[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] NAB vs. DIN recordings
What's your favorite tool for measuring recorded track width on
a tape? I use the Arnold B-1022 Magnetic Viewer, but it's not
the easiest tool on the planet to use - it's sometimes hard to
see the tracks.
FYI, the 2.8mm track width works out to 110.2 mils. Do the
standards for track widths specify them in millimeters or mils?
If I understand correctly from your email, mismatching track
widths (head vs recorded track) primarily influences noise
(fringing), but not EQ?
For the record:
I have a Studer A810 which originates from the Seattle area
which has DIN heads. I need to check if it was originally a
CBC machine, but I don't think so.
I also have a Studer A810 from Universal Studios - in great
shape, low mileage, high serial number - with NAB TC.
My other Studer A810, which is a CBC machine, has NAB (no TC).
My Studer A820 is NAB TC. It originates from Newfoundland
and has an Ontario power sticker on it.
It's rumored that the DIN heads reduce the need to swap head
stacks when switching between full-track mono and half-track
stereo recordings. If so, might this flexibility be a
potential explanation for the prevalence of the DIN heads?
Might there be other performance advantages to the DIN heads
that made them popular?
The Audio Archive
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Richard L. Hess
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] NAB vs. DIN recordings
If you use a too-narrow track, you get low-frequency fringing
effects. The worst case of signal-to-noise degradation would be
10 log (1.9/2.8) or about - 1.7 dB.
I am interested in David Lennick's comments as to the wide
utilization of the DIN heads (2.8 mm tracks) throughout CBC).
I wonder if the EQ was NAB or IEC?
I just cleaned a couple of moldy CBC Toronto tapes and they are
indeed DIN track width. They sound like NAB EQ, however.
I tend to ignore the 1.9 vs 2.1 mm track width. I prefer to think in
mils (thousandths of an inch). So we have roughly 75 mils for the
Ampex original stereo heads (the original half-track mono heads were
always about 82 mils). Then the 82 mils became standardized for
half-track mono AND stereo in the NAB standard I think about 1965.
Then, of course, we have the 100 mil (102?) DIN standard.
I did come across one "half-track" recording that had 60 mil tracks
on it. Joy. I just used the 82 mil normal head (I don't have any
Ampexes so I don't have any 75 mil heads).
Anyway, I just dug out my butterfly head assembly and I'll put it on
my A810 and align it.
I'd love more discussion on the pervasiveness of this. I have some
machines from CBC-TV in Montreal and they were all NAB Timecode, no
DIN heads there.
Richard L. Hess email: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Aurora, Ontario, Canada (905) 713 6733 1-877-TAPE-FIX
Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.