Looking for a 3 speed 10.5 inch reel to reel

[Ted Kendall]

The Logic 7 was three speed up to 15 ips in standard trim - I don't recall lower speed variants, but am open to correction! Back coated tape came in around 1970 - Scotch 206/7, Ampex 406/7, Agfa 368/468. These had a matt back coating and a smooth oxide surface, and are fine for domestic machines. There were also earlier matt types, designed for professional machines and in particular for neat spooling on single-flange reels - BASF LR56/LGR30, Agfa FR/FR4 and others. These are quite abrasive and can chew through some domestic heads in short order.

[Edward Huggins]

There are at least 4 Philips 1970's/1980's tape decks that will more than meet the OP's needs. They all give a superb performance electronically, but do come in for critiscm for their high use of plastic in the casing and main assemblies.

[Station X]

Originally Posted by Edward Huggins

There are at least 4 Philips 1970's/1980's tape decks that will more than meet the OP's needs.

Don't keep us in the dark then, Tell us the model numbers.

[David001]

Tandberg Series 15 and 64, some of the bigger Uher ones (Variocord) have 3 speeds too

[DMcMahon]

Uher SG 631 will do the 3 lower speeds and 2 / 4 track (with corresponding head assembly) up to 10.5"

[Ted Kendall]

If you can live with hum...

[David001]

Sorry, these decks only do 7" reels

[Timvintage]

Thanks so much everyone for all your replies and info. Peter, the Phillips n4450 sounds very interesting, you mentioned it can take up to 10.5 inch wheels, but preferably not nab? Does that mean that you absolutely can’t put nab reels on it? I haven’t actually got any 10.5 inch wheels yet, but will possibly be getting some soon.

[Radio Wrangler]

Before jumping in, hunt down the threads on the Philips N4450 machines. They do seem to be a lot of work. I followed them through as they appeared and they left me feeling glad I bought a Revox back in the day, but the N4450 certainly has the looks.

I can't help thinking that by going for one recorder which does it all, you are embarking on a difficult quest for something very rare. I'd expect you to finish sooner and have change in your pocket if you spread the needs over two or three different machines.

David

[ricard]

Originally Posted by gramofiend

Have you considered double speed transfer of the material say repro of 1 7/8ips at 3 3/4 ips and re record at 7 1/2 ips, then play back the result at 3 3/4 ips. It obviously requires strict attention to repro azimuth alignment of the original but you seem to have knowledge for what you are doing and having laid off recordings from damaged cassettes and various low speed 1/4 inch efforts over the years, I can assure you that it is intelligible and can be quite musical and preservable. I believe there is also software that enables you to place it directly into digitised state and then corect up or down for the speed.

Especially if you record to a computer at the wrong speed, then speed it up or down there, the results can be excellent. One thing is though that the tone correction curves don't necessarily match across the different tape speeds, so to get a straight frequency response, you will need to apply some EQ to compensate for this. It's a wonder someone hasn't calculated the EQ coefficients and posted them somewhere on the 'net.

[DMcMahon]

Originally Posted by Ted Kendall

If you can live with hum...

Surely not on a Uher

[Timvintage]

Radio rangler, you are probably right, and maybe that is what I will end up doing, having a couple of machines. It is just my lack of space that prompted me to see if I could find something that did it all.
I have thought about just changing speed once it is digitised on the computer, but I want to be able to listen to the actual tapes as well, that’s why I don’t want to do that.

[Michael Maurice]

What material is on the tapes at the lower speed?

If its just speech, then equalisation really shouldn't be too much of a problem, and you could use a 3¾ speed machine and then slow it down in software without any serious degradation.

[Ted Kendall]

Originally Posted by DMcMahon

Surely not on a Uher

Absolutely on this Uher, at any rate. Contemporary test reports criticised the unweighted hum figure, and my example had this fault and more besides - it was the layout and shielding rather than skimped electronics that was the trouble. It offered nothing I couldn't do better on other machines, so on it went.

[DMcMahon]

The one in the photo I was close to purchasing several months back but got outbid, from your input it sounds like I might have had a lucky escape !

[Reelman]

Originally Posted by Timvintage

Thanks so much everyone for all your replies and info. Peter, the Phillips n4450 sounds very interesting, you mentioned it can take up to 10.5 inch wheels, but preferably not nab? Does that mean that you absolutely can’t put nab reels on it? I haven’t actually got any 10.5 inch wheels yet, but will possibly be getting some soon.

I’ve certainly seen them used with metal NAB spools and adaptors so have no reason to assume they won’t work. However the issue is that the spools are driven by small D.C. motors via rubber belts, the extra weight of NAB spools just puts a little extra strain on the mechanism.

I used plastic 10.5” spools when my machine was in working order without any problem, indeed Philips supplied two with the machine from new. Bought mine new in 1972.

Peter

[Edward Huggins]

Originally Posted by Station X

Don't keep us in the dark then, Tell us the model numbers.

Oh well Graham, if you must......!
Here are 3 from the top of my head:
Philips N7300, N4450, Pro-12 (with adaptors).
There was an Austrian built successor to the N7300 which I can't find the reference for.

[Michael Maurice]

I would think the N7300 would be a better bet, far less complicated and unlikely to use germanium transistors.

[brenellic2000]

I have come to this one late. Ordinarily I'd have said a Brenell STB2 or MK.6 10-1/2" deck - the Mk.610 is more common and was used by the BBC for 'editing'. Both offer 4 speeds and capacity for a second playback head of choice (1/4 vs 1/2 track).

The biggest headache is the (un)reliability of the Papst motors and Bogen heads but with a bit of ingenuity, any make of head can be fitted. ln this instance, as Ted says, a Ferrograph is probably a wiser choice... but the Brenell will sound nicer!

[Boulevardier]

I know I keep going on about it (bitter experience!), but I would be really reluctant to recommend the Brennell Mk 6. Apart from the widely experienced and aired Papst motors and Bogen heads problem, Brennell really never dragged themselves into the contemporary sophistication standards seen in machines like the Revoxes, etc. In the high-speed, large-spool functions the tape handling was awful, and without hands-on (literally) control of the spools and of the tape loops formed by 15 inches of tape feeding through the pressure roller before the take-up spool reached speed, and the fierce snatches on tape that occurred when in did, badly chewed-up tapes resulted on many "starts". Add to that the wear on the static tape-guides and the wear on heads from the pressure pads, and using and maintaining them was continual hard work.

Just a note of my own experience!

Mike