Reel to Reel Tape


I have an analogue setup. Although I have a CD player in the system. But everything else is an analogue. I am listening to Reel to Reel tape decks, I have a few of them, and I also have DBX 224X-DS attached. Does anyone else have similar setup? I find the DBX to be quite awesome. What's your opinion?
almandog
Do you think that digital omits more than the tape or adds more than the tape or both ? Whatever that might be. 
DBX type II noise reduction is the magic that made tape almost the perfect medium. Sadly, manufacturers couldn’t get it into the cassette format early enough, and confusion between DBX, Dolby B, Dolby C and Dolby HX Pro made things worse while at same time CD was coming out with great promises. Excepting for the wear and tear factor and lack of random access, R2R at 15ips with DBX can’t be beat, not even by DSD. 
Dear friends: The R2R is in reality a today vintage " fashion " and nothing else. Specs of those type of recorders are really poor against today standards, here an example of that in the Studer A-80:

Fru ,~ ncy response ." riu,’P 30 ips 50 Hz . . 20 kHz ± 2 dB, 15 ips 30 Hz . . 18 kHz ± 2 dB and 7.5 ips 60 Hz .. 12 kHz±1 dB --------’’"’’

wow&flutter: 0.04% at 30ips distortion at 1khz: 1%

signal to noise ratio at 30ips: 76db

and all depends not only on the velocity recording set up but the ty pe of tape.
The recorded information in the tape is magnetic and the masters " suffer " through the time a heavy degradation loosing information and is almost imposible for any R2R unit to re-read exactly with out lost any single information during playback due that’s a mechanic item where the magnetic action and unit heads readers just can’t do it no matter what.

It’s very easy to looklisten the signal degradation that makes any R2R macine when you compare a D2D LP against the same LP in the same recording session using the R2R.
The differences in quality in favor of the D2D recording is not enormous but way huge. Even if the R2R could had better specs the best R2R is no R2R as proved a D2D recordings.

As I said only a well regarded vintage " fashion " with no true advantages/facts against today digital recordings or yesterday D2D recordings.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

This does not tell the whole story;



https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/technics/rs-1500us.shtml


Specifications
Track system: 2-track, 2-channel, stereo/monaural system

Motor: 2 x reel, 1 x capstan

Reel size: 5 to 10.5 inch reel

Equalization: NAB

Tape speeds: 3 3⁄4 7 1⁄2 15 ips

Wow and flutter: 0.018% (15 ips)

Frequency response: 30Hz to 30kHz (15 ips)

Signal to Noise Ratio: 60dB

Total harmonic distortion: 0.8%

Input: 60mV (line), 0.25mV (mic)

Output: 0.775V (line)

Dimensions: 446 x 456 x 258mm

Weight: 25kg



2 track is always better than 1/4 track; that's when you only record in one direction, but it uses twice as much tape.


EE tape is the most incredible result I've ever heard; the dynamic range and resolution is like live.

I only use blank tape to record my records. The playback is better than the original recording. That's because the signal has been magnified as a result of the large 2 track heads; they make the signal larger, and hence the music is larger on playback; it's as if your speakers are larger as well.

While I enjoy this everyday, nobody seems to believe it; such is life.