RMG SM900 Versus SM911 Tape?

[ferriteman]

Anyone here clear on the differences between these 2 tapes? Are there differences in bias/eq or is the difference in how you would use these tapes?

Doesn't seem to be much of a difference in price...

Thanks

[Des-Lab]

As I've never tried these tapes, I'm not really sure. But it sounds to me like one is the equivalent to Quantegy #456 and the other being a clone of #499. Both were very good tapes and I never saw much difference between the two.

One possibility I see (and this is pure speculation. So don't hold me to this) is that in the case of Quantegy, #456 and #457 were the same tape. The former was the 1.5 mil version and the latter was the 1.0 mil. And #499 (and GP9) were offered in 1.5 mil only.

Perhaps maybe SM911 is the 'top of the line' and the SM900 is the 1.5 mil version of LPR35.

But then where would SM468 fit into that?

So I have no idea.

[Jay Pemberton]

The LPR 35 is to SM 911 the same as 407 was to 406, and 457 was to 456. Same oxide type, but thinner coating onto thinner 1 mil base.

SM 900 was the hottest BASF stock, and could take higher levels than anything else they had.

SM 468 is something of a boutique, low-print mastering tape. Great tape. It was developed by Agfa back in the 1970s, who made and sold it for years as their type PEM 468. Requires a slightly higher amount of bias to get the optimum sound quality from it, versus LPR 35/911/900, etc. Probably now the only product of the Agfa legacy still being made since Agfa sold their tape manufacturing division to BASF in 1992.

[Skywavebe]

Maybe this has been answered already well enough but just in case it isn't,
the data sheets can be seen at the following site where the tape can be obtained also.
http://usrecordingmedia-store.stores.yahoo.net/datasheets.html

Sam Palermo,