Tape Vs. Vinyl: What Do You Hear?

[kcin]

.............
As a test, it will let one know if the vinyl front-end is solid. The vinyl setup is doing well If one can get the AP 45rpm of this album close to and/or match the clarity on dynamics and tracing of instruments and vocals.

Dre

Here are my observations with tape vs. vinyl so far.. Remember I have limited experience with tape and certainly don't have an updated Studer or Ampex. I have a direct out Otari and a tube repro.

Lots of dynamic energy with tape. I find the sound has a homogeneous "smoothness" - this is not limited to my set up but with every set up I've heard recently- it can be quieter than vinyl but not necessarily true always.

Vinyl in the mega $000 can approach equal dynamics and can be uncannily quiet if the LP is cut accordingly ( try Shelby Lynne- "Just a little loving"- spooky- Vinyl has outstanding bandwidth , try: " You get more bounce with Curtis Coutnce" or " For Duke"- it is startling on my system with Beveridge Electrostats. I believe the headroom is there if the recording and mastering allows for it.

I think Atmasphere commented on this vinyl vs.tape in a post here somewhere ( I don't have time to find it).. now that I have had tape and vinyl for little while I will continue to compare.

Now for this to work for vinyl you have to be heavily invested in your front end -- way more than even an upgraded studer etc, I'd say you need to start at $60-80K at retail to "feel" the vinyl .

The advantage of vinyl is the "ubiquitousness" of the format. With tape you have the record option if you are so inclined and get dynamics in a box if you have an appropriate machine for less $ for that performance in vinyl.

[Dre_J]

As a test, it will let one know if the vinyl front-end is solid. The vinyl setup is doing well If one can get the AP 45rpm of this album close to and/or match the clarity on dynamics and tracing of instruments and vocals.

Dre

Here are my observations with tape vs. vinyl so far.. Remember I have limited experience with tape and certainly don't have an updated Studer or Ampex. I have a direct out Otari and a tube repro.

Lots of dynamic energy with tape. I find the sound has a homogeneous "smoothness" - this is not limited to my set up but with every set up I've heard recently- it can be quieter than vinyl but not necessarily true always.

Vinyl in the mega $000 can approach equal dynamics and can be uncannily quiet if the LP is cut accordingly ( try Shelby Lynne- "Just a little loving"- spooky- Vinyl has outstanding bandwidth , try: " You get more bounce with Curtis Coutnce" or " For Duke"- it is startling on my system with Beveridge Electrostats. I believe the headroom is there if the recording and mastering allows for it.

I think Atmasphere commented on this vinyl vs.tape in a post here somewhere ( I don't have time to find it).. now that I have had tape and vinyl for little while I will continue to compare.

Now for this to work for vinyl you have to be heavily invested in your front end -- way more than even an upgraded studer etc, I'd say you need to start at $60-80K at retail to "feel" the vinyl .

The advantage of vinyl is the "ubiquitousness" of the format. With tape you have the record option if you are so inclined and get dynamics in a box if you have an appropriate machine for less $ for that performance in vinyl.

Sgood asked me for a few thoughts on the fidelity of the tape (RLJ - It's Like This) and I obliged. My additional comments were specific to the APUT RLJ tape and AP RLJ 45 which are both sourced (through their specific process) from the same master tape.

Specifically, it is a way to spot check setup and vinyl performance if one has both the tape and the LP. Obviously, there are a high number of variables that can determine the outcome of the performance from both formats in this scenario. So, the results observed by each individual will be different.


In general:

There are way too many variables for me, personally, to publically generalize about the broader subject of "vinyl vs. tape". I think there may have been a thread on this already. I didn't search for one. Your comments may make for a good start for a conversation for those who may be interested.

Just like vinyl, tape can sound smooth or sharp depending on just as many variables in the recording, transferring, and playback chain.

It is an interesting topic that probably could be explored more in its own thread and probably get much more participation.

[MylesBAstor]

As Andre said, there's lot's of variables involved. What's everyone's experience with the sound--say of recordings such as Arnold Overtures, Bill Evans Live at the Village Vanguard, RLJ, etc--released on LP or tape?

[Rob]

Myles, I know you'll weigh in later when this thread gains momentum. Im a relative short timer to R2R (under two years) but it didn't take long to come to grips with the this. the short answer is tape is better, esp if the vinyl is sourced from analog tape. its clear to me now that vinyl playback adds something that's not on tape as well as taking something away, in other words not everything on tape is translated to vinyl with absolute faithfulness.

My other point is cost be damned, no vinyl rig will surpass tape when its at it best, suggesting hypothetical scenarios where vinyl playback will give tape a run for its money is not what I think were talking about and is a moot point if we're discussing absolutes.

[adrianwu]

Hi everyone, I am new here. I am using a Nagra T Audio and modified a phono preamp I built 15 years ago for the tape head. I have been making live concert recordings (mostly orchestral) for the past 10 years with my Nagra IV-S. One can hear immediately, esp. on large scale orchestral works, whether a recording has been compressed. When one hears a session master without any post-production, the dynamics can be overwhelming. It is impossible to transfer this straight to an LP. A lot of compression is needed. The closest I have heard to session master tapes comes from Analogue Productions. Their recent releases of the Reiner Schezerazade and Pines/Fountains of Rome sound as uncompressed as possible for a commercial release. One can only appreciate it with horn loaded speakers capable of wide dynamic range. It is not a matter of vinyl playback setup, but the music on the vinyl has been compressed to start off with. Even the four orchestral titles on the first series of the Tape Project were a bit compressed, although the Arnold Overtures was the least compressed. Download the Mercury Firebird on DSD from the Acoustic Sounds website for reference. This is dynamics ! I have high hopes for the rest of the Analogue Products Ultratape release.

[kcin]

Sgood asked me for a few thoughts on the fidelity of the tape (RLJ - It's Like This) and I obliged. My additional comments were specific to the APUT RLJ tape and AP RLJ 45 which are both sourced (through their specific process) from the same master tape.

Specifically, it is a way to spot check setup and vinyl performance if one has both the tape and the LP. Obviously, there are a high number of variables that can determine the outcome of the performance from both formats in this scenario. So, the results observed by each individual will be different.


In general:

There are way too many variables for me, personally, to publically generalize about the broader subject of "vinyl vs. tape". I think there may have been a thread on this already. I didn't search for one. Your comments may make for a good start for a conversation for those who may be interested.

Just like vinyl, tape can sound smooth or sharp depending on just as many variables in the recording, transferring, and playback chain.

It is an interesting topic that probably could be explored more in its own thread and probably get much more participation.

I'll be more specific, my comments above are directly related to my experience running the APUT Hugh Maskela tape through a refurbished OTARI MX5050BII including JRF serviced heads direct into a deHavilland repro vs. my vinyl rig with the 45rpm Maskela -Hope disc.

Sure, there are tons of variables, but how do you account for them in comparing/reviewing an arm or table in the vinyl playback category? are you saying that all of your reviews are less meaningful because of the variables: speed stability, VTA, SRA, Azimuth,VTF, loading,Tone arm resonance, wow and flutter,and on and on- are uncontrollable?-they have mass variability even if set up by the same reviewer among the review samples... .................. should we not talk about comparative vinyl rig sound because it is impossible to control the variables?

I'm making the same observations you might make between two tables except it is between two formats... Remember I don't have the experience that some members have & although I don't have a top flight machine I have heard the above tape and record on a refurbished Studer A810 and otari MX55 ( i think- big console) in other systems against other vinyl rigs ( Micro , Verdier, TW and KRonos PRo)

So far for me the tape is more dynamic yes top to bottom. Definitely fuller on the lower registers - however, what I am saying is the vinyl rig can begin to approach this and can be as quiet with the right system. I have also said that there is something about tape - regardless of the recording- that has a homogeneous artifact to it regardless of deck or system... this may very well be distortion in the vinyl rigs I'm hearing or some artifact of the tape interface.. but is there.

Lastly what I am saying is to get close to what you can get from tape you have to spend many $000 on vinyl. Today, if you are agnostic on format and just starting and had the finances you will get better fidelity for less $ on tape even with investing in a top flight machine and repro.

What you won't get with tape is the mass amount of music that is out there and certainly the cost of the format for good fidelity on tape is outrageous in dollar terms.

Cheers.

[Dre_J]

I'll be more specific, my comments above are directly related to my experience running the APUT Hugh Maskela tape through a refurbished OTARI MX5050BII including JRF serviced heads direct into a deHavilland repro vs. my vinyl rig with the 45rpm Maskela -Hope disc.

Sure, there are tons of variables, but how do you account for them in comparing/reviewing an arm or table in the vinyl playback category? are you saying that all of your reviews are less meaningful because of the variables: speed stability, VTA, SRA, Azimuth,VTF, loading,Tone arm resonance, wow and flutter,and on and on- are uncontrollable?-they have mass variability even if set up by the same reviewer among the review samples... .................. should we not talk about comparative vinyl rig sound because it is impossible to control the variables?

I'm making the same observations you might make between two tables except it is between two formats... Remember I don't have the experience that some members have & although I don't have a top flight machine I have heard the above tape and record on a refurbished Studer A810 and otari MX55 ( i think- big console) in other systems against other vinyl rigs ( Micro , Verdier, TW and KRonos PRo)

So far for me the tape is more dynamic yes top to bottom. Definitely fuller on the lower registers - however, what I am saying is the vinyl rig can begin to approach this and can be as quiet with the right system. I have also said that there is something about tape - regardless of the recording- that has a homogeneous artifact to it regardless of deck or system... this may very well be distortion in the vinyl rigs I'm hearing or some artifact of the tape interface.. but is there.

Lastly what I am saying is to get close to what you can get from tape you have to spend many $000 on vinyl. Today, if you are agnostic on format and just starting and had the finances you will get better fidelity for less $ on tape even with investing in a top flight machine and repro.

What you won't get with tape is the mass amount of music that is out there and certainly the cost of the format for good fidelity on tape is outrageous in dollar terms.

Cheers.

My general answer to your questions, embedded in the post above, would be that I’m only saying what I said. I said nothing of equipment evaluation or its process and would hope my very general comments answering a forum member’s request about the fidelity of the APUT RLJ tape isn’t interpreted as such.

I really have no public comments on the general performance "vinyl vs. tape", as mentioned. My comments were directly to answer a request by a forum poster (sgood) about one specific APUT tape from a general listen. I did that and added a comment about comparing setup for that specific APUT RLJ tape and the AP RLJ 45 as a side check - Nothing more.

The general comments you have made (and now mentioned different tape I haven't even played yet: the APUT Hugh Masekela) about “vinyl vs. tape” have merit and are good for discussion, as I mentioned in my response.

As a result, Myles split the thread so there can be discussion from those members interested in engaging in this discussion as you would like to have it framed.


Having this thread separated due to the broader discussion of “vinyl vs. tape” instead of a general answer to a forum members request about one tape will give the topic room to grow and evolve as it gets more participation.

I’ll continue to observe this new thread that was split from the 4-pack APUT thread. It should prove interesting for all participants.

Dre

[Joe Pittman]

Hi everyone, I am new here. I am using a Nagra T Audio and modified a phono preamp I built 15 years ago for the tape head. I have been making live concert recordings (mostly orchestral) for the past 10 years with my Nagra IV-S. One can hear immediately, esp. on large scale orchestral works, whether a recording has been compressed. When one hears a session master without any post-production, the dynamics can be overwhelming. It is impossible to transfer this straight to an LP. A lot of compression is needed. The closest I have heard to session master tapes comes from Analogue Productions. Their recent releases of the Reiner Schezerazade and Pines/Fountains of Rome sound as uncompressed as possible for a commercial release. One can only appreciate it with horn loaded speakers capable of wide dynamic range. It is not a matter of vinyl playback setup, but the music on the vinyl has been compressed to start off with. Even the four orchestral titles on the first series of the Tape Project were a bit compressed, although the Arnold Overtures was the least compressed. Download the Mercury Firebird on DSD from the Acoustic Sounds website for reference. This is dynamics ! I have high hopes for the rest of the Analogue Products Ultratape release.

Welcome and it's good to have you here at Audionirvana. I too have experience recording live performances (mostly choral and big band jazz) and it has been invaluable in understanding what uncompressed live sound is like compared to direct recordings of same. I highly recommend members get some experience in attending live recordings when ever possible to understand the challenges of capturing the live event faithfully.

[kcin]

Agreed- any format is almost primitive in its ability to capture the live event faithfully.

[mep]

Before everyone gets carried away with their bad self, we need to understand that just because you have a recording on tape doesn't mean it's always going to be better than the vinyl you own. Why? Because not all tape to tape transfers you buy are done to the same standard with the same gear and depending on the source(s) of your tapes, the provenance of how close the tape that was used to make the recording you purchased was to the actual master tape can certainly be in question. I have examples in my very limited collection of tapes where my LP of the same tape sounds better. And, I'm also not buying into a particular number of very high dollars that has to be spent on an LP rig in order for the LP rig to be 'competitive' with the sound of tape.

The price of obtaining a high quality used professional tape deck is minimal compared to the cost of buying a top flight LP rig and phono stage. However, even though the entry price into the ability to play 2 track 15ips tapes is cheap by comparison, buying recorded tapes is anything but cheap. Conversely, buying a very high quality table, arm, cartridge, and phono stage isn't cheap, but the cost of buying high quality new vinyl is dirt cheap compared to buying tape.

The bottom line for me is that playing great sounding tapes is a treat that I enjoy. However, my meat and potatoes listening is with vinyl and I'm quite happy with the level of sound quality I have obtained with vinyl. Does great tape beat out the sound of vinyl? Yes, IMO it does. However, if you are going to try and duplicate your LP collection on tape (if that was even possible), you will need some very deep pockets. I think that most people who love the sound of analog and have invested in a tape deck are still going to spend the majority of their listening time with LPs for numerous reasons and I'm fine with that.

[Joe Pittman]

I got back into reel-to-reel tape a year and a half ago when I acquired a Studer A810 from Ki Choi. I'm still using the stock on-board output, but it sounds very good. I'll get a better repro in the future as funds allow. Meanwhile, my goal has been to put together a reference library of tapes with the primary purpose of direct comparison to LP's. I have been continuously improving my LP playback as it is my favorite medium. I never stopped collecting LP's so I have a decent collection.

The biggest problem with tape for me is cost and then availability of music. So I decided I would only seek out and collect master tape copies or least generation copies for reference. I also wanted to avoid "audiophile" music or minor recordings... just the good stuff. I like the titles in the new APUT series, they fits my selection criteria. I hope that increased popularity and sales of these ultimate tapes will encourage companies like Acoustic Sounds to issue ultimate main-stream recordings like Led Zeppelin 1-4 to be released (legally) and many others...

Meanwhile, I have been waiting all of my life for tapes like Scheherazade as the ultimate reference for comparison to my LP copies (original pressings and reissues).

[kcin]

Before everyone gets carried away with their bad self, we need to understand that just because you have a recording on tape doesn't mean it's always going to be better than the vinyl you own. Why? Because not all tape to tape transfers you buy are done to the same standard with the same gear and depending on the source(s) of your tapes, the provenance of how close the tape that was used to make the recording you purchased was to the actual master tape can certainly be in question. I have examples in my very limited collection of tapes where my LP of the same tape sounds better. And, I'm also not buying into a particular number of very high dollars that has to be spent on an LP rig in order for the LP rig to be 'competitive' with the sound of tape.

The price of obtaining a high quality used professional tape deck is minimal compared to the cost of buying a top flight LP rig and phono stage. However, even though the entry price into the ability to play 2 track 15ips tapes is cheap by comparison, buying recorded tapes is anything but cheap. Conversely, buying a very high quality table, arm, cartridge, and phono stage isn't cheap, but the cost of buying high quality new vinyl is dirt cheap compared to buying tape.

The bottom line for me is that playing great sounding tapes is a treat that I enjoy. However, my meat and potatoes listening is with vinyl and I'm quite happy with the level of sound quality I have obtained with vinyl. Does great tape beat out the sound of vinyl? Yes, IMO it does. However, if you are going to try and duplicate your LP collection on tape (if that was even possible), you will need some very deep pockets. I think that most people who love the sound of analog and have invested in a tape deck are still going to spend the majority of their listening time with LPs for numerous reasons and I'm fine with that.

I think we are saying the same thing

[MylesBAstor]

Hi everyone, I am new here. I am using a Nagra T Audio and modified a phono preamp I built 15 years ago for the tape head. I have been making live concert recordings (mostly orchestral) for the past 10 years with my Nagra IV-S. One can hear immediately, esp. on large scale orchestral works, whether a recording has been compressed. When one hears a session master without any post-production, the dynamics can be overwhelming. It is impossible to transfer this straight to an LP. A lot of compression is needed. The closest I have heard to session master tapes comes from Analogue Productions. Their recent releases of the Reiner Schezerazade and Pines/Fountains of Rome sound as uncompressed as possible for a commercial release. One can only appreciate it with horn loaded speakers capable of wide dynamic range. It is not a matter of vinyl playback setup, but the music on the vinyl has been compressed to start off with. Even the four orchestral titles on the first series of the Tape Project were a bit compressed, although the Arnold Overtures was the least compressed. Download the Mercury Firebird on DSD from the Acoustic Sounds website for reference. This is dynamics ! I have high hopes for the rest of the Analogue Products Ultratape release.

Nice to have you aboard!

[Skylab]

I love vinyl. I really do. And I have a pretty decent main analog front end- VPI Scoutmaster, Benz LP-S MR, EAR 834P. But playing the Tape Project version of Lee Morgan's the Sidewinder in the same system on my Tascam 3030, which cost me all of $1,000 fully recapped and aligned, is all the proof I need that a well done 15 ips 2-track tape from many of the fine sources we have is better sounding than even the best version of that LP played on a much more expensive vinyl setup.

JMO, YMMV, etc etc. but for me Tape is clearly better. Vinyl of course is the hands down knockout winner when it comes to cost and selection of titles, but when the tape exists, it's highly likely to be the best sounding version there is.

[Mike Lavigne]

on Wednesday night I had 4 visitors to my room. we began before 7pm and finished after midnight. we played vinyl for the first 2 hours or so, and then did tape the last 3 hours. so that session is fresh in my mind.

I use -2- Studer A-820's (1/4" and 1/2") and the King-Cello for the output electronics, as well as a fairly high level vinyl rig.

I have a friend who posts occasionally here that sells tapes. when he buys a tape collection sometimes he will bring samples of those tapes to my room to compare them to my vinyl rig to see how good they are, and he is not much versed in rock/pop so I help to sort it out. so I've done lots of vinyl-tape comparisons over the years.

when a tape is very good it is quite a bit better. it seems like it does a few things when it's 'right'. (1) it has an ease and authority that cannot be entirely put into words. (2) there is a degree of density to the sound vinyl cannot quite touch. (3) the music projects more like real life. (4) more separation and nuance with greater energy. little things you hear on vinyl come more alive.

it's not fair to give tape it's due without giving the best direct-to-dics LP pressings their due. there is a unique degree of leading edge delicacy and precision along with outstanding micro-dynamics to the better dtd pressings. it does not have the density and weight of the best tape but there are attributes I sure appreciate.

when my visitors were here Wednesday a few tapes we played truly showed what tape can do. 3 really come to mind; 'Who's Next', 'Behind Blue Eyes' & 'Can't Get Fooled Again'. 'Fooled' seems to be a real bugger to find a good pressing with, but the tape is just awesome at making it so easy to listen to. bigger and bolder than any Lp I've heard, and such flow and ease. the density of the organ run at the end and how it all just hangs together without any sense of a reproduction is amazing. the vocals on 'Blue Eyes' are just more real and again the ease makes it seem fresh and real. then there is 'Yes' Fragile.....'Roundabout'. think 'large orchestral fireworks' at warp 9. yet it all gets laid out so easily and with such effortlessness. like you never heard it before. listening to it has such tension and pace, at the end you are out of breath. we ended with Sgt. Pepper's 'Day In the Life' which is etched in all our brains. this makes it sound brand new and never heard before there is so much more life to it than our memories. all the little tricks they used are laid out to hear clearly. and even today, 50+ years since it was recorded, it's an amazing cut to really listen close to for it's creative force and finely crafted result.

[Ki Choi]

Mike,

That was a good description of why I like tapes but couldn't put into words. The other tape I had heard at your place was Muddy Waters... that was something.