Studer C37 Vs Sony PCM-3402 reel to reel II

This test is a little better than the last, the sound has been dubbed from the recorders onto the videos for better quality

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Studer
• C37
• Stony
• DASH
• PCM-3402
• reel
• to

[capstancappy11]

if the STUDER is in original condition then the comparison is useless, the difference between a recapped machiene and an original is HUGE!!!, i've recapped a few machienes myselve and all i can say is that the charactaristics of the STUDER will change DRASTICALLY, 16khz should wound like a nice silver layer on top of the music , pretty much the same as the SONY but softer, PSU recap is also VERY important, is this your machiene?

[Seblington]

I do agree, this machine could do with a capping, the PSU is noisy and there is a lot of hiss from the amps once they warm up, its one of thoes projects I havent got around to yet.

[thomhidd]

For even a chance to hear any difference you have to start with original quality way better than a 16 bit 44.1kHz sampled CD. Even an analog LP will give better quality than a 16 bit CD. Maybe an SACD would be a better original for comparison.

[Seblington]

Most records roll off at 16KHz due to limitations of their design, both these machines are mastering machines which are used to make records from so the only real rue test is a live source though a high quality microphone. I will be doing a video sometime this year which will feature a live recording, but even then the limitations are with the compression of Youtube, cant win!

[tetrodobeam]

It is almost impossible evalutate the difference here due to digital compressed formad used in you tube. The only thing I can hear is that revox has a more round reproduction, that sound sweeter at my ears. Sony is more sharp. Peraphs a better test should be done with live music recording, CD's just sound digital by theirselves! Nice video. Do you have any information about EMI 1950's portable recorders? I have here a pair, one with valves and other transistorized, and I like to restore...

[Seblington]

Thank you! there is very little difference once Youtube has added its compression but at a later date, I should be able to do a HD video test. The EMI's, I have almost all the different ones, the ones you speak of are more than likely the L2's and the RE321's (Or an L4), lovely machines, check my other videos and you will see them.

[donpirla]

@thomhidd On the other side, definitions like "much more" or "much better" sometimes may make some confusion; someone may even be lead to believe that a machine which needs "much more" in order to deliver "the same" is less than ideal. It may make believe the Sony is not that precise: if it needs much clearer information from the start in order to output with good fidelity, than i might be not as hi-fi. But it's hard to think so about the Sony. Although none of my DDD cds sound good.

[donpirla]

@thomhidd , why do you say you'd need much more than 16/44.1 at the source to be able to hear any difference, sounds like you are assuming the Sony is more capable than that. But isn't the Sony's limit just the same:16/44.1? I understand that there is always a minor loss, even with the finest recorders, but your sentence made me aks for some clarification, which I would appreciate. Thank you.

[Germannio]

It's a pity that this comparison or A/B test must be listened through the "bottleneck" of such a low sampling frequency-low bitrate mpeg audio channel that Youtube offers, because this conditions makes completely useless the test.

The typical "gliiliilgliii" of variable bitrate mpeg recordings or streamings coming from beats between high frequencies from program signal and sampling frequency masks differencies at all.

You are so lucky to can hear both great machines "in situ" during A/B test.

[Threemicsrecords]

@capstancappy11 16khz at 240p is almost imposable to hear anyway

[washysama]

yup you can hear the digital embarrasement on the dash!! anyone not hearing that chunk of sound put together on a bit limited frequency range needs real speakers, monitors or ears. In the studer you can hear everything right on it's place in sound frequency, in digital you get all the sounds invading eachother to get a fair psace in that limited virtual place of I/O's. listen to the vocal reverb and echo and stereo wide range, it would be even more evident if there was a drums in the recording.

[wado1942]

I love your demonstrations. I do find it odd that one with such an affinity for antique tape recorders generally likes the most digital of all digital productions (sampled dance music).

[DESUBICA]

I also think live sound would be the way to go (a drum kit and sax) but to the folks out there, do this at home! didn't you notice that Youtube sound is crap????