10-10-08: Jsman
johnnyb53 the only flaw in your post is the fact that a TP tape from the master is second or third generation, and the the Lp is much further down the road. More like fifth, six, or seventh generation.
There is never a flaw in my posts. :LOL:
I didn't say that R2R doesn't have better potential for sound; it's that in actual execution I often found it disappointing because the physical and mechanical quality of prerecorded 7.5 ips tapes were crap, especially compared to the nice HO/LN formulations on polyester blanks from TDK and Maxell that I otherwise fed my Tandberg.
But as far as generation-to-generation deterioration, we're comparing apples to oranges here. An LP may have more copy generations between original multitrack to consumer product than open reel tape, but analog tape-to-tape-to-tape degeneration is very easy to hear, especially when the final generation is crap low-grade oxide on acetate backing. OTOH, the extra generations in LP production are in the lacquer master-to-mother-to-stampers, and the amount of sonic degeneration is going to depend on how meticulously and cleanly the transfers are made.
Also, in the '80s, many classical LPs employed direct metal mastering (DMM), which cut a couple of generations out of the process.
I still stand by my original point that it's hard to beat the potential of LP in terms of sound quality vs. time per unit to produce. It may not be the ultimate in sound quality, but nothing else sounds anywhere near as good that takes so little time to produce.
