Reel-to-reel vs. turntable sound quality
Amandela77 -- Mon, 08/25/2008 - 18:05
I'm about to take the plunge and pop for a vintage reel-to-reel deck (a Teac A-3340 ) and some vintage pre-recorded tapes, but I want to get a sense from the community regarding how reel-to-reel player/recorders compare sound-qualitywise to a well-configured table/arm/cartridge playback system before I do.
I also plan to record some broadcasts from local classical music giant WFMT, one of the few remaining truly great classical radio stations, with my "new" deck.
On a related matter, how do pre-recorded vintage reel-to-reel tapes compare soundwise to their vinyl counterparts assuming a decent recording?
Thoughts?
Amandela
First off, be prepared to spend some money getting your new R-R deck refurbed before you can judge its ultimate sonic capabilities. A full refurb will not be inexpensive.
R-R decks and turntables have very different types of distortions and non-linearities. J. Gordon Holt always preferred tape, but he made many of his own recordings. Just as with LPs, the condition of the commercial tape will have a major impact on its SQ. Tapes, just like LPs can be ruined by one pass through a poorly set-up machine.
Personally, if Ihad the option of spending $800 - $1200 on a properly set-up R-R machine or a digital recording rig such as a Marantz PMD-671 or Korg MR-1000, I'd choose the digital rig in a heartbeat. They both have better ergonomics, more transparent sound, and greater flexibility. But of course your own milage may vary...R-R tape decks can be very beautiful to look at - much prettier than digital gear.
I have a pair of Revox A-77's in my home theater. They do make excellent book-ends. :)
Steven Stone
Contributor to The Absolute Sound, EnjoytheMusic.com, Vintage Guitar Magazine, and other fine publications
Post new comment