[Daniel]

Hi,

Aside from some tape oxide, the rather dark photo and limitations such
inspections impose, I see NO visible flat spots anywhere on the tape
lifters nor heads ... These appear very low use. Again, just by what
you see with your naked eye, do you agree ?

Here's a direct link:

http://members.shaw.ca/ftp_pro/heads.jpg

Many thanks for your time.

Daniel

[Edi Zubovic]

On 4 Oct 2006 23:09:09 -0700, "Daniel" wrote:

Hi,

Aside from some tape oxide, the rather dark photo and limitations such
inspections impose, I see NO visible flat spots anywhere on the tape
lifters nor heads ... These appear very low use. Again, just by what
you see with your naked eye, do you agree ?

Here's a direct link:

http://members.shaw.ca/ftp_pro/heads.jpg

Many thanks for your time.

Daniel


-- Overall, the machine seems to be either little used or very well
cleaned. Yes, there aren't visible worn parts. The heads look fine to
me. I hope the uppermost track shows as if was somewhat dirtier but
not worn. Cleaned heads would tell me naturally more but again, the
heads and the machine looks fine to me.

If you load this photo in an image editor, and then invert colors
(negative image), you'd see the contact area more clearly.

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

[Daniel]

Edi Zubovic wrote:
On 4 Oct 2006 23:09:09 -0700, "Daniel" wrote:

Hi,

Aside from some tape oxide, the rather dark photo and limitations such
inspections impose, I see NO visible flat spots anywhere on the tape
lifters nor heads ... These appear very low use. Again, just by what
you see with your naked eye, do you agree ?

Here's a direct link:

http://members.shaw.ca/ftp_pro/heads.jpg

Many thanks for your time.

Daniel


-- Overall, the machine seems to be either little used or very well
cleaned. Yes, there aren't visible worn parts. The heads look fine to
me. I hope the uppermost track shows as if was somewhat dirtier but
not worn. Cleaned heads would tell me naturally more but again, the
heads and the machine looks fine to me.

If you load this photo in an image editor, and then invert colors
(negative image), you'd see the contact area more clearly.

I looked at the heads and tape path in person yesterday (and in better,
more consistent light) and it all looks very good. The heads indeed
were a bit dirty from oxide and the seller did clean it up before I saw
the machine. The tape path indeed looks near new and shiny and there
are no flat spots on the tape lifters to speak of. Thanks for your
helpful reply.

[geoff]

"Daniel" wrote in message
ups.com...
Hi,

Aside from some tape oxide, the rather dark photo and limitations such
inspections impose, I see NO visible flat spots anywhere on the tape
lifters nor heads ... These appear very low use. Again, just by what
you see with your naked eye, do you agree ?

Here's a direct link:

http://members.shaw.ca/ftp_pro/heads.jpg

Clean the tape gunk off before you ask It does look as if the head wear is
a little asymetrical, but that could be shadow/highlight, and overall looks
pretty good. The wear is not extreme.

geoff

[Mike Rivers]

Daniel wrote:

Aside from some tape oxide, the rather dark photo and limitations such
inspections impose, I see NO visible flat spots anywhere on the tape
lifters nor heads ... These appear very low use. Again, just by what
you see with your naked eye, do you agree ?

another incomplete question brought to you by rec.audio.pro

That link seemed to have problems today, but let me ask - are you
planning to use the heads or the tape deck? I guess I know the answer
to that, but is the deck worth worrying about? What's the machine, and
what are you thinking about using it for? Heads are important, but it's
really only said about fairly pricey (originally) tape decks that
they're worth what the heads are worth. Low grade consumer tape decks
are rarely good performers by today's standards, even with brand new
heads.

[Mike Rivers]

Mike Rivers (that's me) wrote:

That link seemed to have problems today

Ah, there it goes. Looks like a TASCAM *8 1/2" 8 track. Hard to tell
about the play head. It looks like there might be a groove worn down at
the bottom, or that could just be the lighting. But the tape deck is
probalby worth saving and using (answering my previous question to
you).

The real way to tell is to clean the heads and tape path thoroughly,
demagnetize them, then play a calibration (alignment) tape on it. Look
for ragged amplitude at high frequenciesl. Since this machine has sync
playback, you can check the record head as well as the play head just
by switching the monitor between Sync and Repro. (the REAL real way is
to remove the heads and send them to JRF Magnetic Sciences for
evaluation)

You should have a calibration tape and some test equipment to keep the
recorder maintained and aligned. If you don't have one and aren't ready
to make that investment (it's probably close to $200) then don't worry
about the heads. You won't be able to keep up with the maintenance.

[Scott Dorsey]

Daniel wrote:

Aside from some tape oxide, the rather dark photo and limitations such
inspections impose, I see NO visible flat spots anywhere on the tape
lifters nor heads ... These appear very low use. Again, just by what
you see with your naked eye, do you agree ?

You can't see anything with the naked eye. The heads could have been
relapped several times and be about to fail. The gaps could be opening
up and you wouldn't see anything without extreme magnification.

The only real measure is to check the head inductance. This gives you a
very accurate measure of the wear. One thing you can do, though, is just
try and align the machine and see if the EQ settings on the edge tracks
are near the settings on the center tracks.
--scott


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

[Julian]

On 5 Oct 2006 03:28:06 -0700, "Daniel" wrote:


I looked at the heads and tape path in person yesterday (and in better,
more consistent light) and it all looks very good. The heads indeed
were a bit dirty from oxide and the seller did clean it up before I saw
the machine. The tape path indeed looks near new and shiny and there
are no flat spots on the tape lifters to speak of. Thanks for your
helpful reply.

Looks like a groove on the bottom. Doesn't look low wear to me.

Julian

[Richard Crowley]

"Julian" wrote ...
"Daniel" wrote:
I looked at the heads and tape path in person yesterday (and in better,
more consistent light) and it all looks very good. The heads indeed
were a bit dirty from oxide and the seller did clean it up before I saw
the machine. The tape path indeed looks near new and shiny and there
are no flat spots on the tape lifters to speak of. Thanks for your
helpful reply.

Looks like a groove on the bottom. Doesn't look low wear to me.

Isn't that the normal "groove" resulting from the lapping
process during the original manufacture of the head?

From the limited view in that photo, it looks pretty much unused.
(Based also on the cleanliness of the tape path, particularly the
flutter roller which is likely textured and more likely to pick up o
xide dust during use.)

[Frank Vuotto]

Here's a Retinex 'enhanced' picture

http://www7.taosnet.com/f10/head.jpg

[Daniel]

Julian wrote:


Looks like a groove on the bottom. Doesn't look low wear to me.


Those flat grooves on top and bottom of the 2 heads are Relief slots.

[Daniel]

geoff wrote:

Clean the tape gunk off before you ask It does look as if the head wear is
a little asymetrical, but that could be shadow/highlight, and overall looks
pretty good. The wear is not extreme.

The photo is one which the seller sent prior to cleaning the heads.
When I saw it in person, the photos do indeed show shadows.

[Daniel]

Mike Rivers wrote:
Mike Rivers (that's me) wrote:

That link seemed to have problems today

Ah, there it goes. Looks like a TASCAM *8 1/2" 8 track. Hard to tell
about the play head. It looks like there might be a groove worn down at
the bottom, or that could just be the lighting. But the tape deck is


(the REAL real way is
to remove the heads and send them to JRF Magnetic Sciences for
evaluation)

Thank you but that's really not an option. 9 / 10 sellers would not
agree to this.


You should have a calibration tape and some test equipment to keep the
recorder maintained and aligned. If you don't have one and aren't ready
to make that investment (it's probably close to $200) then don't worry
about the heads. You won't be able to keep up with the maintenance.

Oh yes, I know about this. Thank you.

[Daniel]

Mike Rivers wrote:
are you
planning to use the heads or the tape deck? I guess I know the answer
to that, but is the deck worth worrying about? What's the machine, and
what are you thinking about using it for? Heads are important, but it's
really only said about fairly pricey (originally) tape decks that
they're worth what the heads are worth. Low grade consumer tape decks
are rarely good performers by today's standards, even with brand new
heads.

It's certainly not a consumer deck. It's a 58 tascam. Yes, I know I'm
buying the heads 'cause if they're shot I'll be getting a nice heavy
paper weight. The heads would cost more than the machine to get
replaced. Although from inspecting the tape path this seems a low use
machine.

[Daniel]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

You can't see anything with the naked eye. The heads could have been
relapped several times and be about to fail. The gaps could be opening
up and you wouldn't see anything without extreme magnification.

They were not relapped nor do I see any flat spots on the tape lifters.

The only real measure is to check the head inductance. This gives you a
very accurate measure of the wear. One thing you can do, though, is just
try and align the machine and see if the EQ settings on the edge tracks
are near the settings on the center tracks.

I will try that. Thanks Scott. The seller would give me several days
and in which case if it doesn't pan out, I'll return the recorder to
him. Thank god it's local and not an ebay thing where I'd have to
contend with shipping ...

[Daniel]

Richard Crowley wrote:

Isn't that the normal "groove" resulting from the lapping
process during the original manufacture of the head?

Yes, those are relief slots and not grooves from wear. The 58 had this
mentioned in their literature.

From the limited view in that photo, it looks pretty much unused.
(Based also on the cleanliness of the tape path, particularly the
flutter roller which is likely textured and more likely to pick up o
xide dust during use.)

My take too.

[Daniel]

Frank Vuotto wrote:
Here's a Retinex 'enhanced' picture

http://www7.taosnet.com/f10/head.jpg

GREAT! Thank you for taking the time. I really appreciate it!

[Daniel]

Additionally, the seller did mention that the machine was a one owner
unit and that he used it in his own private home studio but as getting
tape and cost of it was a bit of a hassle, the recorder was used very
little.

[david correia]

In article .com,
"Daniel" wrote:

(the REAL real way is
to remove the heads and send them to JRF Magnetic Sciences for
evaluation)

Thank you but that's really not an option. 9 / 10 sellers would not
agree to this.



I've bought and sold multiple mtr-90's over the years and a head report
was always part of the transaction. But the head report for this deck
would probably cost as much as the deck ...

Have you ever owned an analog multitrack? Or lived with one that is old,
even if it didn't have a lot of miles on it?

I've had students, against my recommendations, buy them and end up
spending a lot more $ on them than they ever anticipated.

If you really wanna add analog tape to your arsenal, let me suggest you
get a stereo half track to dump your mixes too.

My 2 cents for free ;





David Correia
www.Celebrationsound.com

[Daniel]

david correia wrote:
In article .com,
"Daniel" wrote:

(the REAL real way is
to remove the heads and send them to JRF Magnetic Sciences for
evaluation)

Thank you but that's really not an option. 9 / 10 sellers would not
agree to this.



I've bought and sold multiple mtr-90's over the years and a head report
was always part of the transaction. But the head report for this deck
would probably cost as much as the deck ...

Something like the Otari MTR90 and your typical PRO designated
recorders are lots more expensive, have a lot more miles than many semi
pro or narrow track format machine like the TASCAM, TEAC etc .... The
pro machines are usually found in pro studios with people who actually
know a thing or two about these beasts and I'm not at all surprised
that a head report is usually a part of the transaction. My point is
that anything less than a pro machine, most of the time, does not
involve a head report for various reasons and one of them, like you
said, it's the expense.


Have you ever owned an analog multitrack? Or lived with one that is old,
even if it didn't have a lot of miles on it?

Yes, I have several older TEAC and TASCAM machines with perhaps 50 -
100 hrs from the previous owner. Parts are cheap and plentiful and it's
easy to maintain and I don't complain about the sound. I'm lucky I
guess with spotting low use machines with plenty of head life left.

I've had students, against my recommendations, buy them and end up
spending a lot more $ on them than they ever anticipated.

I know some who have done the same, bought a machine cheap and then
spent weeks trying to get them to work properly. They made it worse and
spent more than the machine is worth on parts etc .... It's quite a
task being careful what you buy (and knowing a thing about it too) but
then, when the machine is in good condition, it's always good to bring
it to a tech to bring it up to spec.


If you really wanna add analog tape to your arsenal, let me suggest you
get a stereo half track to dump your mixes too.

I've got a half track as well and use it for tape echo, dumping mixes
etc ......

I'd rather record to an old TEAC then have a hand at digital. I've gone
through all that and would never go back. .... I'm not an old guy who
grew up when tape was king. I've grown up when LP's and tapes were
being replaced by CD's and digital so it's not that I've grown up with
analog. I went from years of experimenting with digital to analog and I
don't look back. I have nothing against people going digital or working
with it but it's not for me. I've spent the last 5 years carefully
searching out local deals. I've passed on more deals than what I
accepted. I just don't buy any old thing, no matter if it's a semi pro
or pro machine.

[david correia]

In article m,
"Daniel" wrote:

I'd rather record to an old TEAC then have a hand at digital. I've gone
through all that and would never go back. .... I'm not an old guy who
grew up when tape was king. I've grown up when LP's and tapes were
being replaced by CD's and digital so it's not that I've grown up with
analog. I went from years of experimenting with digital to analog and I
don't look back. I have nothing against people going digital or working
with it but it's not for me. I've spent the last 5 years carefully
searching out local deals. I've passed on more deals than what I
accepted. I just don't buy any old thing, no matter if it's a semi pro
or pro machine.




If it's a small, cheap 8 track you're looking for, keep your eye out for
a 1/2" Otari 8 track - the later one piece model. I owned one in the
early 80's and made many fine recordings with it. Was quite reliable as
well. Only reason I sold it was to go 2".




David Correia
www.Celebrationsound.com

[Daniel]

david correia wrote:
In article m,
"Daniel" wrote:

I'd rather record to an old TEAC then have a hand at digital. I've gone
through all that and would never go back. .... I'm not an old guy who
grew up when tape was king. I've grown up when LP's and tapes were
being replaced by CD's and digital so it's not that I've grown up with
analog. I went from years of experimenting with digital to analog and I
don't look back. I have nothing against people going digital or working
with it but it's not for me. I've spent the last 5 years carefully
searching out local deals. I've passed on more deals than what I
accepted. I just don't buy any old thing, no matter if it's a semi pro
or pro machine.




If it's a small, cheap 8 track you're looking for, keep your eye out for
a 1/2" Otari 8 track - the later one piece model. I owned one in the
early 80's and made many fine recordings with it. Was quite reliable as
well. Only reason I sold it was to go 2".

Nice machines but most of the Otaris that I came accross have been
beaten to the ground by their owners ... There's always the possibility
of a low use one I suppose. I'll stick to the 58 for now but thanks
anyway.

[Mike Rivers]

Daniel wrote:

Nice machines but most of the Otaris that I came accross have been
beaten to the ground by their owners ... There's always the possibility
of a low use one I suppose. I'll stick to the 58 for now but thanks
anyway.

A properly aligned TASCAM 58 can sound better than a properly aligned
Otari MX-5050-8, and the transport is a lot smoother and easier on the
tape. If the 58 is in good shape, the price is reasonable, and you can
see getting a year or two's use out of it, go for it.

[Daniel]

Mike Rivers wrote:
Daniel wrote:

Nice machines but most of the Otaris that I came accross have been
beaten to the ground by their owners ... There's always the possibility
of a low use one I suppose. I'll stick to the 58 for now but thanks
anyway.

A properly aligned TASCAM 58 can sound better than a properly aligned
Otari MX-5050-8, and the transport is a lot smoother and easier on the
tape. If the 58 is in good shape, the price is reasonable, and you can
see getting a year or two's use out of it, go for it.

Thanks man! )

[Jeff Jasper]

Mike Rivers wrote:

A properly aligned TASCAM 58 can sound better than a properly aligned
Otari MX-5050-8, and the transport is a lot smoother and easier on the
tape. If the 58 is in good shape, the price is reasonable, and you can
see getting a year or two's use out of it, go for it.


And when you wear that one out, let me know and I'll be happy to sell you a
Tascam TSR-8 w/dbx I and low hours very cheap.

Jeff Jasper
www.jeffjasper.com

[Scott Dorsey]

Daniel wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote:
Mike Rivers (that's me) wrote:

That link seemed to have problems today

Ah, there it goes. Looks like a TASCAM *8 1/2" 8 track. Hard to tell
about the play head. It looks like there might be a groove worn down at
the bottom, or that could just be the lighting. But the tape deck is

(the REAL real way is
to remove the heads and send them to JRF Magnetic Sciences for
evaluation)

Thank you but that's really not an option. 9 / 10 sellers would not
agree to this.

In the case of a cheap narrowtrack machine, it's not worth it. But for studio machines, most
of the sellers will invest in a head report from JRF or Sprague and have it available to potential
buyers. If they refuse to do that, it's a sign that something is wrong.

Narrowtrack machines, though, are disposable. If the machine can be aligned, buy it. When the
heads go, throw it away.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."