2 Inch Tape Machines... Size Matters?

[Ifrit]

Originally Posted by the russian

+Why can't a manufacturer design a tape deck that was more compact with better connectivity to a DAW editing system? Is it that they can't, or is it that there is no market for such a device? It seems like so much effort is put into making digital "sound analog". Why not put that r&d into perfecting something that's a known success?

There was no DAWs in times when tape machines were developed. And now, I think they perfect connectivity - XLR that could go to your ADC. As to size - it is hard to make good sounding analog electronics plus good transport in smaller size.

[the russian]

I suppose that makes sense. It just seems like we'd be able 'micro-size' those components... I dunno... am I living in 'La-La Land'?

Ifrit, Мой русский язык ужасен! Я являюсь фактически итальянским.

[max cooper]

Seems there are basically two kinds of people buying gear.

People with laptops and portable interfaces and their ilk; also includes people with modest home setups.

and

Lifers. People who can name all the revisions of 1176's.

The people from the first group wouldn't buy it because it'd be too big, too cumbersome and too expensive.

The people from the second group would complain that it doesn't sound like a "real" tape machine.

Both groups would probably be right.

Why no one is building such a thing? It sounds like a good way to lose a substantial investment. Fast.

Whether I think it's a good idea or not has nothing to do with it.

Also, I would imagine that a small operation can design, build and market a preamp, compressor, an EQ, even a few microphones. But tooling up to make a tape machine? That sounds like it something for a big-ass company to do.

I'm sure you've looked inside one, right?

When all the audio in the world was recorded to tape, all kinds of huge broadcast and recording concerns were throwing money into tape recorders.

Now stuff is recorded into computers. So only specialty recordists will use tape, and specialty recordists can't float a company big enough to build tape machines.

[amorris]

I think part of it's large size is that it needs to be it's own peice of furniture. height is for loading tape standing up. if you had the heavy deck plate and surface mount electronics, it would still weigh 100 pounds and you wouldnt ever want to have to "put it away" at the end of the night. and not every home table would hold it safely.

jeez, a blank tape weighs more than most gear today.

[juledude]

Kind of a cool question, I think. I'm a newbie, so welcome.

The previous responses have been very good, so you don't really need mine, but I'll give it to you anyway. I think the answer has to do with how large companies "discover" great-new-things, and secondarily, the realities of building the quality of a large tape with large motors into something much smaller.

First, most big companies start any product based on a MRD (Marketing Requirements Document). Marketing scans their multitudinous brain cells to find out what is selling today at other companies and writes a document that describes their version of that product.

Engineering then builds something that satisfies the MRD. (I warn you ahead of time that Engineering will look good in my story.)

Accounting then tells Engineering their implementation of the MRD costs too much and makes them quit using the good (expensive) parts.

Sales is then tasked with talking the customer into buying the resulting great-new-thing.

I was around when the cassette replaced the 8 track. Bellbottoms and miniskirts time. It wasn't all bad. It was a calamitous furor. Much of the small amount of underwear that was worn back then became bunched in anticipation of the impending event. The story was that, "never was the cassette tape going to come up to the quality of the 8 track. It will never work!" Made some sense. Larger tape = more area for data ( better resolution) on the tape. Smaller tape = less.

But you know how that turned out.

Still, I agree with you that your idea would be a good product.

Jule

[audible]

They tried to make smaller decks with more tracks already, and those did not sound so great. To make a smaller machine, the electronics would have to be miniturized by using a great deal of integrated circuits. When the electronics become IC based, part of the sound is lost. Moreover, to shuttle tape of that weight, the machine needs to be large so the guides, motors and lifters do not bend or break. Maybe some one could make a smaller 2" machine, but what would be the point: not many people would probably buy one plus the sonics would be dubious at best.

[C. Park Seward]

As the previous posters said, it is the mechanics that will cost. The first rule of tape recorders is you have to pull the tape smoothly and evenly past the heads. Tight tolerance machining is expensive. Put a 10 pound reel of tape and hit fast forward and hold on.Your five hp motors (they weigh a ton) will flex the top plate if it is not solid metal. Big and heavy. If not, the thing would hop around the room when you hit rewind.

The electronics are simple. Design here and get it made in China. But getting tight tolerances with motors and guides... ever closely look at a scrape flutter idler? What about 2" rolling guides?

ATR Services will make two rolling guides for you...for $1,000. So what do you think the rest of the machine will cost? And your $250 roll of tape will last for 15 minutes at 30 ips.

Don't forget about maintance. I have a 2" Ampex, the MM-1100. Ever try to get 24 analog play and record channels in exact alignment? You could make an auto-aligning machine for even more money.

But when it is perfect, you never heard sound that good.

[Tibbon]

Plus....

When i was using a JH-24.. i know a HUGE portion of the machine was taken up by the power supplies, and the electronics for the EQ'ing to tape and such (all those little damn cards to calibrate the machine that were so fun).

Even if they were able to shrink it a bit... it wouldn't be for the better. Too close and things get hot... or hard to repair and get to. I'd rather have a well spaced out and layed out tape machine... than one that you load a reel into and fits into a 4U rackspace... but yet you can't repair.

Never thought the worse thing about the tape machine was the size... Err. I did think it weighed a bit much to carry a JH-24 up a windy set of stairs...! That sucked. Carrying a console up sucked too. Wish i could have realized that i should have just removed all the channels first. Doh!