All About vintage pro audio
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…
what is the top unit on top of the amp? and how did you boost up the output.
i heard that youtube was mono still.
It’s pretty hard to tell with youtube’s audio compression…
Hard to tell listening on YouTube with crappy headphones. Did notice a subtle difference in the Studer’s low end. Its a good thing… Dynamic range seems a little sweeter on the Studer, easier on the ear.
I’m musician I can tell you that analogue sounds is far better in the basses and the s sounds. .
Also with these recordings.. the s sounds are much, much better on the studer!!!
the studer sound more natural!… *listened with a reference headphone*… I know youtube is also digital. .but def.. the studer!
I did do a blind test, had the speakers in another room, out of 5 people, 1 thought the C37 was the master, 3 couldnt tell the difference but one worked them all out saying the Sony sounded as sharp as the original where the Studers dynamic range was warmer but at the same time not as accurate, these tests were performed over many different recordings and source, including one from mic of a guitar player and some speech.
true, but i doubt you’d be able to double blind it if you were in the room, and thats what matters…
cassette could still be in use had it be developed to take up ONE lp side on a “c30″!
and as if that wasnt trash enough they had to invent cd, dcc, minidisc…
another very interesting thing is the dynamic compression of lps!!
While it’s fun to see these vintage machines working, anyone who thinks they can make a meaningful comparison of the audio performance is kidding themselves. The audio here is compressed AAC digital at 125 kbps, and can’t come close to providing the full fidelity of either recorder.
Also, by using a redbook CD as the original source (16bit 44.1 kHz), you aren’t even close to exploiting the full performance of the analog machine.
A direct recording of a live performance would be more meaningful
Interesting comparison, I could not hear much difference. It would good to hear the test with some more dynamic music. Youtube has really improved and uploads everything in stereo now with an optional High quality link to it.
i can still here the whine on the dash.
never use atr tape it sheds!
how can you possibly compare the studer if it’s got leaky caps!!
fix it and do the test again with an analog unrecorded source recording to both machines at once!
tape actually usually sounds better than cds, so the quality on the tape recorder cant get any better than your original source, so the tape will sound identical to the cd. also its difficult to tell the difference between the two machines because youtube audio is so compressed, however i bet both machines sound excellent, however the sony seems to have some nice usability features that would makes it a much nicer unit in a studio.
Cheers, I find these all over the place, the DASH was off Ebay, of a shady character, the C37 came from a private studio, I often get offered machines like these, I just cant take everything.
Hi Seblington, it appears that the Dash presents a relatively ‘isolated’ top end range whereby the C37 sounds more musically integrated and overall more ‘embracing’ – and this even through the sonically limited Youtube outlet. The above phenomena shows quite often when switching & listening between digital & analogue sound carriers. P.S. Nice piece of music! Excellent taste!
®©
Great demo, I certainly couldnt tell the difference under the test conditions at least.
Studer c37s were still very much in evidence at BBC radio Manchester in the 80s.
I wonder where you found all of this gear? I can remember when the first ¼in DASH machines appeared in the 80s and they were hugely expensive.
I could’t really tell the difference, but if you uploaded a wav PCM file it would probably be better.
The Studer was probably designed for vinyl record production and the Sony was probably designed for CD production. Which makes it a bit like comparing a vinyl record to a CD.
If you could get a source which was 24 bit rather than 16 bit, the Studer would probably sound better.
Thank you for this video! I’m from Russia, I love analogue machines and would buy Studer C37, if not for it’s large sizes. I remember there was a “compact” version of C37.
Yes, C37 sounds much warmer and more realistic that Sony. I have Studer A710 and ReVox G36, and I can say that they left CD well far behind.
Great machines, and great test, but i think, the studer is better. Maybe this test would be more interesting, if the source is a high(er) definition ( 96 or 192khz) sound. Sorry for bad english
What kind of tape can the C37 use? I finally got mine in and I’m looking to try it with the new +9 formulations, like the SM900 or ATR Magnetics tape, but I think that might be wishful thinking for the electronics.. what’s been your experience?
Avoid Chain Stores Exclusive Concert Videos Funny News
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.