Des-Lab
09-13-2008, 01:59 PM
This latest TapeHeads.Net/Des-Lab tape review will focus on the new ATR Master Tape.
This is a new tape available.
And now, I have taken the time to conduct a full scale test of the tape and report my findings.
My testing methodology was essentially the same process that I used in my recent Akai GX and SX cassette review (http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=753).
TAPE DESCRIPTION:
Type: Reel to reel blank
Brand/Model#: ATR "Mastering"
Width: ¼" wide
Length/Thickness: 1.5 mil X 2400'
The ATR tape comes in an attractive blue textured box as shown:
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Box.JPG
The included reel was that of heritage Scotch/3M style with the ATR logo discretely stamp printed in blue letters on one side. As an aside, while I don't particularly care for the aesthetics of this style reel, I must say that the super wide windage hole cutouts and the flush flanges, these are BY FAR the EASIEST reels to thread. So while in my book they score an F for looks, they score an A+ for function. Perhaps 3M and now ATR intended it that way.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Reel.JPG
The tape itself looks like pretty much any other high performance blank: chocolate brown oxide surface with dark gray/black back coating (more on this below). The surface of the tape appeared mostly mirror smooth and no blemishes or evidence of oxide outcrop was noted. The fill-to height in the reel was also considered nominal. The tape comes supplied as leaderless:
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Tape_Surface.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_ReelFill.JPG
However one thing I did notice is what appeared to be an inconsistent slit pattern on the outer surface of the tape pack. I do not know if this normal or not. It is only readily visible in reflective and semi sillhouette lighting. It had no adverse effect on recording or playback that I was able to discern:
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Slit_Pattern.JPG
Because the tape comes leaderless, I elected to attach/splice on my own. I used white color for the head end and blue for the tail end. For further instruction on how to perform a splice, please see THIS (http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=276) topic.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Attach_Leader.JPG
Once the first leader was on, I proceeded to do a fast-wind pass of the tape as per recommended protocol when using a virgin tape for the first time. At the other end, the other leader was attached. And the tape was fast-wound a second time back to the front end. It should also be noted that the deck was cleaned and demagnetized in preparation for this test prior to the first run of the tape. During fast wind, the tape unravelled smoothly and quietly with no signs of hesitation, stickiness, or any other abnormality.
However, it should be noted that the back coating didn't exactly perform up to par. Part of the reason for applying the layer of carbon or graphite to the back side of the tape is to ensure smooth and uniform tape wind at high speed. The resulting pack wasn't exactly what could be called smooth and uniform. I've seen several other "lower" grade tapes (such as Maxell XLI and Quantegy #407) pack up much smoother and even at high speed.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Tape_Pack.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_White_Rewind.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Blue_Rewind.JPG
TESTING METHODOLOGY
Once I finished the physical and cosmetic evaluation of the tape, it was time to perform an array of actual sonic tests on the tape to evaluate its actual performance. My testing process includes two sets of parameters: OBJECTIVE and SUBJECTIVE. In the case of the former, I used a series of neutral test tones (courtesy of the Stereophile "Test CD").
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_StereophileCD.JPG
The test tones used were:
Pink noise
1 Khtz tone
100 Htz tone
50 Htz tone
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_TestTones.JPG
DECK USED: Teac X-2000R
SPEED: 7½ ips
I recorded each tone twice. First was to establish the best bias setting and truest possible A/B comparison with regards to source-to-playback monitoring.
The second stage of the test involved recording each of the tones at the favorable bias setting at the highest possible input gain to determine a level of threshold for distortion and saturation.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Ready_To_Test.JPG
FINDINGS FOR TEST TONE RECORDINGS
PINK NOISE: Unable to achieve a neutral and true sound with bias, even when turned down as far as the deck is capable: -5%. The original still sounded "brighter" than the recording. With the bias turned all the way UP to +5%, the ensuing recording sounded overwhelmingly dull, as though the tape was suffering severe azimuth errors. The maximum input the tape was able to handle before saturating with audible distortion was +3dB.
1 Khtz: Bias results were identical. However, perhaps in part because of the bias mismatch, during a L/R channel A/B comparison, there was about a 1-2 dB offset. Note that on the output switches, the L channel is set to "tape" and the R channel is set to "source".
But on the saturation part of the test, using this tone, I was able completely "peg the needles" with no audible distortion:
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Monitor_Offset.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Meters_Pegged.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Adjust_Levels.JPG
Results for 100 Htz and 50 Htz were identical to the 1 Khtz test above. In short, for neutral tones, pink noise nothwithstanding, this tape has outstanding headroom. It should also be noted that while I was not able to achieve a true A/B synergy with the bias, this tape has a stunningly low noise floor-essentially nonexistent.
The second half of the evaluation involved SUBJECTIVE testing, using actual musical recorded material in an effort to mimic and replicate how the tape might be used in a day to day setting. Also, because of the much more modulated signal and mix of sounds and frequencies, it simultaneously tests the tape across a much broader range of the sound spectrum as opposed to a single locked frequency.
My test songs, I recorded the following musical selections, for the full length of their track duration two times. Once to establish best bias and optimum sound. The second time, to establish a threshold of distortion:
"Renaissance Man" by The Ocean Blue, because of its emphasis on heavy bass, electric guitars, and strong beat.
"Fable" by Robert Miles because of its etheral electronica sound, high octave keyboards, and steady beat.
"Learning To Fly" by Tom Petty because of its overdubbed accoustic guitars and mid-octave range vocals.
The procedure for all three songs was identical as the test tones above. However, I introduced one additional element. And that is I conducted a blind test with a second listener (my wife) to see if she could correctly disntinguish between the source and recording.
For #1: Still unable to get correct, true playback because of bias issue, even when turned down all the way to -5%. However, the playback was very deep and rich. Distortion and saturation in the low-end tracks such as bass and drums was audible at +3 dB and up on the gain.
For #2: Biasing results were the same. Playback exhibited the same rich analog sound as found in #1. However, because of this musical and tonal content of this track, it was able to handle an across-the-board sustained +3 dB input with pegged peaks on the needles before any audible distortion was heard.
And finally #3: Results were pretty much identical to the outcome in #1.
And for the blind test, the wife was able to correctly distinguish between the source and the playback 3 out of 3 times.
After all tests were finished, I re-recorded a short passage of each of the three test songs. I overdubbed/mixed them together as a final "sample" recording. I then filmed a playback of this test. You will hear in the first selection, some audible saturation.
You can view/hear the video HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGz2Tc9WGz4). I highly recommend that you select the "watch in high quality" option that way you can then view the VU needles showing the output.
CONCLUSIONS:
Overall, a very good tape. For single tones, it is phenomenal. And while touted as a high bias tape (which can result in a decreased emphasis on highs during playback), it definitely has an extremely rich sound that screams every bit of analog it is. It has an almost nonexistent base noise level that all but completely negates the need to use any external device such as Dolby or DBX when using this tape. It would definitely make a good and reliable "master source" tape if an emphasis on capturing the "analog" sound is the desired outcome. For trying to capture the "live" sound, I would use this tape with caution because of the level of low-end saturation that was heard. Especially in light of the fact that this is a 1.5 mil thickness tape (50% more oxide than a so-called 'consumer' tape such as Maxell XLI or Quantegy #407.). I would've expected a much higher tolerance for distortion because of that. Also, if you are a discerning audiophile that wants the best possible "analog" sound-especially when recording from Master Cut LP's, this is the tape for you.
However, if you are more of a home hobbyist and do a lot of casual recording and listening-especially if you like the longer lengths, this is probably a lot more tape than you need and I would not recommend it. Stick with a 1.0 mil tape for your day-to-day listening. Use this ATR tape only for your "masterpiece" works and/or for when you want and need to bring out the very best your system can do-such as when you are doing critical listening. Or showing it off to an audience.
Thanks for reading.
This is a new tape available.
And now, I have taken the time to conduct a full scale test of the tape and report my findings.
My testing methodology was essentially the same process that I used in my recent Akai GX and SX cassette review (http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=753).
TAPE DESCRIPTION:
Type: Reel to reel blank
Brand/Model#: ATR "Mastering"
Width: ¼" wide
Length/Thickness: 1.5 mil X 2400'
The ATR tape comes in an attractive blue textured box as shown:
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Box.JPG
The included reel was that of heritage Scotch/3M style with the ATR logo discretely stamp printed in blue letters on one side. As an aside, while I don't particularly care for the aesthetics of this style reel, I must say that the super wide windage hole cutouts and the flush flanges, these are BY FAR the EASIEST reels to thread. So while in my book they score an F for looks, they score an A+ for function. Perhaps 3M and now ATR intended it that way.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Reel.JPG
The tape itself looks like pretty much any other high performance blank: chocolate brown oxide surface with dark gray/black back coating (more on this below). The surface of the tape appeared mostly mirror smooth and no blemishes or evidence of oxide outcrop was noted. The fill-to height in the reel was also considered nominal. The tape comes supplied as leaderless:
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Tape_Surface.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_ReelFill.JPG
However one thing I did notice is what appeared to be an inconsistent slit pattern on the outer surface of the tape pack. I do not know if this normal or not. It is only readily visible in reflective and semi sillhouette lighting. It had no adverse effect on recording or playback that I was able to discern:
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Slit_Pattern.JPG
Because the tape comes leaderless, I elected to attach/splice on my own. I used white color for the head end and blue for the tail end. For further instruction on how to perform a splice, please see THIS (http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=276) topic.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Attach_Leader.JPG
Once the first leader was on, I proceeded to do a fast-wind pass of the tape as per recommended protocol when using a virgin tape for the first time. At the other end, the other leader was attached. And the tape was fast-wound a second time back to the front end. It should also be noted that the deck was cleaned and demagnetized in preparation for this test prior to the first run of the tape. During fast wind, the tape unravelled smoothly and quietly with no signs of hesitation, stickiness, or any other abnormality.
However, it should be noted that the back coating didn't exactly perform up to par. Part of the reason for applying the layer of carbon or graphite to the back side of the tape is to ensure smooth and uniform tape wind at high speed. The resulting pack wasn't exactly what could be called smooth and uniform. I've seen several other "lower" grade tapes (such as Maxell XLI and Quantegy #407) pack up much smoother and even at high speed.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Tape_Pack.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_White_Rewind.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Blue_Rewind.JPG
TESTING METHODOLOGY
Once I finished the physical and cosmetic evaluation of the tape, it was time to perform an array of actual sonic tests on the tape to evaluate its actual performance. My testing process includes two sets of parameters: OBJECTIVE and SUBJECTIVE. In the case of the former, I used a series of neutral test tones (courtesy of the Stereophile "Test CD").
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_StereophileCD.JPG
The test tones used were:
Pink noise
1 Khtz tone
100 Htz tone
50 Htz tone
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_TestTones.JPG
DECK USED: Teac X-2000R
SPEED: 7½ ips
I recorded each tone twice. First was to establish the best bias setting and truest possible A/B comparison with regards to source-to-playback monitoring.
The second stage of the test involved recording each of the tones at the favorable bias setting at the highest possible input gain to determine a level of threshold for distortion and saturation.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Ready_To_Test.JPG
FINDINGS FOR TEST TONE RECORDINGS
PINK NOISE: Unable to achieve a neutral and true sound with bias, even when turned down as far as the deck is capable: -5%. The original still sounded "brighter" than the recording. With the bias turned all the way UP to +5%, the ensuing recording sounded overwhelmingly dull, as though the tape was suffering severe azimuth errors. The maximum input the tape was able to handle before saturating with audible distortion was +3dB.
1 Khtz: Bias results were identical. However, perhaps in part because of the bias mismatch, during a L/R channel A/B comparison, there was about a 1-2 dB offset. Note that on the output switches, the L channel is set to "tape" and the R channel is set to "source".
But on the saturation part of the test, using this tone, I was able completely "peg the needles" with no audible distortion:
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Monitor_Offset.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Meters_Pegged.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/ATR_Adjust_Levels.JPG
Results for 100 Htz and 50 Htz were identical to the 1 Khtz test above. In short, for neutral tones, pink noise nothwithstanding, this tape has outstanding headroom. It should also be noted that while I was not able to achieve a true A/B synergy with the bias, this tape has a stunningly low noise floor-essentially nonexistent.
The second half of the evaluation involved SUBJECTIVE testing, using actual musical recorded material in an effort to mimic and replicate how the tape might be used in a day to day setting. Also, because of the much more modulated signal and mix of sounds and frequencies, it simultaneously tests the tape across a much broader range of the sound spectrum as opposed to a single locked frequency.
My test songs, I recorded the following musical selections, for the full length of their track duration two times. Once to establish best bias and optimum sound. The second time, to establish a threshold of distortion:
"Renaissance Man" by The Ocean Blue, because of its emphasis on heavy bass, electric guitars, and strong beat.
"Fable" by Robert Miles because of its etheral electronica sound, high octave keyboards, and steady beat.
"Learning To Fly" by Tom Petty because of its overdubbed accoustic guitars and mid-octave range vocals.
The procedure for all three songs was identical as the test tones above. However, I introduced one additional element. And that is I conducted a blind test with a second listener (my wife) to see if she could correctly disntinguish between the source and recording.
For #1: Still unable to get correct, true playback because of bias issue, even when turned down all the way to -5%. However, the playback was very deep and rich. Distortion and saturation in the low-end tracks such as bass and drums was audible at +3 dB and up on the gain.
For #2: Biasing results were the same. Playback exhibited the same rich analog sound as found in #1. However, because of this musical and tonal content of this track, it was able to handle an across-the-board sustained +3 dB input with pegged peaks on the needles before any audible distortion was heard.
And finally #3: Results were pretty much identical to the outcome in #1.
And for the blind test, the wife was able to correctly distinguish between the source and the playback 3 out of 3 times.
After all tests were finished, I re-recorded a short passage of each of the three test songs. I overdubbed/mixed them together as a final "sample" recording. I then filmed a playback of this test. You will hear in the first selection, some audible saturation.
You can view/hear the video HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGz2Tc9WGz4). I highly recommend that you select the "watch in high quality" option that way you can then view the VU needles showing the output.
CONCLUSIONS:
Overall, a very good tape. For single tones, it is phenomenal. And while touted as a high bias tape (which can result in a decreased emphasis on highs during playback), it definitely has an extremely rich sound that screams every bit of analog it is. It has an almost nonexistent base noise level that all but completely negates the need to use any external device such as Dolby or DBX when using this tape. It would definitely make a good and reliable "master source" tape if an emphasis on capturing the "analog" sound is the desired outcome. For trying to capture the "live" sound, I would use this tape with caution because of the level of low-end saturation that was heard. Especially in light of the fact that this is a 1.5 mil thickness tape (50% more oxide than a so-called 'consumer' tape such as Maxell XLI or Quantegy #407.). I would've expected a much higher tolerance for distortion because of that. Also, if you are a discerning audiophile that wants the best possible "analog" sound-especially when recording from Master Cut LP's, this is the tape for you.
However, if you are more of a home hobbyist and do a lot of casual recording and listening-especially if you like the longer lengths, this is probably a lot more tape than you need and I would not recommend it. Stick with a 1.0 mil tape for your day-to-day listening. Use this ATR tape only for your "masterpiece" works and/or for when you want and need to bring out the very best your system can do-such as when you are doing critical listening. Or showing it off to an audience.
Thanks for reading.