Reel-to-Reels. I hear these are making a comeback. Please explain.

[vivalarevolución]

Why are these things making a comeback.  I see some machines on Ebay selling for hundreds of dollars.

[PointyFox]

I bet it's all the twenty-something programmer steampunk kids with beards and tophats who think old is cool bidding on them.

[Puddsy]

Cuz people want that "retro" sound.

Or so says my mom.

[Wildcard]

I still have a ton of vinyl, but I don't think I'm considered a hipster since I've had them for 20 years.

[regack]

I have a reel to reel with neat little buttons and analog meters...  when you hit play the motors make stuff spin.  There's a mini-itx based mediaserver inside.

[tp4tissue]

problem is the heads... too hard to find parts to make it actually remotely listenable..

[fohat.digs]

I still have a ton of vinyl, but I don't think I'm considered a hipster since I've had them for 20 years.

Me too.

Analog rules, but tech-heads don't buy it these days.

[HoffmanMyster]

Some people get them to fit an "image" they're trying to portray. 
Some people get them to have a nice unique thing that sounds pretty good. 
Some people get them to collect vintage audio gear.
Some people get them for nostalgia.

Depending on the person the reason is different.  Pigeon-holing everyone as a stupid 20-something hipster might be an accurate enough generalization but it's definitely not always true.

FTR, I fit into categories 2 and 3.

[kolonelkadat]

I bet it's all the twenty-something programmer steampunk kids with beards and tophats who think old is cool bidding on them.

I am neither into steampunk or beards or tophats, but man I would LOVE to one day buy a house and have my computer room outfitted with an IBM 7090 or something of that ilk


I find them aesthetically pleasing, but would totally have to retrofit them with modern computer internals. I doubt id even use the tape drives. just have them run randomly for effect.

[vivalarevolución]

Some people get them to fit an "image" they're trying to portray. 
Some people get them to have a nice unique thing that sounds pretty good. 
Some people get them to collect vintage audio gear.
Some people get them for nostalgia.

Depending on the person the reason is different.  Pigeon-holing everyone as a stupid 20-something hipster might be an accurate enough generalization but it's definitely not always true.

FTR, I fit into categories 2 and 3.

You sound like a 20-something hipster.  Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[HoffmanMyster]

Some people get them to fit an "image" they're trying to portray. 
Some people get them to have a nice unique thing that sounds pretty good. 
Some people get them to collect vintage audio gear.
Some people get them for nostalgia.

Depending on the person the reason is different.  Pigeon-holing everyone as a stupid 20-something hipster might be an accurate enough generalization but it's definitely not always true.

FTR, I fit into categories 2 and 3.

You sound like a 20-something hipster.  Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I won't argue with that.  However, it seems that the hipsters that everyone hates are the ones that fit into category 1 that I listed, and that's why most people hate hipsters.  That's why I was trying to differentiate between the groups of people that might be interested in these. 

[IvanIvanovich]

Psh, reel to reel. Everyone knows 8tracks are best! I don't know about for home listening, but some recording studios do still use them if you want the old school analogue recording and mastering process. Maybe using these old reel to reel is the next 'big thing' in home studio production? Lot of people want the old full analogue sound especially when they are going to vinyl.

[HoffmanMyster]

Psh, reel to reel. Everyone knows 8tracks are best! I don't know about for home listening, but some recording studios do still use them if you want the old school analogue recording and mastering process. Maybe using these old reel to reel is the next 'big thing' in home studio production? Lot of people want the old full analogue sound especially when they are going to vinyl.

8tracks are fun.  I know they were common for a long time in the radio industry for commercials and other things, after they died out in home use.  I have a few 8tracks that I listen to, but they really are pretty quirky.

[IvanIvanovich]

Yeah, I know they still used 8tracks for commercial spots at the local radio here until at least 2004. I used to guest DJ occasionally... until I ignored FCC rules too many times playing music with 'profanity' and was asked not to ever come back. )

[noisyturtle]

Sounds like some hipster bull****

[IvanIvanovich]

Buys on ebay for $9,000+$1000 freight... gets upset can't figure out how to load FLACs of (insert douchy indie band here) to listen to on it...
then yes that is hipster.

[vivalarevolución]

We found some 8-tracs while cleaning out the house.  We had some good tunes.  Unfortunately, the 8-trac player is broke.

[IvanIvanovich]

Need to get the Boston 8track for the El Camino!

[vivalarevolución]

Need to get the Boston 8track for the El Camino!

Lol, I think that's one of the ones we found.

More than a feeling....

[Danule]

reel 2 reel for sound is probaly one of the best.  That is the technology that a lot of old albums were recorded on.

[IvanIvanovich]

Next... Reel 2 Real will make a comeback too!

[Leslieann]

I know that a few years ago some artists were still using reel to reel for mixing tracks, they liked the sound better, and it was faster than some of the computer systems at the time in the hands of a skilled person. Today, it's retro BS. Though admittedly, they are more interesting to watch  than an Ipod.

Same goes for records, so long as you aren't getting a remastered to 11 copy, modern IS better. "But the cracks and pops make it sound better and it's more true". Since the artists didn't put those cracks and pops there, it's not truly what they released was it. It's amazing how we justify inferiority. Do you really think the Beatles would choose their tech or ours for recording today?


HoffmanMyster
Those "8-tracks" used by the stations were Fidelipac carts or cartridges, and looked a lot like an 8track, they weren't really an 8 track. They are more or less a mini, endless reel to reel.  I was surprised to see them back in 2000 (many stations went to minidisk about then), but some stations even today are still using them, I only know because last year I heard one that was out of phase.  Actually, I'm not that surprised... Stations owners are cheap and radio in general really is struggling to make a profit. I'm actually shocked they still pay DJ's just to play music. A program manager could do 90% of the work himself with a little technology.

[HoffmanMyster]

I know that a few years ago some artists were still using reel to reel for mixing tracks, they liked the sound better, and it was faster than some of the computer systems at the time in the hands of a skilled person. Today, it's retro BS. Though admittedly, they are more interesting to watch  than an Ipod.

Same goes for records, so long as you aren't getting a remastered to 11 copy, modern IS better. "But the cracks and pops make it sound better and it's more true". Since the artists didn't put those cracks and pops there, it's not truly what they released was it. It's amazing how we justify inferiority. Do you really think the Beatles would choose their tech or ours for recording today?


HoffmanMyster
Those "8-tracks" used by the stations were Fidelipac carts or cartridges, and looked a lot like an 8track, they weren't really an 8 track. They are more or less a mini, endless reel to reel.  I was surprised to see them back in 2000 (many stations went to minidisk about then), but some stations even today are still using them, I only know because last year I heard one that was out of phase.  Actually, I'm not that surprised... Stations owners are cheap and radio in general really is struggling to make a profit. I'm actually shocked they still pay DJ's just to play music. A program manager could do 90% of the work himself with a little technology.

Very interesting information regarding the cartridges the stations use...huh. 

As for why people prefer older tech: everyone has their reasons, but I personally like touching things, having a wall full of media (records, CDs, whatever), and interacting with the device playing the music.  Records provide an excellent way to achieve that.  Plus, the album art is usually much better.  It's just a different experience.

[Malphas]

50% genuine sentimentality/50% superficial hipster fetishisation.

[Danule]

Sound quality before, and arguably now people prefer the old tape format for the sound.  Digital in the early days did not match the sound quality of analog.  Now its more personal preferance, artists now are still recording on tape because of the way the format colours the music, usually a warmer sound.  Audiophiles are not any more hipster than people who love using expencive keyboards are hipster.

[Malphas]

The better quality/audiophile argument is BS. It's an excuse used by people who prefer older formats for entirely superficial, conspicuous, hipster reasons.

[Danule]

The better quality/audiophile argument is BS. It's an excuse used by people who prefer older formats for entirely superficial, conspicuous, hipster reasons.

Then I can say typing on a mechanical is BS, cherry brown, BS and topre are all as good as a 25 dollar membrain rubber dome. Sorry that you dont understand it, but that is the reason, and it is a very valid reason.  Sound quality, is very different when it comes to analog and digital, even between solid state and tube.

[audioave10]

I'm not sure how they would compare now, but in the seventies, there was no doubt they were the best sound recording equipment you could buy. They were expensive however. You could also make tapes that lasted as long as 4 hours (maybe six). Speaker technology was different then too.

[Hak Foo]

Same goes for records, so long as you aren't getting a remastered to 11 copy, modern IS better. "But the cracks and pops make it sound better and it's more true". Since the artists didn't put those cracks and pops there, it's not truly what they released was it. It's amazing how we justify inferiority. Do you really think the Beatles would choose their tech or ours for recording today?

I can see one tangible benefit for LPs:  The large physical package does make for a nice presentation, if done right.  You could write the lyrics in the liner rather than in a little folded-82-times slip of paper to fit a CD case.  A nice piece of cover art could be an excellent choice for discount decorating.

I bought a new record recently, and it literally came with a voucher "visit our website and download the corresponding MP3 files!"

[Danule]

Same goes for records, so long as you aren't getting a remastered to 11 copy, modern IS better. "But the cracks and pops make it sound better and it's more true". Since the artists didn't put those cracks and pops there, it's not truly what they released was it. It's amazing how we justify inferiority. Do you really think the Beatles would choose their tech or ours for recording today?

acutally, if you have a clean record, and a proper setup you should not hear cracks and pops, LP quality is very high.

[Malphas]

The better quality/audiophile argument is BS. It's an excuse used by people who prefer older formats for entirely superficial, conspicuous, hipster reasons.

Then I can say typing on a mechanical is BS, cherry brown, BS and topre are all as good as a 25 dollar membrain rubber dome. Sorry that you dont understand it, but that is the reason, and it is a very valid reason.  Sound quality, is very different when it comes to analog and digital, even between solid state and tube.

Nah, I get that audio quality is important to people, I just don't for a second buy that that's the reason for people choosing vinyl, reel-to-reel, etc. For a start I don't personally think older formats are anything like as good as high-resolution digital audio under real world circumstances. For example, people can argue on technical reasons why vinyl is great, but we all know vinyl is actually crap in the real world, full of cracks and hisses. Secondly even under the circumstances where old analogue formats were superior or otherwise preferable, I still don't think that's the reason 99.99% of people choose them, when asked to explain their preference for these formats they use the same lazy arguments and cliche terms like it sounding more "authentic" or "warm". Meaningless drivel.

I honestly don't care if people want to shallowly use old tech as part of their carefully cultivated hipster image; it's when they lie about it and pretend it's for less embarrassing reasons that I feel the need to call BS.

[IvanIvanovich]

Even myself, I will admit most of my vinyl collection is for retro/kitsch novelty factor. I will never claim Culture Club album is better on vinyl, but it was only 50cents! Some I bought because I thought LP picture disc was fun or whatever. For the rest, I own it on vinyl as that is the only format it was made in some cases such as with 12" club singles, Italo Disco, punk records where the label folded and it has gone out of print. CD reissues of bootleg quality where it was 'remastered' from vinyl/cassette copies don't count!

I agree comparing it with our keyboards is not a bad analogy. It can be simple as a perceived difference that can make one happy with something. If that is true it really doesn't matter if it is truly 'technically superior' or not.

[Leslieann]

Then I can say typing on a mechanical is BS, cherry brown, BS and topre are all as good as a 25 dollar membrain rubber dome. Sorry that you dont understand it, but that is the reason, and it is a very valid reason.  Sound quality, is very different when it comes to analog and digital, even between solid state and tube.

Your comparison of keyboards is wrong.
While there is a measurable tactile feel, the keys themselves are digital, either on or off, there is no sort of. Your only choice is how they work. It doesn't matter if it's a $300 Topre or $5 keyboard, the keys still operate digitally and nothing like audio.



The rest of your argument is open to debate.
Digital once recorded stays in it's true form, never changing, Analog is altered every time it is used. By the time you the end user hears it, you have no idea how it was mastered, and even if you knew, it's been so manipulated, it sounds nothing like the studio. How you prefer to play it, is up to you, but in terms of preserving it as it came out of the studio, digital wins. This is easy to prove, go put a tape or record on and allow it to play back to back 500 times and see how it sounds compared to a new copy.

Tubes sound great, but they still manipulate the sound and it only a personal preference as to what you actually hear. Sort of like preferring a mechanical keyboard.

acutally, if you have a clean record, and a proper setup you should not hear cracks and pops, LP quality is very high.

Most peoples arguments for records center on those cracks and pops, which is why I said that. Yes, the quality is high, but for how long. Like I said, every time it is played, the sound changes slightly. Unlike Digital.

[Danule]

think about this.  I's sure some of you have visited other forums that arent strictly keyboard focused.  You will see people talking about keyboards, some of them will say mechanicals are awesome, others will say " its some hipster thing who cares if the keyboard has cherry profile thick doubleshots on there, its the same thing as using a microsoft rubberdome. "  Thats kind of whats going on here, on this forum, in this thread.

[Malphas]

Except I've never really heard anyone say that, and even if they did say something along those lines I wouldn't immediately dismiss it because there's definitely an element of that amongst any enthusiast group. However I think it's particularly prevalent amongst the subset of supposed audiophiles we're discussing here. I'm not talking about audiophiles as a whole, that's perfectly legitimate and similar to being a mechanical keyboard enthusiast. We're talking about a particular group of people who claim to prefer obsolete formats for legitimate reasons, when in fact I think we all know it's actually for vain, superficial ones.

For the record I don't have any issue with people who just openly say they like old formats for reasons of nostalgia or sentimentality - that's cool. I mean the douches who give their reasons as "the sound quality is superior" or "it's more authentic". Those people are typical 21st century hipsters, trying to cultivate a particular image as an end in itself, rather than it being the organic result of genuine eclectic tastes.

[JaccoW]

All I know is I have an old reel to reel that used to belong to my grandfather. And it looks awesome.
It is in need of some repairs but I have a ton of unused reels so I could record some music of my own.
If I had the space i would make it a central part of my room and change the wooden side panels to a dark black.

[McWilloughby]

A (very small) part of the reason these might be making a comeback are as a teaching method for those going into sound production. Nowadays, anyone can pick up a copy of ProTools or Logic and after watching a few youtube videos can produce a reasonably good sounding track with a few hundred pounds worth of gear (or less if they pirate the software). While this is all good and well for independent artists/producers/etc one of the problems it results in is that people don't really understand what, for example, the compressor they used is actually doing to the audio wave, they just know what settings (or even pre-sets) to use to get it to sound "good".

If people learn to record and produce using an analogue desk, tape and actual hardware as opposed to plugins, they generally understand what the different aspects of production actually do and therefore get a better sound out in the end. That isn't to say that everyone everywhere should use analogue gear because that isn't feasible (hence the boom in independently produced records when digital gear became affordable), I am merely saying that there is a valid reason to use analogue gear to produce music sometimes besides the "it sounds better" argument.

As far as the digital vs analogue listening argument goes, I listen to digital copies most of the time because it is convenient (and where I live currently I don't have room for my record player etc ) but if I was going to sit down and just listen to music, I would listen to vinyl. Why? Consider this: a digital copy replicates the entire (relevant) frequency spectrum indiscriminately (obviously taking any equalisation into account) however human hearing does not have a flat frequency response. Analogue recording also does not, and has an audio spectrum more similar to human hearing than digital in that the upper frequencies of human hearing are not as well replicated as say, a few hundred Hz. I would say that this is the source of the "analogue is 'warmer' sounding" argument as frequencies that people find annoying are in the thousands of Hz.

edit - just to clarify, I'm not saying the sound quality of analogue is better because technically/scientifically speaking it is not. I'm just saying that I think there is a point to be made that it could be considered better suited for human hearing.

[HoffmanMyster]

Except I've never really heard anyone say that, and even if they did say something along those lines I wouldn't immediately dismiss it because there's definitely an element of that amongst any enthusiast group. However I think it's particularly prevalent amongst the subset of supposed audiophiles we're discussing here. I'm not talking about audiophiles as a whole, that's perfectly legitimate and similar to being a mechanical keyboard enthusiast. We're talking about a particular group of people who claim to prefer obsolete formats for legitimate reasons, when in fact I think we all know it's actually for vain, superficial ones.

For the record I don't have any issue with people who just openly say they like old formats for reasons of nostalgia or sentimentality - that's cool. I mean the douches who give their reasons as "the sound quality is superior" or "it's more authentic". Those people are typical 21st century hipsters, trying to cultivate a particular image as an end in itself, rather than it being the organic result of genuine eclectic tastes.

I don't think it's vain or superficial at all to want to sit down and enjoy some physical media... (a very legitimate reason to listen to vinyl, by the way)

[Malphas]

No, I specifically said I was fine with that in my second paragraph and previous comments. I'm not talking about people like you, you're honest about your reasons and they're fine, but I don't think you're the majority case here. I'm talking about the typical hipster douche who does things like this as part of artificially creating a certain external identity or persona for aesthetic reasons and peer confirmation, rather than genuine enjoyment or interest.

[HoffmanMyster]

No, I specifically said I was fine with that in my second paragraph and previous comments. I'm not talking about people like you.

I saw that statement, but since the other statement was still there I thought you still meant that.  Apologies for the misunderstanding.  Carry on!

[Danule]

untill recently, (blu ray audio, dvd audio)  analog on  a high end system wether it be vinyl, or reel to reel has better sound quality than standard CD.

[vivalarevolución]

Ya know, there is something about throwing a vinyl on the record player, pouring a beer, and relaxing on the couch with friends.  Then getting up every 20 minutes to flip sides or choose another album why you steadily get more sloshed.  I find this to be a great bonding activity.

[McWilloughby]

Ya know, there is something about throwing a vinyl on the record player, pouring a beer, and relaxing on the couch with friends.  Then getting up every 20 minutes to flip sides or choose another album why you steadily get more sloshed.  I find this to be a great bonding activity.

Agreed. I quite like putting a record on as I'm going to bed as well. Having 20 minutes of music that turns itself off when its done is pretty nice. There is probably a way to get my computer to do this but my record player does it already...

[Danule]

Another cool thing about listening to records is that it forces you to listen to the whole album.  Personally I enjoy listening to albums from beginning to end rather than a random mix of songs.

[JaccoW]

[aref]

And after you find a good reel-to-reel, you have to find high-quality audio tape (good luck), and record at 15ips for best frequency
response and audio accuracy...  I used reel-to-reels decades ago. At the time they were good; these days, it's not worth the expense.
I think it's a retro thing. I still love the mesmerizing reels, but not enough to resurrect my old Revox.

[blackbox]

I have a Tandberg reel to reel that I am going to use. I think it  is more a comeback for LP than reel to reel.

[JaccoW]

And after you find a good reel-to-reel, you have to find high-quality audio tape (good luck), and record at 15ips for best frequency
response and audio accuracy...  I used reel-to-reels decades ago. At the time they were good; these days, it's not worth the expense.
I think it's a retro thing. I still love the mesmerizing reels, but not enough to resurrect my old Revox.

I'll need to have someone check the heads some time but I have plenty 10+ empty tapes lying around. Should be fun.

[blackbox]

And after you find a good reel-to-reel, you have to find high-quality audio tape (good luck), and record at 15ips for best frequency
response and audio accuracy...  I used reel-to-reels decades ago. At the time they were good; these days, it's not worth the expense.
I think it's a retro thing. I still love the mesmerizing reels, but not enough to resurrect my old Revox.

I'll need to have someone check the heads some time but I have plenty 10+ empty tapes lying around. Should be fun.

You are lucky to have so many empty tapes! Now go and have some fun. 

[rowdy]