LP playback vs Reel tapes made from LP

Can reel tapes made from LP actually sound better than the LP itself? It seems like there potentially could be less acoustic feedback into the analog setup during the recording process. Is this worth the trouble and the extra layer of electronics?
60c90f62 524e 4371 b7f7 bc5419e51b81glai
Sometimes that's true. I used to have a Tandberg R2R that had a built-in phono preamp. This preamp, as I was later to realize, was far, far better than the phono stage in my 1972 Altec-Lansing receiver, through which I normally played my records. The Tandberg architecture enabled me to record directly from the turntable into the tape machine. Doing a line transfer also--as you mention--took a lot of room-borne noise and vibration out of the playback, so the net result was that the tapes sounded better than my LP playback. Other situations might create opposite results. The Tandberg also had a better s/n than a typical turntable, unlike the Teacs and Sonys of the early '70s, so they didn't add noticeable noise to the signal chain.
I agree for similar reasons.... having done such a thing in the distant past. I used a pro TEAC w/10 in. reels and 15 ips.

Add to that such a method was common to extend the life of LPs as well... back then... and yes... in my situation too, my phono setup paled to that of the analog tapes.

the one major issue then was you could put several albums onto one reel... Finding the albums and specific tracks was a whole other ball game. ;-))

Hard drives have replaced the reel to reels BTW. Using HDD and associated software, one can improve upon the recording quality of reels by removing artifacts which could not be done back then. So reels had all the pops and/or noise the recorded LPs had. Eeek!
Blindjim, what software are you using? I record my vinyls using Alesis ML9100 and struggle to select a correct software to master clicks and pops. I also know about Sound Forge but probably it's out of budget if I won't find any better deals arround.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I have a large collection of 10 inch reels, all professionally recorded from LP's, some almost twenty years ago. Some were at 15 ips, 7.5 ips and 3.75 ips. Some are two track stereo, other 4 track stereo. Some of these tapes were produced by various broadcast music services like Drake, Media General. Others were produced by the government, e. g. AFRTS. I have many of the source LP's and I have compared the quality of the tapes with the LP's. Again, some of the tapes are great, others trash. In general, most do not have any artifacts. I've recorded many of my LP's with a high end sound card in my computer using Steinberg software. Again, some times the tapes shine other times not. A lot has been written about the Drake production methods and the tight quality control that was used. Most of what we heard on FM radio were Drake tapes. So, if the LP's were well recorded and you use a top line rig, they always win.
If you have a very good LP setup then tape will not sound alike to LP unless you got for 15ips, high bias tape and high bias machine. Still, there is some lost of space and corruption of imaging that it very hard to get on tape if you have a truly able LP setup and properly cut records. Reversely. if you have a very good 15ips recording then it is VERY difficult, practically imposable to match it on LP. The LP at 45rpm has more promise but there was no good music cut on 45rpm.

If you looking to backup some of your most valuable LPs then nowadays probably digital at 24bit is way to go but prepare that it will be very difficult to get in digital the quality that LP might offer. It might be very pricy and VERY complicated if the demands for quality are high enough.
'Fm login'- " The LP at 45rpm has more promise but there was no good music cut on 45rpm."

That's been incorrect for many years. 'Analogue Productions' and 'Music Matters' jazz reissues, just for a 'for instance'. Plus, many others.
BTW my Alesis ML9100 is a sweet tool to transfer from LPs and not expencive $500 used...


Sorry if I mislead you here. My little collection of a few hundred LPs are 'RIP-ing' in my closet. My reel tapes have long since been discarded, and the TEAC was stolen.

My hard of seeing deal prevents me from having the confidence to invest in a very nice TT & it's needed accessories... I've replaced that which I can with the re-issued CD.

Audacity was one I'd mention for ripping records to HDD... there are a wealth of others online which one can try too that I've seen as some of my albums can not be found on disc now. the thing is for me, it's a cost prohibitive measure... a few grand for maybe 100 albums of now questionable quality? Naw. Not me.

AS I can't properly preview them I can't sell them either. I would like to know if they've stood the test of time however and would also very very much so like to have them dupped onto disc if they're worth the doing. They're all rock and roll from the 60s to mid 70s. Some never saw side B played.
Many thanks for the responses. My interests are not so much for archiving my LPs but to extract the best quality playback from my system.

I have a TW Acustic Raven Ac table with Phantom, triplanar, davinci arm; PC1, titan, XV1t and ultraeminent carts. My reel tape deck is a recently serviced Studer A810. It can do 7.5 and 15 ips.

Would transfer to HDD be a worthwhile undertaking comparing to reel?


Given the process will be near the same, merely the ability and ease of searching, selecting, and playing back the recored tracks would attract me to it.
Ummm....since you've got the gear all ready to go, why not just record some LPs and hear for your self? It's unlikely that you'll exceed the sonics of the LP, but you may come close to equaling it, and who knows, any accompanying rolloffs on the taped version may sound more 'musical' to you on your rig. This could especially be true for RBCDs. Plus, it's fun watching the tape spin, and you get to play with another medium. Win-win.
the answer though is no. Meaning that a generation down is a generation down and there should not be so much of anything going on with your lp playback as to change that.

Now, maybe your tape machine is aligned some way to make the recording more pleasant (maybe more rolled off or more compressed sounding, or maybe aligned for my high end) but if it does that, the machine isn't set up technically properly because the best you should be able to get is a close copy.

I agree with everyone here about doing what you want and listening yourself, but the process isn't magic.
As was noted: the only tangible "difference" will be the ability of playing back a tape copy of the recorded material AT A LOUDER LEVEL WITHOUT RISKING ANY ACOUSTICAL FEEDBACK or worrying about (otherwise) walking on proverbial eggshells each time you'd have to pull out the vinyl source.  Also, if you have the luxury of enough tape on hand to use 15ips: the 60Hz bass head bump MAY fatten-up the sound of the copy a bit as well.

To me, though: the ultimate shootout was always comparing a (good) vintage, 7 1/2ips pre-recorded reel to its Lp counterpart.  Before, ultimately, finding the original reel equivalent of two favorite '60s albums of mine: I'd recorded the vinyl version(s) I'd had onto a (when new) Maxell UD35-90 (while there was a NYC electronics chain called "The Wiz" still selling 1800" blanks for $15.99 in the mid-1990s!).  Equipment was: a Sony TC-458 rtr and a Technics SL-1700 DD (with an '80s Yamaha receiver).  The albums were: Sergio Mendes & Brasil '66s "Equinox" and, the Chicago-rooted '60s "garage band" The Buckinghams' last Columbia studio album (from 1968) called "In One Ear and Gone Tomorrow".

Anyway, that Sergio Mendes record was full of such sibilance and the "whirring" of some kind of cutting machine oscillation or defect....WHILE: that Buckinghams' album had the end-of-side tracks riddled in such muddiness (and since these were not any records of meaningful value: they WERE CLEANED with 409 cleaner, actually, in the sink with warm water until you could tell it ran freely through the grooves --- so they were NOT DIRTY).

Fast-forward to only three years'-ago: I FINALLY FOUND, "out in the wild", EACH OF THE FACTORY 7 1/2ips REELS OF THEM (cost me $40 for the two).  WHAT A REVELATION!  The Sergio Mendes album (ON TAPE) sounds like a top-notch, bonafide intimate Jazz recording you would not associate with 1960s Herb Alpert-related kitsch:  the mix (now) is so transparent, you'd swear it was in the league of Getz/Gilberto on Verve!  The Buckinghams' album tape became searing obscure Power Pop where, there was suddenly a mellotron appearing in a song....or: there suddenly was "air" around the crack of snare drums....and, lead guitarist Carl Giammarese's Strat screeched in full glory at the end of side 1 with no hint of grunge obfuscating it.

Before FLACs came along, reel to reel would've been the most faithful "archiving" medium for preserving another analog sound source's integrity; however, if there is a source of a recording from a much truer provenance available (which, personally, I've NEVER considered vinyl a proper facsimile of): copying records to tape is not going to recreate it.
Tape has a drive and flow and as such it might be overall preferable to the source. Objectively it shouldn't be, though, but we can't listen to fully objectively. I like tape sound and prefer it to everything else.
@glai I have the ability to record vinyl to a Studer A810 but to me adding another layer of tape hiss to the pops and crackle of vinyl was something I wasn't interested in, it's just too much distortion for me. I've recorded hi res files to tapes before with good results, the tape really add a sound of its own to the final recording.