[Table of Contents]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Collection for sale

The craziest thing in all of this is, mass-duped tapes generally are TERRIBLE, I mean awful. If you understand anything about how they were made, you'd understand why they generally sound terrible. A few specifics:

1. 4x to 8x and later 16x duplication speeds. Generally on Ampex 3200-type transports, which were hardly stable at 60IPS or later 120IPS.

2. duper masters generally made by low-skill personnel from many-generations-removed copies sent to the duper plants. The duper plants would get a 15IPS safety (second generation from master, which could be a generation or more from the session tapes, particularly in the multi-track era), it would be a safety that close to the master if they were lucky because one common practice was the keep the safety at a studio and run series of duper masters from it for popular titles. Then this 15IPS tape would be reduced and combined to make a 4-track usually 7.5IPS dupe master. If someone decided to make a 15IPS dupe master that meant the duper's playback transport would be running twice as fast as the record transports, adding still more variables to the system. This all got even worse with 8-track carts and 3.75IPS duped reels. Those formats are such dog-doo, I won't even discuss them.

3. the tape stock used by dupers varied and was usually lousy. By the mid to late 60's, Ampex in Illinois was the biggest duper. I think even then RCA and CBS did their own duping (generally with better results). Ampex used their own tape, which is notoriously bad. They never perfected slitting so the tape "country lanes" and at high speed duping that leads to severe azimuth instability. Plus, the Ampex tape is notorious for warping, so most of those 40+ year-old tapes on eBay are badly curled or warped and full of left-channel dropouts. Any acetate tape will warp with the way most of these were stored by consumers, so I probably shouldn't single out Ampex.

4. Azimuth varies widely from tape to tape and even on parts of the same reel (and sometimes different sides of the same reel since some dupers used different record heads for each side of a quarter-track reel -- the heads were offset and would run at the same time but early 3200 systems didn't accomodate 4 tracks on one record head). Unless you check azimuth with a scope for each side of each tape (sometimes difficult since of course there are no alignment tones on these tapes), you're only somewhere in the neighborhood (and often outside the ballpark).

5. maintenance of the duper equipment varied from day to day, line to line and worker to worker. Sometimes there's hum in a channel. Sometimes level is all wrong. Sometimes channels are reversed. And remember that this junk sold at a premium to LPs.

6. finally, the hiss and wow/flutter level on most duped tapes I've heard is unacceptable. Unless you like digital artifacts better than hiss, there is no digifilter that satisfactorally cleans this up. I don't even think something like Plangent that locks to bias would help since the wow and flutter could date back any generation between the studio tapes and the duped tape and the bias recovered would only be the duper bias on the final duped tape.

Meanwhile, in contrast, a properly done LP was mastered right from the master tape and if it was mastered and pressed properly, it is much closer to the source than a duped reel. Also, I should mention that some dupers were better than others. Ampex was particularly bad in my experience. So was Bel-Canto. And early 2-track duped tapes are a whole other matter and often sound better than the early stereo LPs, if you can find one that's not completely worn out from age nowadays.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- From: "carlstephen koto" <cskoto@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Collection for sale

Speaking of crazy,.. I collect reel to reel tapes (in a minor way) and an auction of one came to my attention a couple of weeks ago. It was a Japanese 7" 7.5 ips 1/4 track issue of Pink Floyd's "Adam Heart Mother". The reason this auction attracted the interest of several tape collectors was that it had already reached a bid of over $400 with two days left. By the next day, it was over $700. At that point, I speculated that it would go for over $1k. I guess that's why I usually lose bidding wars. The final price was over $1800! We were flabbergasted. Luckily, I suggested some reasons why a single 7" tape could be worth that much to someone when one of the regular posters let us know that he'd bid $1600 on the tape.
BTW reel to reel tapes have had a dramatic upswing in prices the last year or so. But nothing like that!
Steve Koto
On Feb 22, 2008, at 7:55 PM, Roger and Allison Kulp wrote:

The market is crazy,and unpredictable.I don't want to sell any of my rarer,and pricier pieces,but I buy almost a record a day on eBay,and I sell vinyl and shellac to support my habit.Even without selling my good stuff,I sell records that I an very surprised at what the go for.I mean,whoda thunk a copy of the Denver version of "High School USA",would go for close to ninety bucks ? A year or so earlier,I couldn't give the same record away.


phillip holmes <insuranceman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: People like that get what they deserve. They think some '80s reissue of
Sgt Peppers is worth $100, which is insanely stupid. If they want to
sell records and do a decent job of it, then they need to get educated.
Nobody forced them into the business. Besides, all those records were
cheap as dirt at some point.

Malcolm Rockwell wrote:
Great story, Roger!
What? Did he expect for you to tell him what was rare so he could
charge you "accordingly"?
I've been there, too. Hard to keep the eyebrows from raising with  glee
when one spots inexpensive rare records among the overpriced dross,
though. Good thing most of these sellers can't read collectors!


Roger and Allison Kulp wrote:
Clearly someone who knows "Them old records are collect-eye- bull",but
has no clue beyond an obvious few artists,like Elvis,Beatles,and
Stones,what are.The guy probably  wouldn't know a four-figure garage
45,mono violin Lp,or early R&B 45,if he tripped over it.I have been
to a number of record stores run by people like this,in my
time.People with common Elvis and Beatles that are insanely
overpriced,and put ridiculously rare soul,and R&B records out for
under $5.00 a pop.Eventually,though,they all fund out what they were
doing,and got angry with me for buying the stuff,and threw me out of
the store.

Another reason why I largely stick to eBay.


phillip holmes  wrote: Do you think he has
Barbara Streisand and Pablo Cruise?  He guarantees "100% known
artists".  That usually means I've already heard it a thousand times
on the radio.  Oh, it's also a "virtual record shop", which means it
doesn't have everything you'd want to find in a "real" record shop.
Guess I'll pass.

David Lennick wrote:

And he doesn't have The Five Sharps' "Stormy Weather".

If that collection is too rich, try this..which he'll ship for $100:

200201499411 (the link itself is about a mile long)


Roger and Allison Kulp wrote:

We can all cite stuff we have that he doesn't.I doubt he has "How
Many Times" by The Rogues on Lou-Sal,or The Underground  Railroad,on
Discovery Club (I was spinning this last night.),many recods by
Lord Kitchener (Whom no collection should be without.)or a lot of
vanity pressing country 45s,from the 50s,and 60s.


"Steven C. Barr(x)"  wrote: ----- Original Message ----- From:
"John Ross"

Anybody know anything about this guy or the collection?

1) Nope!

2) He can only own "Every Record Ever Made" IF he has a copy of a
Radiex demo 78 I own, made to announce the availabilty of  ELECTRICAL
records on the label! Matrix numbers are NOT in any known GG
and it would seem to be early by a few months...beyond that I know

3) This reminds me of somebody's (forget whom?!) recorded comedy
"Every Record Ever Recorded! Lithuanian Language  Records!"...and so
IIRC, back in the sixties or early seventies sometime...?

4) Lemme figger a bit here...?! 300,000 records would septuble my
half-vast archive of a mere 50 kilodiscs (+/-)...but, that  takes up
rooms of my 7-room abode...so I'd need twelve more rooms (and a  WHOLE
BUNCH of empty milk boxes...?!)...

Looks like I'll have to pass (and not merely because I'm short  about
$2,999,998.43 of the opening bid...?!)

Steven C. Barr

--------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
Try it now.

--------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]