just contradicted yourself there mate!!!. Hahaha!!

I also find your arrogance laughable. Formats to avoid!!!. HAHAHA

Ummm... he's right on both counts. It's not arrogance; it's physics.

If I were to make an analogy (no pun intended), I'd relate wider track width to high- vs. low-sample-rate digital recording. Think of wider track widths as higher sample rate; you get more information, and more accurately.

The reason to avoid formats that sqeeze a lot of tracks onto a narrow space is, either the track gaps are too narrow (hence crosstalk), or the tracks themselves are too narrow (hence reduced frequency response).

I'll put my Ampex 1" 8-track up against anything Tascam or Fostex has ever made. It is a monster in all respects, and cost me all of $650.

[Al]

He contradicted my post,by saying that tape width has nothing to do with it!!
Then went on to say that!!?.
O.k then trak width,tape width you know what i meant!!?

I've had my recordings released by Virgin records,which were incidentely recorded on my Fostex r8. All this you have to have a certain machine to get a good result nonsense is all rubbish!. At the end of the day if your a good engineer anything is possible. A bad workman always blames his tools eh?!!

[bobbydj]

No! No! I insist. You can only record great stuff with a Studer.

[j.hall]

He contradicted my post,by saying that tape width has nothing to do with it!!
Then went on to say that!!?.
O.k then trak width,tape width you know what i meant!!?

don't be a complete idiot!!!!

i'd rather not get into this, but since you are insisting.....

you completely don't get it man

the available surface area to put magnetic flux onto 8 different tracks of audio on a 1/2" piece of tape is significantly less then putting 8 different tracks on a 1" piece of tape

tape height still has nothing to do with it!!!!!

are you following me yet....since i'll assume you aren't let's use a different example that i already used

a 2" 8 track is going to have much more sruface area devoted to each track then a 2" 24 track......hence, the 2" 8 track will sound much "fuller" and better....of course exceptions can exist due to calibration and maintenance of the deck

but to say the tape height is the sole factor in sound is completely ignorant of you.....in fact, it's as ignorant as not realizing that i answered the original posters question which happened to specifically be about the difference in sound fo a 1/2" 8 track and a 1" 8 track.....and since you are spreading wrong information, i felt it was justified to set the record straight so the origianl poster wouldn't be making diecisions based on misinformation

I've had my recordings released by Virgin records,which were incidentely recorded on my Fostex r8.

and pink floyd did dark side of the moon on a 16 track

and led zeplin did most of their stuff to a 4 track
and the beattles did this and that, and the stones.....

gimme a break man....

All this you have to have a certain machine to get a good result nonsense is all rubbish!. At the end of the day if your a good engineer anything is possible. A bad workman always blames his tools eh?!!

i didn't say any of that....you are putting those words in my mouth.....

i merely corrected the wrong information you were spreading

no where did i say you had to have a 2" 16 track studer A-80 to make a "pro" record


if i'm arrogant for correcting your blatanly wrong information......then i guess i'm arrogant

[Al]

I didn't say you said that j.hall!..i was only making a point about the recording scenario,and what you can acheive with simple means!,after all this dude was looking for a CHEAP tape machine!.

I'm sorry for refering to you as being arrogant. Like i said in my last post,tape width/trak width!!..maybe i should have been more specific in the first place...please excuse me!!

Al

[j.hall]

cool......

i think we can agree that there is hardly anything cheaper then a DAW right now

i think this person really needs to decide if a tape machine will bring in business

the maintenace and tape cost make it more expensive in the long run, no matter what machine or format you get....

[tiger vomitt]

thank you so much for all the info!

i know that less tracks on wider tape yields "better" sound quality. i guess what i was hinting at in my question about fidelity was if there are any freaks out there that prefer the sound of 1/2" over 1". see, i had a friend who was doing an album on a tascam 388 he had around cuz he liked the sound. he usually recorded on an MS16 (not exactly hi-fi either hehe). and i gotta say, the 388 really did have its own kind of cool quality going on. i understand why he did what he did.



AI, thank you for the tip on the Fostex thing. there is something about fostex that i just dont trust tho, i dont see myself ever getting any fostex gear over $25 at the moment. but thank you for the suggestions!!



now kerry, that mx5050 is looking good there is a part of me that is genuinely weirded out by the idea of buying a tape machine from someone i dont know, which generally rules out ebay i suppose. it seems like there is so much that could be wrong with the deck, that i would have no idea how to even identify. if im buying a guitar, i know how to look at the neck, make sure there's no shorts, etc. but i dont even know what to look for to make sure a deck is okay.

can anyone recommend a good dealer for 8 track recorders? ooh, a website link with info on what to look for would be awesome too!


thanks tape op homies!

evan

[tiger vomitt]

I'll put my Ampex 1" 8-track up against anything Tascam or Fostex has ever made. It is a monster in all respects, and cost me all of $650.

hi takeout,

what model is your ampex recorder?

[j.hall]

takeout's deck is a rare ampex

it's a 440b (not rare at all) that was custom built at the factory to run at 30ips

also, i'm not sure if ampex actually made a 1" 8 track
that part of this machine might be custom as well

her's some things to keep in mind about "takeout's" deck

1. he got it off ebay in a package deal for 650 which included a scully 280b 1/4" 2 track....we are thinking that the good deal he got was due to the auction including both machines

2. we knew that we could fix or replace anything that was wrong with the deck oursleves or have a really good tech friend of ours do it for beer.....so buying off ebay didn't really matter, since we have some decent tape machine knowledge before hand

3. the biggest risk was the head stack, which we lucked out on, it looks great

4. it took about 40 hours of work to nurse this thing back to life, and our tech friend had to come trace down a lifter problem we couldn't figure out

5. after all the work, patients, and swearing.....the machine still went down in the middle of our first "pay gig".

6. this deck is really old, it has no logic circuitry, and nothing to complicated.
from a service stand point, this deck is like working on a 57 chevy and not like a 2003 mercedes. if something is broken, it's rather simple to find it and fix it.

the machine is rock solid right now, and i have to say that it's hands down the best sounding analog deck i've ever worked on

discrete class A electroncis on a 1" 8 track is just amazing

i've worked on:
studer
otari
3M
MCI
Ampex

and this deck kills them all.....

BTW, the scully 1/4" 2 track he got in the package deal is in some serious need of repair and service.......we haven't even had time to deal with it

but, to print mixes from the ampex over to the scully (discrete class A electronics) will be pretty bad ass

the main thing to look out for is head life
if the heads are great, and the machine powers up and sucessfully goes through all the transport functions......chances are your problems will be pretty small

then again, "xonlocust" can tell you otherwise