Reel to reel

benjie

I go to your studio and record my music in your studio and I want it on analog tape ... I want to use that master tape that we just recorded to produce CD’s and vinyl albums because of the perceived richness this distortion produces. Since we are using the master tape with the distortion, would’n that distortion also transfer to the other media ...

Of course. And if you then use analog tape to record an LP or CD made from that analog master, you’ll be adding more of the distortion inherent to analog tape, however slight that may be.

On top of that, many consumer tape decks are not properly aligned and calibrated. If that’s the case, even more distortion may result, and some of that may be quite euphonic.

Remember, I’m not trashing tape here - I’m a tape and vinyl guy. But it is what it is.

^^ +1

 I haven't read all of the posts in this thread, so my apologies for being redundant if I am being so, but I have to ask the question.
Other than for archival purposes why on earth would you wish to record vinyl onto tape? Sure, if you want to add head bump, head wear and poor calibration frequency response modifications, tape hiss, compression, harmonic distortion, and additional wow and flutter- it's just great.

I have a properly calibrated/maintained (and measured!) 1/4" 2 track Otari MX50 and my friend has a equally carefully maintained Studer A820 and they're both fine machines, but the degradation/alteration is obvious to me- even at 15IPS. By the way, the decks sound a bit different and I prefer the Otari (slightly) over the Studer and in blind tests my friend, reluctantly, agreed, even though in non-blind listening he declared the Studer was obviously better- confirmation bias is hard to control. Both machines are re-capped, but have stock opamps. Both are, indeed, very fine machines.

However, what I found better as an archival method was to use a really high quality ADC/DAC- such as the RME ADI-2 PRO FS. 
ABX and extended period AB blind testing that I have performed with friends has indicated that the resultant playback is indistinguishable from the original on a statistically significant basis, and no more than 24 bits/96kHz PCM seems to be required to maintain that statistical significance.
I was absolutely certain that this would not be the case, and until I actually went through the tests I would always say that the digital was inferior- but now, very reluctantly, I have to say I was wrong.
I've also digitally archived 15IPS tape masters- generally 3rd generation- such as Kind of Blue, Dark Side of the Moon, Elgar cello conc. with Dupre etc. and again, I and those who I have conducted a valid AB test with cannot tell the difference despite the initial certainty that we could.
The converter is comparable in cost to the tape deck and hard drives are much cheaper than tape.
I buy my SM468 tape from Splicit- it cost about $60 and gives me 2500 feet and a nice metal reel- and about 33mins of recording time.
Roughly the same price buys me a 2TB drive and at 33MB/min for 24/96kHz wav we're talking 1000hrs of recording or about 1500hrs with FLAC.

Wynpalmer, while most would probably agree that Otari and Studer are better than my Technics RS1500; The results I'm getting must be due to the fact that I replaced all the electrolytic capacitors with "Black Gates" (this was before they stopped selling them) plus I replaced all the transistors with new ones from Panasonic.


Now that I've finished recording my favorite vinyl to 15 IPS tape, I'm starting on CD's; they turn out even better than LP's when you select the good one's; that's what I'm doing today. Once done, there isn't even the remotest hint of digital; it's pure analog.


Soon I will be enjoying the fruits of my labor, sorry you aren't getting the same results.