Who wants to buy a new Reel-To Reel?

[Tim Gillett]

Ergonomically I like the B77

Tape play/wind logic was a big improvement over the A77, when going from fast wind/rewind to play meant a broken tape.

Yes the B77 was more fool proof. But in fairness the A77 was already a big advance over the previous valve series in a number of ways. Also in fairness the A77 wouldnt allow you to go straight from fast wind to play. You had to press Stop, wait for the reels to stop, and only then press Play. The uneducated got impatient for the reels to stop, pressed play and that's when tapes could be damaged.

Solution: RTFM. In bold lettering in the owner's manual, page 23: "The Play button must only be operated when the tape is stationary".

My main quibble with the A77 is very difficult tape path cleaning. Even just viewing it is extremely difficult. To their credit, Revox improved this somewhat on the B77 but it wasnt until the PR99 that they properly fixed it. The age old contest between cosmetics and function.

[Arpangel]

Ergonomically I like the B77, especially the track bounce function.

Yes, I used that extensively when I first bought my B77. I never had any desire to go 4 track because it always seemed to involve too many decisions about which tracks to bounce and how to assign the tracks so that you could mix most effectively. With the B77 you just got on with it - you had to mix as you went along and play each part correctly all the way through. While you could go back and re-record the most recent part again as often as you needed, once you had moved on to recording the next instrument there was no going back.

Yes, I can remember I’d make music on the B77 when I had very little time indeed, it was extremely quick to work with, and mixing as you go was a great benefit, it was very spontaneous.
The awkward cleaning, on the A77, there was a company that made modified machines with raised top plates which enabled easier access, I think they were called ITA?

[Martin Walker]

I never, EVER want to see a tape machine again. I lived through that hell and there's no way I would go back!

I do tend to agree, and my Revox A77 did end up going up in a puff of smoke.

Martin

[Arpangel]

One thing that you cannot do, with digital, and that’s slowing things down, it just doesn’t work, I’d own a tape machine just for doing that.
The depth and thickness, the solidity, you get with tape is unequaled.

[Mike Stranks]

One thing that you cannot do, with digital, and that’s slowing things down, it just doesn’t work, I’d own a tape machine just for doing that.
The depth and thickness, the solidity, you get with tape is unequaled.

You've obviously never used iZotope RX then...

[Kwackman]

One thing that you cannot do, with digital, and that’s slowing things down, it just doesn’t work, I’d own a tape machine just for doing that.
The depth and thickness, the solidity, you get with tape is unequaled.

You've obviously never used iZotope RX then...

Yes, nor Cubase, Logic and I'm sure others.

[Drew Stephenson]

Generally when someone says 'Digital can't do X' I generally take it to me 'I haven't worked out how to do X'.
Sorry Arpangel. :/

[James Perrett]

One thing that you cannot do, with digital, and that’s slowing things down, it just doesn’t work, I’d own a tape machine just for doing that.
The depth and thickness, the solidity, you get with tape is unequaled.

That's probably because you were working on a machine with NAB eq where the eq effectively changes between speeds. With digital you'd need to use something like Uhe's Satin which allows you to set the eq mismatch properly. You would also need to be working at high sample rates as you may well be bringing supersonic signals down into the audible band.

It is certainly very easy to change speed in digital but it doesn't work in the same way as tape without going to some effort.

[MOF]

That's probably because you were working on a machine with NAB eq where the eq effectively changes between speeds.......It is certainly very easy to change speed in digital but it doesn't work in the same way as tape without going to some effort.

Does it really matter? Ninety five plus percent of people will just hear it as a tape slowing down effect and that includes me, I can’t remember if real analogue tape exhibited some eq change as it slowed down. I don’t think tape speed had anything to do with CCIR and NAB curves though since tape speeds were agreed standards.

[Arpangel]

The resolution just isn’t there with digital, it just doesn’t work.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Hmmm.... It does... But only if you use appropriate equipment appropriately and know what to do with it.

[Kwackman]

The resolution just isn’t there with digital, it just doesn’t work.

As one who had the "joy" of using analog tape for many years, I really miss it too.
I miss the tape hiss, the limited dynamic range, the smell of isopropyl to clean the heads, the time spent lining the thing up, setting up any noise reduction system (because tape sounds SO good people use noise reduction!), the limited recording time that got halved if you doubled the speed to get better quality, the time to rewind and change reels, the reduced editing facilities, no ability to loop phrases while recording, the limited number of tracks, the storage space reels took up, the space a reel to reel machine took up, loss of quality at each bounce down, very limited editing abilities, depending on your skills with a razor blade only one level of undo, expense of tape, the awful feeling when you changed the monitoring from "desk out" to "off tape"...
Do specsavers do rose tinted specs?!
The very first time I used a digital workstation (AMS Audiofile which wasn't exactly user friendly) I was glad to hear a giant step in fidelity, and was amazed at the editing possibilities. Even slipping one track against another was a game changer.
Now we have incredible A to D converters that can cope with dynamic ranges approaching that of the human ear, running DAWs with editing and sound changing abilities that were science fiction when I used tape machines, on modestly priced computers. The total cost much, much less than any Studer reel to reel tape machine!
Digital works, really well.

[John Stafford]

I would dearly love a nice reel-to-reel. It's absolutely not necessary, and it doesn't make any sense at all, but none of the things I love make any sense.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I know what you mean...

My wife and kids are all bonkers too...

[Folderol]

I would dearly love a nice reel-to-reel. It's absolutely not necessary, and it doesn't make any sense at all, but none of the things I love make any sense.

Well I've mentioned the UHER here, and several other places. If you want it, it's yours for whatever you offer more than the cost of postage - with half a dozen tapes thrown in, and a set of replacement belts. It worked last time I tried it, which was something like 6 months ago.

If nobody ever claims it, then with great reluctance it will eventually have to go to the dump.

[The Elf]

Kwackman -

I could add my own list of horrors to yours. But that'll do for starters!

[Martin Walker]

Kwackman -

I could add my own list of horrors to yours. But that'll do for starters!

Yes indeed - Kwackman's post brought back a lot of painful memories for me too, in my case with a Revox A77.

Never again!

Martin

[John Stafford]

That's very kind of you Folderol. However, my friend tells me he has a reel-to-reel in his attic which he has offered to me.

I'll see if it's any good. Many thanks for your generous offer.

[Dan LB]

I would dearly love a nice reel-to-reel. It's absolutely not necessary, and it doesn't make any sense at all, but none of the things I love make any sense.

Well I've mentioned the UHER here, and several other places. If you want it, it's yours for whatever you offer more than the cost of postage - with half a dozen tapes thrown in, and a set of replacement belts. It worked last time I tried it, which was something like 6 months ago.

If nobody ever claims it, then with great reluctance it will eventually have to go to the dump.

Don't bin it Folderol! I'll buy it from you. Can you PM me the details on it? It's the stereo version yes?

[James Perrett]

I guess I'm probably a bit mad, but I've had a big grin on my face for most of the day listening to one of my favourite bands coming off 15ips tape.

[Arpangel]

Hmmm.... It does... But only if you use appropriate equipment appropriately and know what to do with it.

Well, that’s me out then.

[Mike Stranks]

Hmmm.... It does... But only if you use appropriate equipment appropriately and know what to do with it.

Well, that’s me out then.

Why?

I'm 70 and still learning stuff all the time... just recently I learnt how to slow things down and speed them up digitally without anyone being any the wiser. I'm talking changing tempo, but leaving pitch alone.

This morning i shall be experimenting with some video effects I want to try for my Christmas 'production'....

Go on! Be bold!

... please don't continue saying things 'can't be done' or 'it's not very good' when you mean in your experience so far you haven't worked it out or have no inclination to do so. You're giving us old codgers a bad name!

[Arpangel]

I would dearly love a nice reel-to-reel. It's absolutely not necessary, and it doesn't make any sense at all, but none of the things I love make any sense.

Well I've mentioned the UHER here, and several other places. If you want it, it's yours for whatever you offer more than the cost of postage - with half a dozen tapes thrown in, and a set of replacement belts. It worked last time I tried it, which was something like 6 months ago.

If nobody ever claims it, then with great reluctance it will eventually have to go to the dump.

If no one else claims this Folderol, put me second in line, if Dan doesn’t take it, I can sort post out and give you something on top.

[jimjazzdad]

If I was on the right side of the pond, I'd have been all over Folderol's offer. As it is, I'm glad that the Uher is going to find a good home. I don't know if its a bit of a no-no to promote other forums here, but there is lots of support for reel to reels of all makes over at Tapeheads.net - a mix of techies and oxide apostles.

While I will never stop using my digital gear as my primary, there IS something about tape. Maybe its just a romantic notion coupled with selective amnesia. I still own, and occasionally use, a Tascam 32, a Teac A-3340S and a Teac A-3300SX. I gave my 'spare' A-3340S to my son.

[Dan LB]

If I was on the right side of the pond, I'd have been all over Folderol's offer. As it is, I'm glad that the Uher is going to find a good home. I don't know if its a bit of a no-no to promote other forums here, but there is lots of support for reel to reels of all makes over at Tapeheads.net - a mix of techies and oxide apostles.

While I will never stop using my digital gear as my primary, there IS something about tape. Maybe its just a romantic notion coupled with selective amnesia. I still own, and occasionally use, a Tascam 32, a Teac A-3340S and a Teac A-3300SX. I gave my 'spare' A-3340S to my son.

I’m a member of Tapeheads.net, as are a few others around here. It’s a great resource.
I own and use a Tascam 388, a Sony TC-399, and a Sony TC-106. I actually enjoy the process of working with tape!