Michael Fitzgerald Posted August 31, 2005 Report Posted August 31, 2005 I thought it was Ampex 456 that was the diabolus-in-musica. Mike Quote
Chuck Nessa Posted August 31, 2005 Report Posted August 31, 2005 I thought it was Ampex 456 that was the diabolus-in-musica. Mike ← Lots more. I've been dealing with this stuff for years. Quote
Ted O'Reilly Posted September 2, 2005 Report Posted September 2, 2005 I thought it was Ampex 456 that was the diabolus-in-musica. Mike ← Lots more. I've been dealing with this stuff for years. ← Ah, yes, "Grand Master" 456! We couldn't afford it in public radio, but its 406 & 407 brothers were pretty bad, too.... Quote
Ted O'Reilly Posted September 2, 2005 Report Posted September 2, 2005 I'm not certain but I think that was a problem post-1970 - with new tape formulations - also, I'll add, and hope not to offend anyone, that Graham Newton's transfer work is inconsistent - ← You won't be offending me, Allen, but I know Newton to be a finicky perfectionist. As always, the "inconsistencies" may be in the people he works for, to say nothing of the sources he has to work with... Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.