A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Collecting newsgroups » 8 Track Tapes
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Reel to reel speeds



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 25th 06, 08:31 PM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Reel to reel speeds

Were albums first released in 3 1/4 ips and if they were succesful they
were re-released in 7 1/2 ips? are there any other factors?

Ads
  #2  
Old October 25th 06, 08:38 PM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Reel to reel speeds

what are the factors to release an album at 7.5 i.p.s

  #3  
Old October 25th 06, 08:38 PM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Reel to reel speeds

what are the factors to release an album at 7.5 i.p.s?

  #4  
Old October 25th 06, 08:39 PM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Reel to reel speeds

what were the factors to release an album at 7.5 i.p.s?

  #5  
Old October 25th 06, 10:05 PM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
DeserTBoB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,541
Default Reel to reel speeds

On 25 Oct 2006 12:31:02 -0700, "rusty" wrote:

Were albums first released in 3 1/4 ips and if they were succesful they
were re-released in 7 1/2 ips? are there any other factors? snip


No. There never was a "3¼ IPS" speed, ever. Labels went to 3¾ IPS 4
track to save money on tape, no other reason, just like they went from
2 track to 4 track around 1960. In each case, quality went down
preceptibly, while profit margins improved.
  #6  
Old October 25th 06, 10:06 PM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
DeserTBoB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,541
Default Reel to reel speeds

On 25 Oct 2006 12:39:56 -0700, "rusty" wrote:

what were the factors to release an album at 7.5 i.p.s? snip


Are you having some sort of problem like Nudo does, posting again and
again??? Asked and asnwered, already!
  #7  
Old October 25th 06, 11:03 PM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 34
Default Reel to reel speeds


DeserTBoB wrote:
On 25 Oct 2006 12:39:56 -0700, "rusty" wrote:

what were the factors to release an album at 7.5 i.p.s? snip


Are you having some sort of problem like Nudo does, posting again and
again??? Asked and asnwered, already!


no, just making corrections in spelling and grammar.

  #8  
Old October 25th 06, 11:04 PM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 34
Default Reel to reel speeds


DeserTBoB wrote:
On 25 Oct 2006 12:31:02 -0700, "rusty" wrote:

Were albums first released in 3 1/4 ips and if they were succesful they
were re-released in 7 1/2 ips? are there any other factors? snip


No. There never was a "3¼ IPS" speed, ever. Labels went to 3¾ IPS 4
track to save money on tape, no other reason, just like they went from
2 track to 4 track around 1960. In each case, quality went down
preceptibly, while profit margins improved.


I meant 3.75 or 3 3/4 ips

  #9  
Old October 26th 06, 01:35 AM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
DeserTBoB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,541
Default Reel to reel speeds

On 25 Oct 2006 15:04:52 -0700, "Rusty"
wrote:

I meant 3.75 or 3 3/4 ips snip


Well...if you have a belt drive deck with a bad belt, I supposed it
could go at 3¼! :Þ

But no, there was no real determining factor about which group got
what speed, except that, at Columbia, their pop catalog went to 3¾ IPS
before their Masterworks classical releases did. This change happened
in the mid-'60s. Tape costs, as with cartridges, were the number one
cost factor on tape releases, and halving the speed effectively halved
their cost per unit.

I'm supposing the next question would logically be, "Is there a lot of
difference between 3¾ and 7½?" Yes...undeniably so. Halving the
playback speed on most machines cuts the high frequency response
almost by half (some better machines handled it a little better) and
increased the noise floor by a minimum of 6 dB assuming the same flux
density level was used. Also headroom is reduced considerably at the
slower speed, and many times the normal operating level (O VU level)
of flux density would be decreased by about 3 or 4 dB to compensate.
This also added to the noise floor but up to 10 dB.

Just from those number you can see how prerecorded RTR tapes decreased
in quality from those high quality Westminster, Columbia and Omega 2
tracks of the mid-'50s to the comparaitvely lousy 3¾ IPS 4 track of
later days. This is why original 2 track dupes from the '50s, even
though they've suffered the vagaries of time (brittleness and
self-magnetization) are prized by collectors, while the big hub 3¾
dupes are pretty cheap.
  #10  
Old October 26th 06, 02:19 AM posted to alt.collecting.8-track-tapes
Robert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Reel to reel speeds

rusty wrote:

what are the factors to release an album at 7.5 i.p.s?


i believe it had a lot to do with where you purchased the tape at.
i have a record-club copy & a retail store copy of the Who - Tommy.
the retail store version is a two tape box with the tape speed of 7.5 ips.
the record club copy is on a single reel & is recorded at 3-3/4 ips
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reel to reel sound quality Rusty 8 Track Tapes 3 September 21st 06 05:04 PM
Reel to reel problems Rusty 8 Track Tapes 7 September 19th 06 04:18 PM
FA: 2-Days, Vintage Sawyer View-Master with Reels fishnet General 0 November 26th 05 05:19 PM
FA: Vintage Sawyer View-Master with Reels, c. 40s fishnet General 0 November 21st 05 03:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.