I have a band coming into the studio next year and they are trying to get a budget together which includes tape. Most bands I work with, due to small budgets, can only afford one or two reels of 2" and the same goes for 1/4" for mixing, but these guys have time to save up some money so we have options and they want to do a full length of about 40 minutes worth of music.They are an Unsane/Cherubs noise rock type band, so it's not as if we need to worry about tape hiss much.How do you go about deciding what tape speed to track and mix down to? Also, I was under the impression that between 15 and 30 ips the slower speed will have more low end, but doesn't compensating/calibrating for the low end bump negate that? At the moment I'm leaning towards 15 ips for tracking and 30 ips for mixing, but I'd like to hear what you guys think.My 2" machine is 24 track, wish I had a 16 track head stack...When I run at 15 ips I calibrate for CCIR.Thanks

steve wrote:I'm very fond of 15 ips/CCIR for the multitrack for any music with significant bass content. I use that alignment more than 90 percent of the time. With old lower-level tapes (Ampex 456, AGFA 469, Scotch 250) I would almost always use 30 ips because the noise performance was noticeably better at the levels those tapes could handle, but once tapes like 499, GP9, SM900 etc became available, the elevated levels made the noise negligible even at 15 ips on 24 track.LF response varies from machine to machine, with Ampex ATRs being notably quite good at 30 ips, but that is an exception. Most machines' 30 ips response is compromised by 2-3 dB at 40 Hz, often twice that at 30, and especially with heavy music, a lot of important information is down in that region.I also use 30 ips for mixdown on 1/2-inch machines. Most 1/4-inch machines don't have great low-frequency response at 30 ips, so in general I'll use 15 ips on 1/4-inch format machines and 30 ips on 1/2-inch.As always, thank you. This makes a lot of sense and I'll go with your advice. It'll also save the band some money, so that's good news for them.Best,Eddie

I'm very fond of 15 ips/CCIR for the multitrack for any music with significant bass content. I use that alignment more than 90 percent of the time. With old lower-level tapes (Ampex 456, AGFA 469, Scotch 250) I would almost always use 30 ips because the noise performance was noticeably better at the levels those tapes could handle, but once tapes like 499, GP9, SM900 etc became available, the elevated levels made the noise negligible even at 15 ips on 24 track.LF response varies from machine to machine, with Ampex ATRs being notably quite good at 30 ips, but that is an exception. Most machines' 30 ips response is compromised by 2-3 dB at 40 Hz, often twice that at 30, and especially with heavy music, a lot of important information is down in that region.I also use 30 ips for mixdown on 1/2-inch machines. Most 1/4-inch machines don't have great low-frequency response at 30 ips, so in general I'll use 15 ips on 1/4-inch format machines and 30 ips on 1/2-inch.

What's the benefit of doing 30ips on a 1/2 machine if the LF drop is still an issue? Is it less of a deal due to the increased track width? = Justin

15 ips/CCIR is crushing it so far for the new/old project.

Justin Foley wrote:What's the benefit of doing 30ips on a 1/2" machine if the LF drop is still an issue? Is it less of a deal due to the increased track width? = JustinOn all the 1/2-inch stereo mastering machines I've used (Studer A80 and 820, Otari, 3M, MCI, Sony and Ampex) the low frequency response with 30 ips has been acceptable. On most multitrack machines it has been nowhere near as good in the bottom octave (20-40Hz). I can speculate that the track width is the biggest factor, but also in a mastering (stereo) machine the physical size of the heads can be larger on a per-track basis, because there aren't the constraints of trying to keep erase gaps short between the erase and record head, for example, and the head cores are only stacked two-high. Bigger head cores can have better low frequency response.I recently did a test, because I was working on a LF-heavy doomy record, of the Studio A ATR, and the bass response down to 30 Hz was nearly identical between 30 ips and 15ips, and there was certainly usable signal at 20 Hz. Below that, the 15 ips extended things a little, but the difference in HF clarity was much more evident, and in the end that decided the issue and we mixed at 30 ips with no reservations.

Justin Foley wrote:What's the benefit of doing 30ips on a 1/2" machine if the LF drop is still an issue? Is it less of a deal due to the increased track width? = JustinIt is an issue with some of the older stock repro heads from the 80's and earlier. Anyone making pro 2-tracks into the '90s had improved the LF response at 30 IPS with better designed 1/2" and 1/4" heads. The Flux Magnetics ME (Mastering Extended Response) repro head is now kind of a standard with a lot of mastering machines. We have them on all our ATRs, and it's a treat. Basically 20-25kHz ± 1-2dB at 30ips. They also made our 16 track headblock which performs similarly, though we mostly use it at 15IPS (still flatish to 20kHz, CCIR EQ). I guess the bottom line is, since the LF response is a function of playback, and can be taken advantage of with the right heads, 30 IPS would be the more pristine speed. You get the benefits of lower noise, better high frequency response, while losing no low end (anymore).

Also, you save the bands a good bit of money by running 2" at 15ips vs. 30ips.Since 1/2" tape is considerably cheaper ($110/ reel vs. $320/ reel), you aren't burning their money so much running 30ips on 1/2".