SOUND ON SOUND

[Arpangel]

If anyone does want an open reel machine, I've still got that UHER Report Stereo machine, that I'd accept any reasonable offer for - with about half a dozen BASF tapes .

That’s tempting, but I’m looking for a 10.5 inch reel machine, or a bigger Studer, but they are so hard to find in decent condition now.

[Sam Spoons]

And if you do the HiFi bods will have caused the price to soar...

[Arpangel]

And if you do the HiFi bods will have caused the price to soar...

Yes Sam, it’s one of those ideas that never gets done, it’s one of my "if one falls into my lap at the right price" type of ideas, so yes, it’ll probably never happen, it would be nice, but I can live without it.
I feel like that about a lot of gear these days!

:)

[Sam Spoons]

I always slightly regret selling my A77 but it was not getting used. I don't regret selling the 3440S and the Tascam 48 quite so much as they were replaced with digital (Akai DR8/16) but the A77 was a very cool bit of kit. :blush:

[James Perrett]

I had two B77’s on permanent loan back in the 90’s, I opened them up because of some problem or other, I was really surprised at how bad the build quality was, low quality pots and components, badly installed, it’s really surprising how they became an industry standard as I though the Japanese machines like the Tascam 32-2B were much better built, and sounded great.

Interesting - as I feel the opposite. Yes, the pots in the Revox are a weak point but everything is easy to get to and they've spent money in all the right places - like the more sophisticated capstan motor. The Teac machines that I've worked on seemed agricultural in comparison - although I've not worked on a 30 series machine or newer.

I quite like the Fostex E series machines though.

[Arpangel]

I had two B77’s on permanent loan back in the 90’s, I opened them up because of some problem or other, I was really surprised at how bad the build quality was, low quality pots and components, badly installed, it’s really surprising how they became an industry standard as I though the Japanese machines like the Tascam 32-2B were much better built, and sounded great.

Interesting - as I feel the opposite. Yes, the pots in the Revox are a weak point but everything is easy to get to and they've spent money in all the right places - like the more sophisticated capstan motor. The Teac machines that I've worked on seemed agricultural in comparison - although I've not worked on a 30 series machine or newer.

I quite like the Fostex E series machines though.

Yes, I had to replace the pots in one machine, they had completely rotted, I think, due to heat build up in these machines.
Ergonomically I like the B77, especially the track bounce function.

[James Perrett]

Ergonomically I like the B77, especially the track bounce function.

Yes, I used that extensively when I first bought my B77. I never had any desire to go 4 track because it always seemed to involve too many decisions about which tracks to bounce and how to assign the tracks so that you could mix most effectively. With the B77 you just got on with it - you had to mix as you went along and play each part correctly all the way through. While you could go back and re-record the most recent part again as often as you needed, once you had moved on to recording the next instrument there was no going back.

[Hugh Robjohns]

...and that's kind of where Sound On Sound came from... :lol:

[Trevor Johnson]

Ergonomically I like the B77

Tape play/wind logic was a big improvement over the A77, when going from fast wind/rewind to play meant a broken tape.

The weak point sof the B77 were the toggle switches, which have often been broken. Nagravox make a repair kit and sell replacement switches, but at a cost!

[Old Will]

I had an A77 Mk IV half-track in the '70s. Sold it in '86 for a ReVox PR-99 in floor console. That one I should have kept. I never took one apart, but the ReVox machines always seemed to me to have better sound quality and tape handling than most of the Japanese machines. At work the 2-track was an Ampex ATR-102. I've been lusting after one of those since they came out, but way too expensive for a home studio. Mara Machines in Nashville sells nicely refurbished MCI machines. Last I checked, their 2-track was $5000 US.

[Tim Gillett]

Ergonomically I like the B77

Tape play/wind logic was a big improvement over the A77, when going from fast wind/rewind to play meant a broken tape.

Yes the B77 was more fool proof. But in fairness the A77 was already a big advance over the previous valve series in a number of ways. Also in fairness the A77 wouldnt allow you to go straight from fast wind to play. You had to press Stop, wait for the reels to stop, and only then press Play. The uneducated got impatient for the reels to stop, pressed play and that's when tapes could be damaged.

Solution: RTFM. In bold lettering in the owner's manual, page 23: "The Play button must only be operated when the tape is stationary".

My main quibble with the A77 is very difficult tape path cleaning. Even just viewing it is extremely difficult. To their credit, Revox improved this somewhat on the B77 but it wasnt until the PR99 that they properly fixed it. The age old contest between cosmetics and function.

[Arpangel]

Ergonomically I like the B77, especially the track bounce function.

Yes, I used that extensively when I first bought my B77. I never had any desire to go 4 track because it always seemed to involve too many decisions about which tracks to bounce and how to assign the tracks so that you could mix most effectively. With the B77 you just got on with it - you had to mix as you went along and play each part correctly all the way through. While you could go back and re-record the most recent part again as often as you needed, once you had moved on to recording the next instrument there was no going back.

Yes, I can remember I’d make music on the B77 when I had very little time indeed, it was extremely quick to work with, and mixing as you go was a great benefit, it was very spontaneous.
The awkward cleaning, on the A77, there was a company that made modified machines with raised top plates which enabled easier access, I think they were called ITA?

[Martin Walker]

I never, EVER want to see a tape machine again. I lived through that hell and there's no way I would go back! :headbang:

I do tend to agree, and my Revox A77 did end up going up in a puff of smoke.


Martin

[Arpangel]

One thing that you cannot do, with digital, and that’s slowing things down, it just doesn’t work, I’d own a tape machine just for doing that.
The depth and thickness, the solidity, you get with tape is unequaled.

[Mike Stranks]

One thing that you cannot do, with digital, and that’s slowing things down, it just doesn’t work, I’d own a tape machine just for doing that.
The depth and thickness, the solidity, you get with tape is unequaled.

You've obviously never used iZotope RX then...