Reel to reel , is it real the hype!

Every time you make an analog copy more degradation is added. 

I owned a Revox. It fell apart after 10 years.

Tape machines relative to a turntable are complex machines. They require a lot of maintenance. 

I won't do it again under any circumstance. Even if you do not think that high resolution digital files 96/24 and above do not sound quite as good they represent a far less expensive and far more reliable situation than reel to reel tape. There are many that argue digitally recorded material sounds best in high res files. Mastered correctly, without much compression, I am inclined to agree. The industry moved away from reel to reel for a reason. These people are not stupid and they listen to live musicians all day long. If anyone knows what music is supposed to sound like it is them. 

An audio buddy of mine and small group often compare DAC (good DAC) to records using different amps.  The DAC is generally the cleanest (playing DSD and high sample rates) but often misses that mood/deeper "visceral" feeling we get from records.  

His idea, not executed yet is we record from DAC via some nice silver cables to RTR tape.  Might get that done in the next month.

+1 jnovak! Good advice! 

davidgwillett

... His idea, not executed yet is we record from DAC via some nice silver cables to RTR tape.

What would be the advantage of that? The tape dub can't possibly be higher fidelity than the source.

keep in mind of you get an MTR-10 or 12, both were offered in 1/4 inch tape and 1/2 inch tape formats as two track and 4 track machines. 1/2 tape is addictive though......and 30 ips half inch can be like crack....