I have a Teac 80-8 and would like to know if theres a way to make the sound of it a bit cleaner. As owners of the said recorder will already know, theres a definite 1970s sound to it, almost "muddy". Could I try boosting a certain set of frequencies on mixdown, or something similar?
Topic Tags
Comments
cleaning the mechanisms and calibrating the thing might help, du
cleaning the mechanisms and calibrating the thing might help, dunno if you have already. i'm not an expert (i own a tascam 34), but i've been told that biasing like to +3 at whatever frequency, (biasing in general) and recording technique can help clean things up. like on a snare, i've been told you really want that at like -10 or so, cuz you want to preserve the transients on that instrument. bass, maybe not so much. hi hat yes. so things that have alot of transients, will relate cleaner w/ more headroom according to some of the the convo's i've had w/ this guy phil greene, who like has had hits, and knows tape and machines. he talks way over my head, but those are some of the things i remember. the overall though being that on transients, you don't want that 'tape compresion' for a clean sound, which makes sense, as your leaving room for each electrical point to no be overed. i love the grunge of these personally, and if i wanted clean, i'd get a more refined machine.
as far as hyping the highs during tracking, my tascam 4trk cassette machine manual states, that you may actually want to lower the treble during tracking to reduce any mic/room hiss, and then boost it during mixing. it must have to do w/ headroom.
overall, i personally like the old teac/tascam stuff for their grit, and any cleanliness, is probably not going to be anything but subtle. fun machines!!!!!!
Well, the first thing you need to accept is that while the 80 wa
Well, the first thing you need to accept is that while the 80 was a nice home recording tape deck, it's not ever gonna give you the results that you'd get from a pro 1" or 2". It is what it is. That being said, your "muddiness" could be a result of various issues; it could be that the heads need re lapped or re aligned. If you run a finger nail up and down the face of the head, and feel grooves or bumps, you probably need to have the head(s) re lapped.
Also, if you can find a service center that could put it on an oscilloscope, you could have the heads checked for proper alignment - azimuth, zenith, height, etc., - to make sure that they are set in such a way that the tape moves across the heads as it's supposed to.
Checking your bias will also help. You will need a lab alignment tape for your particular tape type and how you want it biased.
Noise Reduction, especially the cheaper kinds that came with those decks ( dolby B, C, dbx, etc) were pretty good at getting rid of tape hiss, and while I don't think that these NR types necessarily made things "muddy" per se, - it's not as if NR "altered" the low end in an altogether bad way - it's just that these types of NR were notorious for killing the "air" and "silk" on the top end.
This may help... here's a link to a service manual. Pages 6-11 show specific settings for various bias and alignment:
http://www.tascamvintage.com/teac80-8.pdf
Welcome to the world of analog! This was simply just a part of what was involved and what we all needed to do back in those days, LOL)
If your plan is to continue to work with tape, you should get used to what it really involves. ;)
fwiw
-d.
DonnyThompson, post: 406506 wrote: Well, the first thing you nee
DonnyThompson, post: 406506 wrote: Well, the first thing you need to accept is that while the 80 was a nice home recording tape deck, it's not ever gonna give you the results that you'd get from a pro 1" or 2". It is what it is. That being said, your "muddiness" could be a result of various issues; it could be that the heads need re lapped or re aligned. If you run a finger nail up and down the face of the head, and feel grooves or bumps, you probably need to have the head(s) re lapped.
Also, if you can find a service center that could put it on an oscilloscope, you could have the heads checked for proper alignment - azimuth, zenith, height, etc., - to make sure that they are set in such a way that the tape moves across the heads as it's supposed to.
Checking your bias will also help. You will need a lab alignment tape for your particular tape type and how you want it biased.
Noise Reduction, especially the cheaper kinds that came with those decks ( dolby B, C, dbx, etc) were pretty good at getting rid of tape hiss, and while I don't think that these NR types necessarily made things "muddy" per se, - it's not as if NR "altered" the low end in an altogether bad way - it's just that these types of NR were notorious for killing the "air" and "silk" on the top end.
This may help... here's a link to a service manual. Pages 6-11 show specific settings for various bias and alignment:
http://www.tascamvintage.com/teac80-8.pdf
Welcome to the world of analog! This was simply just a part of what was involved and what we all needed to do back in those days, LOL)
If your plan is to continue to work with tape, you should get used to what it really involves. ;)
fwiw
-d.
Well I recently had the Teac serviced by a tech and he done several things to it, such as polishing the heads etc..
If I bought a different brand of tape, might that do the trick?
tape will make a difference, i doubt that the difference would b
tape will make a difference, i doubt that the difference would be as drastic as taking away a 'muddy' sound and making it, um, un-muddy. i think i know what your talking about cuz i have a similar machine, basically the next revision of the teac, became the tascam, then they added 'B' to the next revision.
they tend to be perhaps a bit dull, or dark. there's definately that effect. i didn't use NR on my 34, and i didn't find it noisey at all. except when it cam to mastering and the collective noise of the tracks and all the compression, and the mastering compression really had an effect, i just had to reset the mastering compressor for this particular track, and it was fine.
I think your machine, especially if it's been serviced to spec/taste, probably isn't going to sound drastically different. it's just how it sounds. they are not transparent in any way. i'm thinking maybe adjusting your eq/miking on the source would be a far better solution to getting rid of mud. knowing that your not using any sort of hi-fi type machine, i wouldn't expect pristine, or even huge sound, more just well rounded, and pleasing (not harsh).
As I said in my post and K pointed out as well, it is what it is
As I said in my post and K pointed out as well, it is what it is.. it was a nice machine for home studio use in that it allowed you to get your ideas down in a pre production manner - with the assumption that eventually you'd end up at a real studio using a pro deck/console for a final release. That's not to say you couldn't do final production on this deck, you certainly can, but your results will not be what you've probably grown to expect in terms of fidelity.
For what it was built for, it was a fine machine. But as a final production deck, well, most of the huge albums/bands you heard during that time were doing work on MCI's, Studers, and other pro spec machines with wide formats, and were being tracked and mixed through consoles like Neve, SSL, Trident, Mitsubishi, Harrison, Sony MCI, etc., not to mention the inboard and outboard pre's, compressors, etc.
Your best bet is to do what K mentioned, which is to add some silk and air through the use of EQ. You might want to consider hi passing everything but kick and bass, or ultra low synth patches, this will also help to brighten things up on the whole and take away some of the "mud".
What kind of tape are you currently using, and is it brand new?
the 80-8 was a great machine imo. i think they were the best sou
the 80-8 was a great machine imo. i think they were the best sounding of all the Tascam Teac 8 tracks because they are the only ones that were all discreet. but any 80-8 would be getting long in the tooth however even if it were left sitting in a closet for thirty years with almost no hours put on it.
i don't think you can bias it for high output tape. it may not fully erase high output tape as well. i recommend using fresh 456 or a compatible type.
no doubt it should be completely recapped as it's probable the caps are all out of spec and most likely leaking. the power supply should be rebuilt as well. this will go a long way to tightening up the sound
but it is what it is. all analog decks exhibit what is called "head bump". this is a slight boost of low's at a specific frequency. this is dependent on tape speed the slower the tape speed the lower frequency the head bump will be. the DBX niose reduction that came with the 80-8 will only exacerbate any head bump as well as doubling any frequency response anomalies.
most narrow format analog machines will have a frequeny response rated at + or - 3 dB. that's a 6 dB range which is pretty ragged. as Donny mentions larger format machines such as 1" 8 tracks are usually rated to a much tighter response of + or minus 1 dB or in the case of some of the higher end machines (like a Stephens) + 1 / minus 0 dB.
don't think you can bias it for high output tape. it may not ful
don't think you can bias it for high output tape. it may not fully erase high output tape as well. i recommend using fresh 456 or a compatible type.
I think Kurt is right... I mean, you could bias for higher output, but you might run into problems with overdubbing and the bias circuit not enabling the machine to fully erase.
According to the service manual, all tests on the machine, and all specs based on the tests, were done on Ampex 456. I think, if memory serves correct, that Scotch 206 ( was it 206 or 306 Kurt?) is the compatible competitor, although I'm not even sure you can get any tape beyond 456 anymore, and even 456 stock has been sold and resold several times, from Ampex to Quantegy - and I have no idea who manufactures it now.
If you wanted to save a few bucks, you might be able to buy it in "rarely used" lots on ebay. You'd have to check.
-d.
you will need to research at what point used reels of 456 are co
you will need to research at what point used reels of 456 are considered to be safe to use. there is a cut off date where the problems that cause sticky tape syndrome were addressed. tape manufactured past this date are good. tape made before this date are no good.
[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.tangible…"]here is a thing[/]="http://www.tangible…"]here is a thing[/] i found on analog tape. check it out, it's a good read.
DonnyThompson, post: 408645 wrote: Frosty - it's been awhile si
DonnyThompson, post: 408645 wrote: Frosty -
it's been awhile since you posted this topic originally... can you share with us what you ended up doing in relation to what did/didn't work?
Hi there. Yes its been awhile, but haven bought any new tape yet. I reall thnk some RMGI SM911 is the way to go, but in Pancake form. I have several metal reels from Ampex 456 I threw out.
Don't know where to get it though.
i couldn't find it in pancake but here's some links for reels.
i couldn't find it in pancake but here's some links for reels.
[="http://www.fullcompass.com/product/344164.html"]RMGI-North America SM911 34220 1/2" x 2500 ft Recording Tape on 10.5" Metal Reel | Full Compass[/]="http://www.fullcomp…"]RMGI-North America SM911 34220 1/2" x 2500 ft Recording Tape on 10.5" Metal Reel | Full Compass[/]
1/2" Open Reel Analog Recording Tape
[[url=http://="http://www.prodatap…"]EMTEC-RMGI SM911 1-2in X 2500ft 10-5in Reel[/]="http://www.prodatap…"]EMTEC-RMGI SM911 1-2in X 2500ft 10-5in Reel[/]
There's a very wide range of possibilities as to why you feel yo
There's a very wide range of possibilities as to why you feel you need more top end...
How long ago was the deck serviced? Tape heads checked, alignment, electronics, bias set for the tape you are using...
The short answer is that yes, EQ's, both graphic and parametric will allow you to sculpt the tone in many frequencies and frequency ranges.
The long answer is that if your machine hasn't been maintained, (see above) you can add top end EQ to the mix, but you're gonna also boost a lot of noise, too.
More details about your setup would help us to help you further...
Maintenance history on the machine?
What kind of console are you using to record and mix?
What kinds of mics are you using?
Do you have acoustical treatment in the room in which you are mixing?
What kind of monitors do you have?
Are you mixing through monitors or through headphones?
Are you using fresh tape?
Are you noticing any tape backing peeling or shredding off?
Are you using any form of encode/decode noise reduction, either on the machine itself or through external Noise Reduction Modules?
If so, what type of NR are you using? (Dolby B, C, dbx, etc...)
Do you have a Test Tape reel from which you can do alignment and biasing?
Do you have a voltmeter and an oscilloscope?
The problem with attenuated top-end could be as simple as the heads needing a cleaning and degaussing...(don't have your tape in proximity to the deck if you are degaussing!)
Or, it could be something more serious, like worn heads, or a misaligned head-stack, or bias settings, or noise reduction settings.... there are lots of possible culprits.
You need to be far more detailed as to what your set up is, and with the history of servicing and maintenance on the deck, because the list of possible problems is a long one, and the more we know about your rig, the more we can help you...
an 80-8 in good condition should not have issues with top end c
an 80-8 in good condition should not have issues with top end clarity. that's actually a decent recorder. not a big fat 1 inch but still pretty good. if anything those machines don't do the low end as well as a large format machine. i suspect you need to recap and align the machine.
in the day of that machine it was common for the engineer to boost the highs 3 dB while recording a track and then to cut the same at playback but that was to cut down on noise not to get it brighter.
Since the machine was serviced 18 months ago, its been used for
Since the machine was serviced 18 months ago, its been used for about 20-30 hours.
Mixer is a Studiomaster 166 Trilogy
Mics are Beta 57A (2),SM58 (2), Akg D112, Beyer M69, Beyer CK710+713, PZM, Stagg tom mics.
Room isn't acoustically treated.
Monitors are really my hi-fi speakers(Quad 11L)
The tape isn't brand new
Tape does shed the odd bit of fine oxide, but nothing bad.
Don't use noise reduction.
Havent a test tape or an oscilloscope.
servicing a machine is a very fine but you really should replace
servicing a machine is a very fine but you really should replace the caps. there's no way that machines caps can be in good shape after all these years. the fact the tape is shedding is also of concern. get a new reel and get a tone generator and a real test tape and learn to align the machine and to set the bias. last do not expect it to "sound" like digital recorder. that's just not going to happen. if that's what you want go buy some old ADATs.
Sounds good man, love what these kinda machines do to electric g
Sounds good man, love what these kinda machines do to electric guitars. I own a tascam 34, which was the next generation machine (4 track version). Yours definitely has a cleaner sound than mine probably due to a pro servicing yours, rather than my hack job experimental setup. Check it out if u get a sec.https://soundcloud.com/stream did this in my buddy's basement last year. These machines are fun huh.
hopefully this works, still getting used to my ipad. [MEDIA=so
hopefully this works, still getting used to my ipad.
[MEDIA=soundcloud]gushusound/money
[[url=http://[/URL]="https://soundcloud…"]View: https://soundcloud…]="https://soundcloud…"]View: https://soundcloud…]
Your 80-8 is sounding just great. Just the right saturation on t
Your 80-8 is sounding just great. Just the right saturation on the drums. I had a 38, back in the 1980s. There ain't nothing wrong with your machine. And your recording and mixing sounds good! Sure, I've heard better. But this is very listenable. Good job. The track that kmetal posted is lavishly rich with preamp saturation. It sounds nasty bad which means good.
I think you're being hypercritical about your own work? It's easy to do. We've all done it. Your recording is very accomplished sounding. And coming off of a 1/2 inch, 8 track recorder, it sounds amazing! So what's the problem? It's certainly nothing real. Nothing bad. Nothing to be ashamed about. Nothing you've done wrong.
I like things to sound up front and in-your-face. Your recording and mixing it all sounds as good as my recording and mixing. I'm not sure what this says about me? It's all good! You hit the mark. You got it down. I think it's your monitoring you're not liking? And you can't evaluate anything really, through headphones. Just having a good pair of monitors is not a panacea of perfection. It's all about the room it's in/ they're in. This might be a first in a series of monitors for ya? Though shipping can get expensive.
When a machine is adjusted properly, input should basically equal output with the exception of a little hiss, without any noise reduction. Now with machines that have DBX noise reduction? Those will exhibit a frequency response twice as awful as the factory printed specifications for the machine. DBX makes your frequency response twice as bad by a factor of two. These machines were not flat. As a result, frequently the sound that you've recorded, doesn't quite come out sounding the same way. You'll get added EQ in places you didn't want to add EQ. And then sometimes, you won't be able to get any of the EQ you want for a track? It'll be already too wacky ± 30-20,000 Hz. So not flat, the response curve might make you seasick? It really goes up and down three DB, across the entire response. So now it's like ± 6 DB from 20-20,000 Hz. And that's an incredibly audible change. In the end, all of these proconsumer machines, were never all that flat. Not like the finer American, British & German-made stuff. But livable nonetheless.
So I don't hear anything bad and I can't figure out what you're complaining about? Don't hyper fixate. It's much more fun if you just hyper masturbate.
Words of wisdom
Mx. Remy Ann David
Thank you for your words of wisdom. I now wonder if the clarity
Thank you for your words of wisdom. I now wonder if the clarity I think should be there, was maybe years and years of hearing CDs with that digital clean sparkle of top end. Don't know. What sort of outboard do I need to think about buying to improve the sound further? The parametrics I used on it were just two cheap Behringers, bottom of the range. Also, a cheap Phonic compressor and an Alesis Nanocompressor.
Actually, it's not really "sparkle"... it's just digital. If yo
Actually, it's not really "sparkle"... it's just digital. If you go back and listen to albums that were done in the analog age and compare them to stuff on CD, you'll hear plenty of sparkle and silk on the analog stuff... it's just that analog treats the top end a bit differently, through harmonics and tape saturation.
What you've grown accustomed to, and what your ears are leading you to perceive as "sparkle" is just a hyped-up top end that can be inherent in many digital recordings. I'm not inferring that one is better than the other, and I'm not saying that all analog is good or that all digital is bad -( I don't want to start the whole "digital vs analog" debate here) - there have been plenty of both good and bad mixes in both formats throughout the years...it's just that digital has been around for so long now - nearly everything we hear these days is digital in either origin, or processing, or copied release... that our ears have adjusted to the way digital treats EQ.
You can get plenty of sparkle off of that Teac. Just make sure you are using good, fresh tape, that the heads are cleaned, degaussed, aligned, and that your bias is set properly. You'll be amazed at just how much sparkle and silk tape can give, (as well as warmth) providing you know what you are doing in terms of gain structure, tone sculpting and processing. :)
What sort of outboard do I need to think about buying to improve
What sort of outboard do I need to think about buying to improve the sound further?
Not sure what kinda mics your using, but that's always a good start, as are a nice set of monitors and room treatment. Those things might help you not have to use eq, or maybe less of it. I'd say after that maybe a nice channel strip, or pair? I've tended to just go in order of the signal chain w gear purchases. Mic-pre-eq-compression. The order of eq and compression is a matter of taste, and what your trying to get out of it, but I'd buy and a nice eq before a compressor, just for no other reason than I have more fun playing w them than compressors in general.
There's some good stuff that's pretty affordable that I use, sm57s, personus eureka channel, art mpa(kinda doesn't have a "sound"), rane peq 15 eq, Dbx 160, I own a 166xl, which is okay at compression, but a little on the dull side tone wise. But I got it for 50 bucks, and it's cool for home demo type stuff. Just some ideas on some decent cheap gear.
Although I think your recording sounds really good, if your not satisfied w the top end, maybe a better set of converters would help, but really I think it's more along the lines of what Donny what saying. From my experience analog will take a lot more high eq before it's starts to sound "too much" than digital will, just because of there inherent designs, and properties.
Here's another thing to remember... Analog is much more forgivin
Here's another thing to remember...
Analog is much more forgiving with levels than digital is.
If your deck is aligned and biased properly, you needn't be as concerned with "absolute Zero" like you need to be with digital. Whereas digital can give you some pretty nasty things at 0db and above, analog has it's "sweet spots" that happen up near 0 and beyond a bit... Your deck should be aligned to a certain specification with tape type and levels. Don't be afraid to tap into that 0 to +3db area... as long as your gain chain is steady and you don't have one gain source over-driving another - there are some sweet harmonics and saturation sonics that can occur up there with tape, and sounds very nice on things like vocals, kick drum, cymbals, guitar amps, etc.
As far as gear you can add, well, that's a very open question with a wide array of answers. Microphones are important, as are monitors and room treatment... I like K's suggestion of a channel strip, something with a nice EQ and GR.
While you can get into "boutique" type models with strips - models like Neve's and API's - if you don't want to break the bank, you might want to consider something like this, which is Class A, has 3 band parametric and gain reduction and is $299 (US):
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/StudioChan/
The nicer (and more pricey) alternative would be this one - If you happen to have $2500 (US) laying around doing nothing:
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/APIChanStr/
No. Well, yes, you could, if you had two of them, but I was refe
No. Well, yes, you could, if you had two of them, but I was referring more to tracking.
For tracking, you would plug your mic into it... either a dynamic or a condenser, it can handle either, because the channel strip has a phantom power switch (48v) for condensers. It also has TRS line inputs as well
It's used to "front load" your tape deck's input. "Front Loading" means you will plug your mic into the preamp first, where you can do things like add gain, EQ, compression, not to mention taking advantage of the Class A circuitry. It's like plugging into a mixer's channel input, except it has functions that a normal, consumer grade mixing console's channel inputs do not. You would then come out of the channel strip into one of the track inputs on your tape deck.
Or, you could use the strip strictly as a Class A preamp, record flat with no EQ or compression, and then use those functions during your mix down.
For mixdown, insert the strip to a channel/track you want to effect on your mixing console, either through an auxiliary, an insert, or as an effect (effect send)... and then enable the compression and EQ. Just make sure you pay attention to your gain structure. You don't want to overload the either the strip or the mixer's input channel. The Presonus model has a -20db pad that might help in avoiding overloads.
And, note that I just suggested the Presonus channel strip as an example. There are many different channel strips out there, so do your homework. The link below might help you to determine which channel strip would be best for you.
http://www.musiciansfriend.com/resources/article/Preamps-Buying-Guide/m710119#3
You're talking about clarity but you're going for that tape satu
You're talking about clarity but you're going for that tape saturation. You do know that saturation means distortion? So with distortion, you are eliminating clarity, not enhancing it. And tape saturation is a method of limiting that the tape will do for you at the cost of saturation. Which means dense. It doesn't mean clean. And the tape provides for enhanced distortion and soft limiting. That's not clarity.
Yup, you're probably confused by all the digital crap you've heard? And it's not just the sparkle from the digital, no. It's also the nasty brick wall filtering on earlier digital recordings that the brick wall filter to prevent aliasing, adds its own type of sheen. Or what people perceive as sheen. The problem with this sheen is that it's a lot like Charlie. You don't get that with an analog machine which has no sheen. They're just smooth and silky. It almost gets her hormones flowing. Guys like high-end. Women like smooth and silky. You do the math. It's okay if you're gay. Just reverse the pronouns.
I'm reversed
Mx. Remy Ann David
If you can get the noise reduction unit for it, it would help qu
If you can get the noise reduction unit for it, it would help quite a bit. It seems to do more than just reduce noise. The bass tightens up a tad, and there seems to be a little more head room. The other thing is to maybe use plus9 tape.
And most old analog users will probably tell you that they used to hype the hi end while recording, and if need be turn it back down on playback. Turning the hi end down oh playback also helped to reduce the hi end hiss a little further.
Those were the days eh?