Tape machines I own, any good?

[Marcello Mastroiani]

Hi guys.
I own a 8-track (cinch inputs) 1/4" tape Fostex machine (it's black, so it's
the R8, I guess, since when we got it, my partner went on a trip to get
married and didn't return for 6 months, took the keys of the studio, so I
don't know for sure), and a Philips 4407, which came to me out of order, I
have to fix it first. Afterwards I got an Philips HiFi N8404 stereo electret
microphone for it.

My question is: Should I try using them, (I was thinking about connecting
the outs of my mackie SR24.4 VLZ mixer subgroup to the Fostex, and record
guitars (especially acoustic, maybe even vocals?!) with the Philips.) or are
they just not good enough compared to todays 24bit/120dB DAWs? We make 80's
electro-pop, french house and british-style rock, from Depeche Mode and Daft
Punk, thru Massive Attack to Manic Street Preachers and U2.

We also own an EGOsys WaMi rack 24 system, so I was thinking about combining
those two systems...

[Ricky Hunt]

"Marcello Mastroiani" > wrote in message
...
> Hi guys.
> I own a 8-track (cinch inputs) 1/4" tape Fostex machine (it's black, so
> it's the R8, I guess, since when we got it, my partner went on a trip to
> get

The R8 is decent for a narrow width 8-track. Possibly good for drum
compression, etc. I've made some good recordings on them but wouldn't use it
as my main recorder if I had something better. But worth keeping around if
you've got the room.

[Scott Dorsey]

Marcello Mastroiani > wrote:
>I own a 8-track (cinch inputs) 1/4" tape Fostex machine (it's black, so it's
>the R8, I guess, since when we got it, my partner went on a trip to get
>married and didn't return for 6 months, took the keys of the studio, so I
>don't know for sure), and a Philips 4407, which came to me out of order, I
>have to fix it first. Afterwards I got an Philips HiFi N8404 stereo electret
>microphone for it.

This is consumer grade equipment. The 4407 is a quarter-track machine and
isn't worth the time and trouble to fix it.

The R8... well... it's very far from studio quality, but it is what it is
and you should try it. Be very careful about the alignment because they
drift like mad. And be very careful about track layout; tracks will bleed
into adjacent tracks and the edge tracks sound different than the other
tracks. You can't bounce to adjacent tracks.

>My question is: Should I try using them, (I was thinking about connecting
>the outs of my mackie SR24.4 VLZ mixer subgroup to the Fostex, and record
>guitars (especially acoustic, maybe even vocals?!) with the Philips.) or are
>they just not good enough compared to todays 24bit/120dB DAWs? We make 80's
>electro-pop, french house and british-style rock, from Depeche Mode and Daft
>Punk, thru Massive Attack to Manic Street Preachers and U2.

Sure, try the R8! It's not hi-fi by any means, and when they were new
they were basically laughed at by professional studios, but you may find
it a useful sound for something.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Marcello Mastroiani]

I'm not gonna sell them, that's for sure. :) I don't plan on recording
acoustic drums EVER (but, who knows) since I'm the drummer, and I own a
double Roland PD5 setup (7xPD-5, 1 PD-9 for snare, 1 PD-7 for ride + 2 Ddrum
bassdrums, dixon rack) with Alesis D4, Korg DRM-1, SPD-11 + FD8.
I also own many drum machines:

BOSS DR55
KORG DDD-1
OBERHEIM DX
ROLAND R8
YAMAHA RX5
YAMAHA RX7
YAMAHA RX8
YAMAHA RX11
YAMAHA RX21
YAMAHA RY8

and

AKAI S3000i
AKAI S950
CASIO FZ10M
E-MU E64
ENSONIQ EPS16+
ENSONIQ MIRAGE
YAMAHA TX16W
YAMAHA A4000

samplers, do you think Fostex would be good for recording drums from those
machines? I also have an older Behringer SNR208 8-channel denoiser I was
planning on using combined with the Fostex (before or after, I don't know
yet, think I'm gonna experiment a bit first...), and then into the ESI WaMI
rack 24, to the computer. Does this sound rational 2 U guys? :) Am I
overdoing it?

"Ricky Hunt" > wrote in message
news:Jv%Lh.28571$y92.28161@attbi_s22...
> "Marcello Mastroiani" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Hi guys.
>> I own a 8-track (cinch inputs) 1/4" tape Fostex machine (it's black, so
>> it's the R8, I guess, since when we got it, my partner went on a trip to
>> get
>
> The R8 is decent for a narrow width 8-track. Possibly good for drum
> compression, etc. I've made some good recordings on them but wouldn't use
> it as my main recorder if I had something better. But worth keeping around
> if you've got the room.
>

[Laurence Payne]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 01:04:00 +0100, "Marcello Mastroiani"
> wrote:

>I own a 8-track (cinch inputs) 1/4" tape Fostex machine (it's black, so it's
>the R8, I guess, since when we got it, my partner went on a trip to get
>married and didn't return for 6 months, took the keys of the studio, so I
>don't know for sure), and a Philips 4407, which came to me out of order, I
>have to fix it first. Afterwards I got an Philips HiFi N8404 stereo electret
>microphone for it.
>
>My question is: Should I try using them

Well, you certainly won't get out of them quite what you put in :-)

[Marcello Mastroiani]

Thanks. What about Fostex model 80, is that better/worse/same as the R8?



"Laurence Payne" <lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom> wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 01:04:00 +0100, "Marcello Mastroiani"
> > wrote:
>
>>I own a 8-track (cinch inputs) 1/4" tape Fostex machine (it's black, so
>>it's
>>the R8, I guess, since when we got it, my partner went on a trip to get
>>married and didn't return for 6 months, took the keys of the studio, so I
>>don't know for sure), and a Philips 4407, which came to me out of order, I
>>have to fix it first. Afterwards I got an Philips HiFi N8404 stereo
>>electret
>>microphone for it.
>>
>>My question is: Should I try using them
>
> Well, you certainly won't get out of them quite what you put in :-)

[Scott Dorsey]

Marcello Mastroiani > wrote:
>samplers, do you think Fostex would be good for recording drums from those
>machines? I also have an older Behringer SNR208 8-channel denoiser I was
>planning on using combined with the Fostex (before or after, I don't know
>yet, think I'm gonna experiment a bit first...), and then into the ESI WaMI
>rack 24, to the computer. Does this sound rational 2 U guys? :) Am I
>overdoing it?

Try it and see.

Skip the noise gate. If your goal is to hit the tape hard, use ONLY even
numbered tracks because there will be substantial bleed. And don't use
the noise reduction on the Fostex because it will dramatically change when
you hit the tape hard.

Be sure you have the right alignment tape for the Fostex... as I recall
it needs an IEC tape and not the usual NAB tape.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ricky Hunt]

"Marcello Mastroiani" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks. What about Fostex model 80, is that better/worse/same as the R8?

Same guts without the pop-off control panel of the R8.

[Romeo Rondeau]

Ricky Hunt wrote:
> "Marcello Mastroiani" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Thanks. What about Fostex model 80, is that better/worse/same as the R8?
>
> Same guts without the pop-off control panel of the R8.
>
>

I used to have one of those R8's, it was my first multitrack that I
actually bought with my own money :-) The little pop off "remote" was
cool, it made me feel like I was recording on a "big boy" machine. Not
too bad sounding considering the tape width, I learned to live with the
Dolby C, though.

[Laurence Payne]

On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 03:21:24 GMT, Romeo Rondeau >
wrote:

>
>I used to have one of those R8's, it was my first multitrack that I
>actually bought with my own money :-) The little pop off "remote" was
>cool, it made me feel like I was recording on a "big boy" machine. Not
>too bad sounding considering the tape width, I learned to live with the
>Dolby C, though.

Me too. We managed, and did some good work. But, when it became
affordable and reliable, the move to digital was all plusses.

[Marcello Mastroiani]

As it turns out, I have the Model 80. Thanks a bunch guys, I knew I
shouldn't use ALL 8 tracks on it, as it, IMO cannot sound good that way, it
seems obvious, 1/4" for 8 tracks?! Yeah, right. :)
Is there a way to use it to record, say, stereo, but on full 1/4"? Guess
not... :(

One day I'll get a Revox or a Studer, I just know that. :)


"Laurence Payne" <lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 03:21:24 GMT, Romeo Rondeau >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>I used to have one of those R8's, it was my first multitrack that I
>>actually bought with my own money :-) The little pop off "remote" was
>>cool, it made me feel like I was recording on a "big boy" machine. Not
>>too bad sounding considering the tape width, I learned to live with the
>>Dolby C, though.
>
> Me too. We managed, and did some good work. But, when it became
> affordable and reliable, the move to digital was all plusses.

[Mike Rivers]

On Mar 24, 12:59 am, "Marcello Mastroiani" >
wrote:
> As it turns out, I have the Model 80. Thanks a bunch guys, I knew I
> shouldn't use ALL 8 tracks on it, as it, IMO cannot sound good that way,

> Is there a way to use it to record, say, stereo, but on full 1/4"? Guess
> not... :(

Well, the tracks don't get any wider if you don't use all of them
unless you replace the heads, but that's kind of silly on a machine
like this. What happens (and this is true with any multitrack
recorder) is that the noise adds up the more tracks you have, and
narrow tracks are a little noisier than wide tracks. But doesn't that
recorder have Dolby C noise reduction? Use it, at least for your own
projects.

[Marcello Mastroiani]

Why is that kind of silly on a machine like this?
Too expensive, too complicated, or the result not satisfying?

Just trying to get as much info as I can on those machines, since they
inspire me, somehow, when I see the tape rolling, I feel like making music.
When I see a digital recorder flashing the diodes, I feel like I've just set
the alarm on for having done something wrong. :)

And what about that Philips 4407, I know it's consumer-grade equipment, but
could it be improved by adding some better heads or something? (maybe I
should get new head... ;) )


"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Mar 24, 12:59 am, "Marcello Mastroiani" >
> wrote:
>> As it turns out, I have the Model 80. Thanks a bunch guys, I knew I
>> shouldn't use ALL 8 tracks on it, as it, IMO cannot sound good that way,
>
>> Is there a way to use it to record, say, stereo, but on full 1/4"? Guess
>> not... :(
>
> Well, the tracks don't get any wider if you don't use all of them
> unless you replace the heads, but that's kind of silly on a machine
> like this. What happens (and this is true with any multitrack
> recorder) is that the noise adds up the more tracks you have, and
> narrow tracks are a little noisier than wide tracks. But doesn't that
> recorder have Dolby C noise reduction? Use it, at least for your own
> projects.
>
>

[Mike Rivers]

On Mar 24, 5:16 pm, "Marcello Mastroiani" >
wrote:
> Why is that kind of silly on a machine like this?
> Too expensive, too complicated, or the result not satisfying?

In order to convert it to a stereo 1/4" machine you'd have to fit 2-
track heads to it. Too expensive, too complicated, and you'd still be
running through the low budget electronics. Not terribly satisfying.
I've heard of people putting 1/2" stereo heads on the Fostex 1/2" 16
track machines, but using outboard electronics. The transport is
pretty solid. But you can probably buy a working Ampex AG440 for what
it would cost you for a decent set of 2-track heads, machining the
mounts, and matching them to the electronics.

> Just trying to get as much info as I can on those machines, since they
> inspire me, somehow, when I see the tape rolling, I feel like making music.

Then buy an Ampex and be done with it. It will still be working when
your grandkids are grown.

> And what about that Philips 4407,

No clue, but replacing heads on a recorder with anything but the
original or a specially designed replacement set is far from trivial.
You need to know a lot more than you know. It's not like replacing
spark plugs in a car.

Come to think of it, I don't even know where to find the spark plugs
in my present car.

[James Perrett]

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 00:58:51 -0000, Mike Rivers >
wrote:

> On Mar 24, 5:16 pm, "Marcello Mastroiani" >
> wrote:
>> Why is that kind of silly on a machine like this?
>> Too expensive, too complicated, or the result not satisfying?
>
> In order to convert it to a stereo 1/4" machine you'd have to fit 2-
> track heads to it. Too expensive, too complicated, and you'd still be
> running through the low budget electronics. Not terribly satisfying.
> I've heard of people putting 1/2" stereo heads on the Fostex 1/2" 16
> track machines, but using outboard electronics.

There's also the Fostex E22 which is a half inch stereo machine based on
the E series transport but with different electronics to the mulitrack
machines.

>
>> And what about that Philips 4407,
>
> No clue, but replacing heads on a recorder with anything but the
> original or a specially designed replacement set is far from trivial.
> You need to know a lot more than you know. It's not like replacing
> spark plugs in a car.

I started off with a Philips domestic reel to reel and seemed to spend all
my time fighting drop-outs and tape path instability. They're not really
worth bothering with. See if you can find a Revox.

Cheers

James.