Re: Experience with ATR-102 and APR-5003 1/2"

[22Busy]

My Spitz machine is either the first or second one he did after
starting his own company. It is rock solid and sounds great. No
experience with the Sony.

On 1 Jul 2003 10:31:01 -0700, (OZ) wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I am trying to decide if I want to trade up my Sony APR-5003 for a
>Mike Spitz Ampex ATR-102 1/2" and was hoping that someone have or had
>first hand experience with both machines. What were the major or minor
>difference? No speculation please, experience only!
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ozzie

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> I am trying to decide if I want to trade up my Sony APR-5003 for a
> Mike Spitz Ampex ATR-102 1/2" and was hoping that someone have or had
> first hand experience with both machines. What were the major or minor
> difference?

The sound. There's no comparison. If you have that kind of money, there's
not a nicer guy than Mike Spitz to spend it with. However, don't spend
all your money on the machine. Are you a good maintenance technician?
Otherwise, you'll need one. The ATR isn't by any means a dog, but when
something does go wrong with it, they're a bitch to troubleshoot and
some parts may be difficult to find.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <znr1057097303k@trad>, Mike Rivers > wrote:
>In article > writes:
>
>> I am trying to decide if I want to trade up my Sony APR-5003 for a
>> Mike Spitz Ampex ATR-102 1/2" and was hoping that someone have or had
>> first hand experience with both machines. What were the major or minor
>> difference?
>
>The sound. There's no comparison. If you have that kind of money, there's
>not a nicer guy than Mike Spitz to spend it with. However, don't spend
>all your money on the machine. Are you a good maintenance technician?
>Otherwise, you'll need one. The ATR isn't by any means a dog, but when
>something does go wrong with it, they're a bitch to troubleshoot and
>some parts may be difficult to find.

I have a 102, and it's the best and most stable transport I have ever
used. The electronics are good, but I think they could be better and in
some ways I think I even like the old 440 electronics better for recording
though not playback.

The Spitz replacement I/O units are worth every penny.

The 102 is the no fun to work on, and diagnosis is really a pain. Get
a spare audio card, a spare audio control card, and spares for all three
transport cards. Also have 2N3055s in the parts bin.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Bob Ross]

As others have mentioned, the big plus for the ATR-102 is
sound...especially w/ Spitz electronics, but even a stock Ampex is one of
the finest sounding 2-tracks I've ever used.

The big plus for the APR-5xxx is editing; if you cut a lot of tape those
Sonys are a joy to work on.

/Bob Ross


OZ wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am trying to decide if I want to trade up my Sony APR-5003 for a
> Mike Spitz Ampex ATR-102 1/2" and was hoping that someone have or had
> first hand experience with both machines. What were the major or minor
> difference? No speculation please, experience only!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ozzie

[Scott Dorsey]

Bob Ross > wrote:
>As others have mentioned, the big plus for the ATR-102 is
>sound...especially w/ Spitz electronics, but even a stock Ampex is one of
>the finest sounding 2-tracks I've ever used.
>
>The big plus for the APR-5xxx is editing; if you cut a lot of tape those
>Sonys are a joy to work on.

So, get an ATR-102 for recording, then a mono Nagra III for editing. Not
only is it a really convenient editing deck, but you can take it on the
airline and cut tape during your flight.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Steven Rhodes]

Somehow I can't imagine pulling out a razor blade mid-flight these days...

in article , Scott Dorsey at
wrote on 03.7.4 8:33 AM:
> So, get an ATR-102 for recording, then a mono Nagra III for editing. Not
> only is it a really convenient editing deck, but you can take it on the
> airline and cut tape during your flight.
> --scott
>

[david]

In article >, Bob Ross
> wrote:

> As others have mentioned, the big plus for the ATR-102 is
> sound...especially w/ Spitz electronics, but even a stock Ampex is one of
> the finest sounding 2-tracks I've ever used.


Alactronics mods 102's as well. I know part of what Bob does is update
the electronics that control spinning the reels, as I have heard the
stock machine can occasionally go a little wild.

Anyone out there know enough to compare what Bob Alach does to one of
these compared to Spitz?

Also, how much of a dif is there sonically between the 1/4" and 1/2"?



David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island


www.CelebrationSound.com

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> So, get an ATR-102 for recording, then a mono Nagra III for editing. Not
> only is it a really convenient editing deck, but you can take it on the
> airline and cut tape during your flight.

I doubt it. You probably can't carry a razor blade on board any more.
Maybe you could cut tape with nail clippers? They're on the OK list
now.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )

[Scott Dorsey]

david > wrote:
>
>Alactronics mods 102's as well. I know part of what Bob does is update
>the electronics that control spinning the reels, as I have heard the
>stock machine can occasionally go a little wild.

The transport controls are actually pretty stable, although you can get
them into weird modes if they are out of alignment. And they do take a
lot of alignment.

>Anyone out there know enough to compare what Bob Alach does to one of
>these compared to Spitz?

Spitz basically replaces the I/O modules with higher grade ones, if you
want. Since you don't have to use the I/O modules at all, this may or
may not be significant. Otherwise he mostly keeps the machines stock but
he does excellent refurbishment work. Dunno with Alach does.

>Also, how much of a dif is there sonically between the 1/4" and 1/2"?

It's considerable. I like 1/4" better most of the time. But 1/2" is
currently very fashionable.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."