Brian Roth
Well-known member
The last picture shows a 350 electronics chassis.....dunno why the ad says 351! But very clean units.
Bri
Bri
Studios with Ampex 350/351 – U.S. & Europe
- Thread starter mitchillinois
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
PermO
Well-known member
I don't really see the reason of hauling an old tape machine all over the planet...
I would record everything digital, no processing, and at the final stage, at one location, record all those files to the tapemachine for it's imparted sound.
I use an old (all original tubes) G36 as an effect, but record to my DAW first, this way I can do several runs on several levels and listen wich take hit the tape saturation just perfect and record that back into the DAW.
I would record everything digital, no processing, and at the final stage, at one location, record all those files to the tapemachine for it's imparted sound.
I use an old (all original tubes) G36 as an effect, but record to my DAW first, this way I can do several runs on several levels and listen wich take hit the tape saturation just perfect and record that back into the DAW.
MidnightArrakis
Well-known member
[dunno why the ad says 351] -- Based upon how the ad is worded, I got the impression that the -- CASE -- is from a 351. Dunno.....
/
PermO
Well-known member
Unless you are C.W. Stoneking...
There's only one way to really get "that" sound.
Recorded on old vacuum tube tapemachine and two (ribbon?) mics in a room;
This took a whole lot of effort to get it "right"
There's only one way to really get "that" sound.
Recorded on old vacuum tube tapemachine and two (ribbon?) mics in a room;
This took a whole lot of effort to get it "right"
Brian Roth
Well-known member
Well for all intents and purposes, the transports were identical. The electronics units of the 350 and 351 appear identical from the front with one tiny difference. The 351 panel has a small "dot" engraved below the small "input transfer" switch directly beneath the VU meter. Ampex did that because production of 350 and 351 overlapped and they wanted to make it easy to track inventory at a glance in the warehouse.
While the front panels are almost identical, the guts are totally different. 350 used octal tubes and point-point wiring and the 351 used noval (9 pin) miniature tubes on several printed circuit cards. Also, the 350 electronics units had an external PSU (one per audio channel) but the PSU circuits were internal to each 351 channel.
Bri
+1 for recording everything clean, then add ampex residue as needed in the final processing. That way you'd only depend on one machine, and also avoid problems with the very-different wear patterns that could be expected from six different 70 years old machines from across the world.
Unless, that is, you need all the processual problems and complications associated with getting those tape machines behaving in the situation. Or if you need pictures of said process for that matter.
If you really need what most of us associate with 50'es sound, you may want to consider going to optical media (film sound) and back
/Jakob E.
Unless, that is, you need all the processual problems and complications associated with getting those tape machines behaving in the situation. Or if you need pictures of said process for that matter.
If you really need what most of us associate with 50'es sound, you may want to consider going to optical media (film sound) and back
/Jakob E.
Brian Roth
Well-known member
Also, because of the major differences in the audio electronic designs, an Ampex 350 will have a (somewhat?) different "sound" compared to a 351.
Those machines were in wide usage "just before my time" in the recording and broadcast industry.....but there were many still in daily operations when I was a newbie in the biz and for years thereafter.
The Ampex, Studer, etc. machines from that era were NOT designed to be a Special Effects Sound Generator. The engineers were doing their best to create machines where "output equaled input" using available technology. In our current world, we can hear the "small" faults of those vintage designs when compared to current 1024 bit-depth systems sampling at 200000 Gigabits per picoSecond <G!!!>.
It's crazy how those old workhorses performed as well as they did when designed decades ago.
Bri
Those machines were in wide usage "just before my time" in the recording and broadcast industry.....but there were many still in daily operations when I was a newbie in the biz and for years thereafter.
The Ampex, Studer, etc. machines from that era were NOT designed to be a Special Effects Sound Generator. The engineers were doing their best to create machines where "output equaled input" using available technology. In our current world, we can hear the "small" faults of those vintage designs when compared to current 1024 bit-depth systems sampling at 200000 Gigabits per picoSecond <G!!!>.
It's crazy how those old workhorses performed as well as they did when designed decades ago.
Bri
Another option would be to record everything to digital and transfer the audio through an Ampex 350 before the editing/post production stage.
That would be much more convenient and cost efficient.
That would be much more convenient and cost efficient.
soapy_goat
Active member
Malcolm Catto @ Quatermass Sound Lab, London has a 351 stereo machine
SoundBlaster
Member
Exactly my thought.
Disco Volante
Well-known member
They're supposedly filming a documentary. Hence the need for the actual machine...
Even with all well-maintained gear, the individual small differences from one 70-year old machine to the next would be a challenge, I suppose, if travelling with tapes was the conceptual idea.
The quality of the recordings made in the 50's still baffles me from time to time. Listening to e. g. Time Out with the Dave Brubeck quartet, it is just right, so crisp, recorded in 1957..
Even with all well-maintained gear, the individual small differences from one 70-year old machine to the next would be a challenge, I suppose, if travelling with tapes was the conceptual idea.
The quality of the recordings made in the 50's still baffles me from time to time. Listening to e. g. Time Out with the Dave Brubeck quartet, it is just right, so crisp, recorded in 1957..
mitchillinois
Active member
The film is set in WWII and uses some vintage audio interviews recorded in the period after the war from 1946 to about 1960.
For people for whom there is no footage or audio, voice actors read their written words (the “lower third” identification is done in a way that does not deceive viewers). Real - or should I say “reel” - vintage audio will help evoke those times.
As a teen in the late 1960s I used a 602 for a few interviews. Beginning in the late 1970s I used a 350 for recording and editing radio interviews (the main studio had new AG-440s). So I am familiar with the machines.
I’ve checked them out vs. reel-to-reel and emulations are pretty good and much, much easier. However, I prefer the authenticity of the real thing with tape saturation, wow and flutter, and the tube circuits of the day.
Most would use an emulation, which is fine. Everyone makes their own decisions.
Today’s audio technology is superb. I am all for it. We use denoising on an archival interview and other such tools.
Barry Hufker
Well-known member
Thank you for the insight into your project. That's exciting. And I applaud your choice to be authentic.
mitchillinois
Active member
Thanks. We're looking for studios that have a tape machine. If this doesn'y exist, traveling with one fits in somewhere among plan B, C, and D, as does the approach that you suggest.
mitchillinois
Active member
Thank you for your kind words. My thought is that RCA ribbons and Neumann/Telefunken tube condensers connected as directly as possible into a vintage tape machine will have a vintage sound (rather than a possible vintage-ish sound).
mitchillinois
Active member
Thank you. Yes, road cases could be checked out. Traveling with a tape machine is somewhere among plan B, C, an D. I'd prefer not to travel with one as I will either be traveling with one colleague or solo. My goal is to find studios near the voice actors that already have a vintage tube tape machine in active use and biased for the tape that they use. We will do this project in perhaps 6-12 months. If we end up having to travel with a tape deck, I will definately refer back to your post, services, and will likely check in about any tape you have available at the time. Right now, the focus is on finding studios that have vintage tape machines in active use, Thanks again.
mitchillinois
Active member
Thank you. I knew about the Ampex and Studer plug-ins but not this rack-mounted emulator. An interesting device. I had come across this company making tube preamps that they developed to sound like Ampex preamps https://www.electricandcompany.com/ec3 .
mitchillinois
Active member
Thank you! That's enticing. However, my goal is to find studios with a vintage tube tape deck in active use. Traveling with a deck is one of several back-up plans if I don't locate studios with a tube Ampex or Studer in active use by the time we do this in 6-12 months.
mitchillinois
Active member
Thank you! That's enticing. However, my goal is to find studios with a vintage tube tape deck in active use. Traveling with a deck is one of several back-up plans if I don't locate studios with a tube Ampex or Studer in active use by the time we do this in 6-12 months.
mitchillinois
Active member
Thanks. We will largely be using ribbon mikes.
This is quite a recording.
An aside. Long, long ago when I was a teenager, a new neighbor moved in across the hall. The neighbor was playing a country blues album in the apartment at high volume, which I could hear and was enjoying. I was trying to place which artist it might be on Arhoolie, Biograph, or another such label. When I met the neighbor, I learned that he wasn't playing a record. He was a blues musician playing his guitar and singing. At the time he was hanging out with and absorbing all that he could from Homesick James (Elmore's cousin).
Last edited:
