What is the best Reel To Reel machine ever built?


Everyone who has listened to master tapes or dubs knows about the well balanced sound they provide. But it is also important to have a fine tape recorder or playing machine to enjoy the tapes' qualities in a good system.
Maybe my question was raised once before but the relevance of the topic is now greater as the tapes are back to more and more audiophile friends, especially those who are owning excellent phono chains.

I have seen many big & professional machines being recently offered and sold on e-bay, Audiogon and other platforms and I am discussing within a small group which machine is really the "holy grail" among the R2Rs. So why not here. I am interested in findings.
thuchan

Showing 4 responses by atmasphere

The old Ampex machines were nice, but the tube electronics were designed to be simple and easy to repair in the field but not audiophile grade. Sound beautiful but limited dynamic range and too much color!

This is not true.

The problem here is that when Ampex made their tube electronics was a good 40-55 years ago! They were amazing when they were new (many Living Stereo LPs were recorded on them) but have gone downhill due to age. If they are properly rebuilt they will take any solid state electronics ever made to task. If not rebuilt properly then I would agree that they can be colored- paper coupling caps perform well, but don't last for decades!

The transport is a different matter. It is arguable that the ATR was indeed the state of the art, but if you really wanted to make things go, find a way to make it work with the 351 tube electronics.
At present we have the Ampex 351-2 (updated), the Studer, a very nice Sony (allows you to change from 1/4" to 1/2" tape in seconds), an Otari and a Tascam.

In the past I used to do a lot of the on-location work with a Magnacord, a nice tube machine that is excellent but does not get much mention.

Mike is right about the rather crude setup of the Ampex 350 transport (we also have a 300 transport and things are no better with it). When I did the update/upgrade of the Ampex I chose the AG-440 transport. At least it has automatic head lifters! It also has a flutter idler in the headnest.

Years ago I did a recording of a large choral/orchestral work called Canto General. Mikas Theodorakis was in town to conduct, so I didn't want any screwups. So I used two tape machines, the Studer A-80 and the Ampex and made two master tapes. In playback the Ampex could use either tape and was obviously more musical than the Studer. The Ampex-made tape also sounded better on the Studer than the tape that it made. Both machines were in good condition and this was in 1986.

Now the difference I heard was one that is often described as the difference between tubes and transistors, so if you prefer transistors you may well have liked the Studer's tape more. I have to say- it was/is damned impressive.

The biggest weakness I have heard in tape machines is actually in record mode- transistor machines are prone to a certain kind of modulation noise that shows up most in simple passages. This is due to the head driver transistor being sensitive to the bias signal- special traps have to be used in SS machines to reduce this problem. Tube machines are immune.

So if you are in playback only IMO you have greater flexibility about which machine is the 'best', however it will certainly be a mastering deck unless somebody has really tweaked the hell out of a lessor machine. BTW the mastering machines respond really well to such tweaking. We have replaced every chip and coupling cap in sight in the Sony and the results were spectacular.
Sam, the best mixer for on-location is none at all if you can get away with it!

I use Neumann U-67s. They have their own faults but those are far outweighed by their benefits :)
Transaudio is correct; the Crown was originally designed to be able to survive a fall off of a donkey. For real.

The weakness in them is the electronics. Seems to me there was an original version that was tube, but I have never seen one... anyway, the transistor units have a lot of the failings that transistors often have IMO. I may still have some LPs that Robert Fulton (founder of the modern high end cable industry) recorded using his 'modified' Crown; those recordings are excellent, although musically they are typical audiophile, which is to say ABYSMAL :)

There has been speculation locally about whether or not Fulton really did modify his machines. After he died (rather suddenly) a friend of mine obtained one of them from his estate and it was entirely stock!

So other than my comment about transistor vs tubes... perhaps my comments about the electronics might be taken with a grain of salt (although if you find one cheap I would not turn it down, and also I would expect to replace every electrolytic capacitor in sight in the electronics). I've usually stayed away from them mostly because they seem more consumer than pro to me (same for the Revox...)