Teac X-300R Open Reel (Bob...)

[BeatleFred]

Bob- if you're reading this (and Greetings to everyone else who isnt Bob): I finally had a chance to record some music on the Teac last night. [if you recall, I purchased this model on Ebay recently]. I must say, I am VERY impressed with the sound quality of this machine. I will experiment more as I have time- with different tapes and settings (hopefully some vacation time coming up soon). Last night, I just used a reel of Radio Shack hi output tape that I bought a few years back that was never opened before. I dont know if thats LH1 or LH II type tape as it doesnt say on the box (or even Ampex 456 for that matter) but it seemed to sound better on LH I setting so I'm guessing, its that and thats what I used on the Teac- (referring to the LH I/II bias button on the X-300R).

I just basically made a compilation tape of various songs from my CD collection. Upon playback, I was very pleasantly surprised at the quality of sound. The Teac certainly does give you that classic analog sound- warm, smooth, and "fat"- fat meaning- not thin or shrill or ear-fatiguing like some digital stuff can be. Maybe "Full- bodied" would be a good way to describe it (why am I in the mood for a beer now?- smile) In fact, it even sounds like the recording is better than the original! I know that might be impossible but what I mean is, when listening to the recording I made on the X-300R, it was like I was able to hear and distinguish some subtle nuances in the music that I never quite noticed when listening to the source CD itself. Wish I could say the same for cassettes, as I do like them too, but they always seem to sound a liitle muffled in comparsion to the source CD that I recorded music from - and thats w/o using Dolby. Of course, the open reels run at faster speeds, so I know they do sound better, but the sound from the X-300R is so substantailly better- to the point where I dont think I'll be using cassettes too much in the future.

Oh by the way- there is a GREAT book on Open Reel machines called 'Evolution of the Audio Recorder' by Phil van Praag, do you know of it? I imagine a site like www.amazon.com would have it.

Luckily I saved all my issues of Modern Recording that I bought as a teen in the late 70's/early 80's- alot of great info in there on those analog machines you cant find anymore nowadays. (though there are sites like www.tapeop.com).

I did call Tascam yesterday to order some Rubber Cleaner- and they told me its a discontinued product- Geez! They did give me a phone # to call another company, (Cortek- or some place with a name like that) but I kept getting their answering machine. Any chance, you know of another place(s) I can still get some rubber cleaner?- as obviously I'd like to keep the X-300R in well- maintained condition. Sincerely, B/F.

[Bob Lovely]

Fred,

Sorry that I was away from my computer since Friday afternoon. I am pleased to hear your the outcome of your recording session. When you say that you actually prefer the sound of music recorded on your new-found Reel recorder I am not surprised. Please see Todd Frederick's thread: Bob Lovely's Cocktail Lounge Mix Vol. 6. This thread will further discuss this listening experience you are referring to. The Reel recorder adds additional analog "color" to the sound of selections recorded on the machine. There is nothing wrong with added color as long as that color is desirable, pleasurable to the ears and adds to the listening experience. Steve has discussed, on many occasions, how vintage analog equipment adds desirable color to recorded music.

I am familar with the Radio Shack tape. Set your EQ selector to LH II. Secure a reel of professional grade high output tape (preferably BASF SM-900) and run an experiment. Record one track at the LH II setting and the same track on the EE setting. I will be very interested in hearing the results of that experiment.

Thanks for the information on the book. It is unfortunate that Tascam has discontinued the rubber cleaner. I would try a professional audio house. Since you live in the New York area, that should not be a problem. I purchased a large bottle two years ago from:

www.fullcompass.com

Good luck with your recordings!

Bob :)

[Paul L.]

For cleaning the rubber pinch roller, try Formula 409. I've been using it and it works fine.

Spray some onto a clean, lint-free cotton cloth. Don't spray it at the tape recorder itself.

And don't use it except for cleaning the rubber.

A bonus on using Formula 409 is that it is FAR cheaper than the tiny little packaged bottles of rubber cleaner. They must have had a mark-up of about 1000%. And the colored dye they put in there to make it look fancy in the bottle couldn't have been good for anything.

[Bob Lovely]

Originally posted by Paul L.
For cleaning the rubber pinch roller, try Formula 409. I've been using it and it works fine.

Spray some onto a clean, lint-free cotton cloth. Don't spray it at the tape recorder itself.

And don't use it except for cleaning the rubber.

A bonus on using Formula 409 is that it is FAR cheaper than the tiny little packaged bottles of rubber cleaner. They must have had a mark-up of about 1000%. And the colored dye they put in there to make it look fancy in the bottle couldn't have been good for anything.

Paul,

I believe you are referring to the Tascam or Teac head cleaner (colored dye). The Rubber Cleaner (different) is a solution that smells like Kerosene or Jet Fuel. That solution really cleans the Rubber and leaves it with just the right amount of tackiness. For cleaning heads, I recommend a 91% solution of Isopropyl Alcohol, not the 70% Rubbing Alcohol forumla. I have never tried 409 on the Rubber but, I will give it a try.

Bob

[Dave]

Originally posted by Bob Lovely
I recommend a 91% solution of Isopropyl Alcohol, not the 70% Rubbing Alcohol forumla.
Bob, don't you mean 99% as opposed to 91%? I've never heard of the 91% before and having used it for 38 years (diabetic) I've never seen 91%, at least up here anyways.

[Bob Lovely]

Originally posted by Dave

Bob, don't you mean 99% as opposed to 91%? I've never heard of the 91% before and having used it for 38 years (diabetic) I've never seen 91%, at least up here anyways.

Dave,

The 99% is intended for medicinal purposes, is typically certified as sterile and is more expensive. The 91% is much cheaper and readily available at most drug stores here. It works very well as a head cleaner.

Bob

[Paul L.]

I haven't seen it in years, but I believe TEAC had a kit with a few different kinds of cleaner in it, and each one had a different color of dye in it.

Yes, for cleaning heads I agree, Isopropyl alcohol. I use 99% formula. I just recently got another pint of it at a local drug store for all of $1.25. Enough to last many years.

By the way, this stuff is poison so keep it in a safe area.

[Bob Lovely]

Originally posted by Paul L.
I haven't seen it in years, but I believe TEAC had a kit with a few different kinds of cleaner in it, and each one had a different color of dye in it.

Yes, for cleaning heads I agree, Isopropyl alcohol. I use 99% formula. I just recently got another pint of it at a local drug store for all of $1.25. Enough to last many years.

By the way, this stuff is poison so keep it in a safe area.

Paul,

I remember those kits!

I purchased my last Tascam Rubber Cleaner in 2000. It came in a container with an attached snap-on top--very smelly but, very effective. It is clear. Most of these solvents are highly toxic. I live alone so no need to worry about access by the little ones. I always wash my hands after using the Rubber cleaner.

Bob

[Mike V]

I've never seen 99% Isopropyl where I shop. Can someone name a major chain (CT area would be helpful).

In the meantime, I've been buying anhydrous (100% pure) Isopropyl at $24 a gallon from the electronics supply shop. It's great for those homemade LP cleaning solutions, but so very pricey!!

[Bob Lovely]

Originally posted by Mike V
I've never seen 99% Isopropyl where I shop. Can someone name a major chain (CT area would be helpful).

In the meantime, I've been buying anhydrous (100% pure) Isopropyl at $24 a gallon from the electronics supply shop. It's great for those homemade LP cleaning solutions, but so very pricey!!

Mike,

I would think any well-stocked drugstore should carry it. When in doubt ask a staff member or even the Pharmacist. I use the 91% solution (cheaper) and it works quite nicely. I do not believe there is any need to use the more pricey 100% formula, although I do believe it would take quite awhile to go through a gallon? I go through an 8 ounce bottle about once a year.

Maybe someone will know a specific place in your area.

Bob

[Mike V]

Unfortunately the 91 does leave residue on my vinyl. I stopped using it a few years ago because it left a haze behind (that I could remove with distilled water, so it wasn't a big problem). When I mix my own record machine cleaning fluid, it has to be pure, otherwise the brushes will be lost to contaminants very quickly. I have used 91% on tape heads and rubber, so for that purpose I'd agree it's perfectly fine. 99% would probably be OK, so I'll check with my pharmacist. Thanks!

Mike

[Bob Lovely]

Originally posted by Mike V
Unfortunately the 91 does leave residue on my vinyl. I stopped using it a few years ago because it left a haze behind (that I could remove with distilled water, so it wasn't a big problem). When I mix my own record machine cleaning fluid, it has to be pure, otherwise the brushes will be lost to contaminants very quickly. I have used 91% on tape heads and rubber, so for that purpose I'd agree it's perfectly fine. 99% would probably be OK, so I'll check with my pharmacist. Thanks!

Mike

Mike,

I missed the vinyl cleaning application. I would think 99% would work better on a vinyl cleaning machine. I recommended the 91% for cleaning tapes heads, of course.

Good Luck!

Bob :)

[BeatleFred]

Hi Bob:

What setting on the X300R would be used for Quantegy 456 tape, LHI or LHII and why cant the tape manufacturer put this simple info anywhere on the box of the tape??

[Bob Lovely]

Originally posted by BeatleFred
Hi Bob:

What setting on the X300R would be used for Quantegy 456 tape, LHI or LHII and why cant the tape manufacturer put this simple info anywhere on the box of the tape??

Fred,

Remember that your X300R was made before most modern tape formulations. Quantegy 456--LH II. Try a test track using the EE setting and tell me what you think, out of curiosity.

Bob

[BeatleFred]

Hi Bob:

The reason why I asked about Quantegy 456 is because I picked up two reels of it at a Sam Ash pro audio store in NY City. I had gone there to see if they had Tascam rubber cleaner and the BASF Tape. They only carried the Quantegy for $10.99 so out of curiosity I thought I'd buy it and try it out. (I will order some BASF from tapeworld.com). They didnt have the Tascam cleaner. They had a small bottle of Rubber Renue by MG Chemicals- are you familiar with this particular product and whether its suitable for use on a tape machine? Otherise, I can try the suggestion to use 409 as mentioned in a previous post.

I was also interested to know if the length of tape (1800 vs 1200 ft) might affect recording quality- its nice to have the extra time available with 1800 ft but perhaps due to it being thinner, better recordings can be made with 1200 ft- thoughts? (The 1800 ft Radio Shack tape I have lists the tape as 1.0 mil, the Quantegy box has nothing mentioned).

I also wanted to ask which type of empty take-up reel do you use? With my X-300R, I use a metal Maxell one. I had bought a few of them several years ago brand new for next to nothing in price. They look to be excellent-I like that it has a notch where I can place the end of the tape coming from the supply reel when I first load the tape on the machine. This is unlike the empty Ampex 10" reel on my Tascam 32 which has no notch at all which I cant understand why. Without the notch in the take up reel- I gather that means I have to hold the end of the tape with my finger onto the reel and then wind a turn or two of the tape around a few times over it to hold the tape in place before I can let go with my finger and activate Play and commence with playing the tape -?? Seems to me a notch makes things alot easier and the tape can wind more securely onto the eel.

As for LHI, II, and EE settings: I did check an Owners manual copy I have of an X-3 machine (the model that came out before the X-300)- I wanted to see if perhaps they might go into more details than whats written in my X-300R manual. The X-3 has two buttons, for bias and eq (there is no EE setting). The manual says that setting 2 is for normal tape and 1 is for low noise high output tape. It also mentioned these settings are effective only during recording- doesnt matter what they are set at during playback-- thats good to know as my X-300R didnt mention that. So, I was just wondering about the Radio Shack tape I have. You told me to set the machine at LH II for this tape- but on the box its says Studio Quality High Output Tape- so with the "high output" designation, shouldnt the setting be LH I??

I suppose another way is just to try and let our own ears be the judge and use what our ears think sounds best. I will try and make some more recordings onto the machine and see if I can consistently pick out which tape and setting seems to give the best results. I did briefly try the EE setting but it didnt really seem to offer any improvement at all. In fact, it mightve been the poorest sound on playback, but who knows, maybe I didnt do something right. For now, I thought LHI sounded best but I didnt hear a drastic difference between LHI and LH II.

I did want to ask, Bob: when you make a tape, particularly when songs alternate between new & older music, do you just use one average level to set the Input record level at and keep it there, or do you adjust as needed for each song? The goal being that when listening to playback- the volume heard remains fairly even throughout all the songs, not fluctuating to the point that you have to keep fiddling with your amp's volume control all the time because one song is heard too soft, the next one too loud etc... What level do you usually have the Output knob on your tape machine- is it high up near 8, 9 or do you have it lower and prefer to control the volume more with your stereo amplifier?

I will let you know when I obtain some BASF tape. I will try the R Shack & Quantegy some more and give a better listening to each. My initial thoughts were that Quantegy would be a far better brand tape and that buying Radio Shack sounded like some kind of low-class supermarket type product- but quite honestly, I cant say that the R Shack tape is bad at all. They atleast give you some information about the tape on the box, whereas the Quantegy says nothing at all.

Sincerely, Fred.

[Bob Lovely]

Fred,

Sorry that I have not gotten back to you sooner. I brought my Owner's Manual to my X-1000-R with me as a reference. In that manual, clearly high output tape should be used on the LH II setting although I hear very little difference by running a test on I or II. I highly prefer the professional grade tapes at 1.5 mil. They record more smoothly, archive better and have a higher consistent quality. The Quantegy 456 is a very good tape but, I have had better luck and less problems with BASF. The Quantegy should sound very good, however.

Here is how I record:

Speed: 7.5 ips

EQ Setting: EE position for most tracks. Lower amount of tape equalization=flatter recordings with higher output, less color, more dynamic range.

Tape: BASF SM-900

Process: I record a lot of comps. In my record chain I use a BBE Sonic Maximizer as an adjustment to tonal qualities. Except for some problematic recordings, I use this device sparingly. I adjust the record level for each track individually in order to get the sound just right and hit the "sweet spot" in the tape. This also keeps the playback levels from track to track very consistent. On playback with the BASF, I set the playback level at about "8" or equal to the record level.

Bob :)