The Best Tapes For Loops

Robert L's Analog Synths

The Best Tapes for Loops
The high-quality, durable magnetic tapes, gentle to your echo-machine heads.

Robert L's Analog Synths
Tape Loops
Payment details
Tape Loop Replacement Instructions

Debate on the Tape Quality Recently, on some Web pages statements can be found about inappropriateness of some tape brands for the echo chamber tape loops, because of extensive head wear and tear, soiling of the mechanism, etc... Among others the Ampex tapes were quoted as an "absolute no" by some people. In the same time the term "lubricated tape" is getting more and more emphasized, although often without any explanation, adding to the overall confusion. Though a careful reader would immediately note that these comments are quite superficial and imprecise, because of their direct impingement to our product, we shall respond to this allegations. The Original "Roland" Tape Loop RT-1L Let's start from the original RT-1L tape loops that Roland provided with its echo chambers. I have a few of the original loops that were not used at all. Though there are not any specifications as to the brand of tape from which the loops were made (Delatronics say that it was a Scotch tape produced in Italy), a simple check of the original tape shows that it is not significantly different from any other better quality tape. As for the mystical "lubrication", it refers to the so called "lubricant" substance, which is an adage to the top layer of the tape. It ensures the smooth passage of tape over magnetic heads, saving them from intensive wear and tear. So it is obvious that the term "lubricated tape" must not be taken literally -- the tape is not greased with anything! All of you who felt that moisturizing your loops and greasing the heads and transport mechanism would be a total	madness -- were just plain right. The others, could better study some suggested readings, like a nice article Magnetic Tape Storage and Handling, and especially the part What Can Go Wrong with Magnetic Media. There is a lot of detailed explanation about the magnetic tapes, how they are made, and how they behave. In short, "lubricants" can be found in every modern, good quality magnetic tape, Ampex, as one of the well known, being no exception. On the other hand -- too much lubricant can make discon-tinuities in magnetic material which then lower the audio quality. Especially if the magnetic traces are very thin, this discontinuities in magnetic material, due to the added lubricants becomes audible as tiny "drop outs". To get back to the original RT-1L, we must mention a very disappointing fact about them, or perhaps a relieving one, for those of you who were planning to get the originals no matter how much they cost. Being 25 and even 30 years of age, due to the chemical instability of the substances used in the old tapes, the surface of original RT-1Ls is heavily disintegrating by now. Our experiments proved that repeatedly. The heads got dirty immediately after putting the original loops on, and the magnetic response of the tape was terrible. Even the great opponents of Ampex tapes have to admit that this is so. To conclude, even if you managed to find unused original loops, they will perform very bad, shedding particles from its upper layers on heads, and all over the tape path. There are some general recipes on how to make such old tapes usable by baking them on low temperatures (see e.g. here). However this remedies the tape for only a short period of time, perhaps enough to make back up copies. And this will be, obviously, of no use in the case of the tape loops.

Is Anything Really Special About the Original RT-1L As can be concluded from the above text, the answer is simply: no! There is nothing very specific in the original RT-1L loops. Many tape recorders and special tape reproduction machines were performing the exact same job as the echo machines. The similar brands of tapes were used in radio broadcast for commercials and in film production for background effects, i.e. everywhere they were supposed to be run over and over again, thousands and thousands of times. For example, on your RE machine with the middle range speed, the same part of tape will cross the heads about 200 times per hour, and 60 000 times during the recommended usage period. The same thing happened on the machines meant for repetitious speech reproduction, like in elevators, subways, but also in the Mellotron system, sound effect machines in film industry, etc... There is a good article "The MacKenzie Repeater" explaining the use of machines similar to tape echoes. Also, when dubbing multiple tracks on reel to reel recorders, it usually happened that the same tape part is moved back and forth for several hundred times, meaning that the situation of extensive use of the same part of tape is close to that on echo machines.	Smooth and Rough Tapes To resume and simplify: there are basically two types of tapes considering their behavior towards the heads: the "smooth" ones and the "rough" ones, the latter being more abrasive. A good question is: why would anyone produce a magnetic tape that is known to be harmful to the magnetic heads on the precious recording machines? You don't have to be an analog-recording expert to guess that it was some kind of a trade-off between sparing the heads and having the best of audio quality. Remember the lubricants mentioned above? It is already mentioned that if you put too much of these you can spoil the magnetic consistency of material, and lower the audio quality. So it is no wonder that some of the "rough" tapes were the ones giving the best audio results. Like the legendary Agfa PER 525 mastering tape, and some of the BASF LGRs MASTERING TAPES of older production. People used to call them the "sand paper" tapes (of course, it was still not that bad), and were still using them. Of course, these tapes were not meant for the multitrack recordings or broadcasting, nor for any kind of prolonged use. They were meant only for high-quality mastering, which usually doesn't require much repetition. These tapes were known of excellent adherence to the heads, good firmness, durability, low particle shed, and above all -- the superb sound! The latter being reason good enough to risk replacing head sets every few years. The "rough" brands were used mostly until late 80s, and many famous recordings all over the world were mastered using them.

Tapes from New Era Of course, the technology of magnetic tapes changed a great deal over time, and many disadvantages of the early products were improved. Especially during the 1990s a lot of improvement in magnetic media happened. Ironically, this coincided with the general transfer from analog to digital recording, so that significant technology advancement stayed largely unnoticed by broader audio community. For example the latest Ampex Grand Master 499, and the Quantegy (the Ampex tape plant successors) GP9 offer much better signal to noise ratios than even imaginable twenty years ago -- rising up to 80 dB without the use of any noise reduction system. New brands offer better physical features, durability, less magnetic shed, chemical stability, and of course less head abrasion. The newest BASF tapes follow the lead. The Tapes We Use Of course, the answer is already given above. If we want to preserve the priceless heads on our analog echoes, the rule number one is to avoid the above mentioned "rough" tapes. The rule number two is to check the durability, i.e. the consistence of the top layer and the back coating of the tape. Too much dirt on heads and the transport mechanism is not tolerable, because you don't want to clean your heads every few hours. Our recipe is quite simple: take the best available tape that is known to be "smooth", i.e. with the "lubricant" substance added to the top layer to minimize the friction, but in the same time assuring good adherence to the heads and good overall quality. And such features are easily found on tapes for professional broadcast use, or for multitrack recordings, as already mentioned above. Our first choice of Ampex 457 and 478 was justified by the same argument: those types were recommended by Fostex for their popular 8-track recorder R8 produced in the late 80s and early 90s. It proved good for extensive use, it was gentle to the heads (as I could well check on my Fostex multitrack during many years of use), and the	amount of magnetic shed was quite tolerable. The Ampex 478, proclaimed as the broadcast tape, has slightly less audio quality, but even better durability and smoothness. Our present choice is the highly reputable BASF LGR 50 professional broadcast tape produced by the legendary Germany based chemical concern. This tape has slightly narrower frequency range, but with a great output signal level, and an excellent saturation effect (a natural signal compression by the magnetic media). All guitarists will love that, and on vocals it will sound "warm and sweet". Also, to conclude in plain and simple statement, the MASTERING TAPES, NOT TO MENTION THE ABOVE DESCRIBED "ROUGH" TAPES HAVE NEVER BEEN USED BY US FOR THE PURPOSE OF PRODUCING THE TAPE LOOPS. We take care to use the smooth tapes produced to cause the minimum possible wear to your precious magnetic heads! Your Feedback Is Welcome Let's finish the story with an invitation to comment on our products. Although the tape loops are constantly checked during the production, and at the end tested by the method of a random choice, your opinions and suggestions are always welcome. Up to now, the feedback is mostly very positive! Thank you. However, due to the fact that all echo machines are now more than 20 years old, important thing is to keep them in good technical condition. Few complaints turned out to be caused by bad transporting mechanisms, or overal bad state of the machines. Our dedication to select the right tape material, and careful manufacturing, guarantees a quality product that you will be satisfied with. There was one case of unsatisfied customer, but this was probably due to some problems with correct placing of the tape loops. The customer was offered to return the package for a money refund, but since he didn't respond, probably all finished well.