Outline · Standard · [ Linear+ ] Ampex 456,457 Same As Scotch 207?, silly question I know but just curious..

I have read that at least that most decks in the 70s' and 80s' were biased to Scotch 207, and I have read elsewhere that 456 and 457 Ampex/Quantegy is good for decks made in the 70s' adn 80s'. Is there any similaraties in these formulas or are they totally different.??

I also read that Scotch sold their tape manufacturing to Quantegy. That is another reason for my curiosity. Thanks for everyones feedback and input. Sincerely,Vincedog3.

I'm not real clear on what the equivalents were between Scotch, Emtec, Agfa, Racal Zonal and Ampex all were?

I do know the difference between 456 and 457 and that is strictly the thickness of the backing of the tape. 456 being 1.5 mil and 457 being 1 mil.

Another very knowledgeable member here named Beck might have more insight on this topic and perhaps he would be good enough to make us a chart and I could post it as a sticky or incorporate it into the FAQ.

Good questions!

Cheers!

The one tape that Scotch made that was marketed as a direct replacement for Ampex 456 was Scotch 226. This formulation became available in the mid to late 80's.

The biggest problem with any tape is not the amount of bias current necessary but how well the oxide sticks to the backing, especially over time.
I have seen several projects almost lost due to loss of adhesion. The accepted practice for restoration was to remove the metal flanges and bake
the tape in a convection or a microwave oven at a medium high heat for an amount of time dependant on the thickness of the tape.....ie: a 2 inch tape bakes for 1 hour and ten minutes at 650 watts in a microwave. The recordings are then transferred to a stable (new) reel.

I have seen instances of almost every formulation lose its oxide. Usually the problem resulted from environmental issues in the storage facility.
Occasionally formulations would show up at studios and shed like a cat in August. 456, 207 and 226 all suffered at one time or another. Studios would often change brands. The mobile facility I worked for in the 80's used Ampex 406. I don't recall any oxide problems with that formulation.
Maybe we were just lucky.....we did do a lot of gospel music.

Danny

Ditto what my man above just said.

Ampex 456 was equivalent to Scotch 226, in 1/4", but was known as Scotch 966/986 on 1/2".

We now return you to your regular programming, already in progress.

I have read that at least that most decks in the 70s' and 80s' were biased to Scotch 207, and I have read elsewhere that 456 and 457 Ampex/Quantegy is good for decks made in the 70s' adn 80s'. Is there any similaraties in these formulas or are they totally different.??

I also read that Scotch sold their tape manufacturing to Quantegy. That is another reason for my curiosity. Thanks for everyones feedback and input. Sincerely,Vincedog3.

Quantegy (Ampex) 406/407 is bias equivilent to Scotch 206/207 (+3dB level tape)
Quantegy (Ampex) 456/457 is bias equivilent to Scotch 226/227 is bias equivilent to BASF/AGFA/EMTEC SM911 and SM468 (+6 level tape)

Quantegy (Ampex) 499 is bais equivilent to Scotch 986 (+9dB level tape)
Quantegy GP-9 is exactly the same formulation as Scotch 996, and is bias equivilent to BASF/AGFA/EMTEC SM900 (+9dB level tape)

This post has been edited by ninohernes: Oct 31 2004, 02:37 PM

I have read that at least that most decks in the 70s' and 80s' were biased to Scotch 207, and I have read elsewhere that 456 and 457 Ampex/Quantegy is good for decks made in the 70s' adn 80s'. Is there any similaraties in these formulas or are they totally different.??

I also read that Scotch sold their tape manufacturing to Quantegy. That is another reason for my curiosity. Thanks for everyones feedback and input. Sincerely,Vincedog3.

Quantegy (Ampex) 406/407 is bias equivilent to Scotch 206/207 (+3dB level tape)
Quantegy (Ampex) 456/457 is bias equivilent to Scotch 226/227 is bias equivilent to BASF/AGFA/EMTEC SM911 and SM468 (+6 level tape)

Quantegy (Ampex) 499 is bais equivilent to Scotch 986 (+9dB level tape)
Quantegy GP-9 is exactly the same formulation as Scotch 996, and is bias equivilent to BASF/AGFA/EMTEC SM900 (+9dB level tape)

You nailed it!

I might also mention that many of these tapes had pretty die-hard followers when they were all available. Although compatible they weren't treated as interchangeable because a certain tape would do something to the sound that would be lost on a different medium.

--Tom Scholz & Boston used Scotch 226 or die for tracks, 996 for mastering
--Steve Perry wouldn't even sing in the shower without AFGA 468

Scotch 966/986 was an "improvement" on 226, but Scholz didn't like it so he stocked up on 226 before it was discontinued, and still uses it today.

A lot of the signature sounds that groups were identified with came form using various tapes on machines tuned for Ampex 456. The key was the way the other tapes sounded on a deck tweaked for 456. Tweaking the machine for another tape would change and maybe ruin the sound. The original Boston sound was best using Scotch 226 on a machine set for 456.

We need to round up all these old secrets and put them in a great volume buried under a magic talking tree or something, before we all grow old and die.

Well, it's too early in the morning for magic talking trees for me! But, I'll figure out away to incorporate this info into the FAQ and at least make it handy for future reference.

Thanks again to all who contributed here.

Cheers!

This post has been edited by The Ghost of FM: Nov 1 2004, 05:45 AM

We need to round up all these old secrets and put them in a great volume buried under a magic talking tree or something, before we all grow old and die. 

I agree!

This post has been edited by ninohernes: Nov 1 2004, 09:54 AM

You nailed it!

I might also mention that many of these tapes had pretty die-hard followers when they were all available.  Although compatible they weren't treated as interchangeable because a certain tape would do something to the sound that would be lost on a different medium.

--Tom Scholz & Boston used Scotch 226 or die for tracks, 996 for mastering
--Steve Perry wouldn't even sing in the shower without AFGA 468

Scotch 966/986 was an "improvement" on 226, but Scholz didn't like it so he stocked up on 226 before it was discontinued, and still uses it today.

A lot of the signature sounds that groups were identified with came form using various tapes on machines tuned for Ampex 456.  The key was the way the other tapes sounded on a deck tweaked for 456.  Tweaking the machine for another tape would change and maybe ruin the sound.  The original Boston sound was best using Scotch 226 on a machine set for 456. 

I love Boston!!

Too bad that 226 has the worst sticky shead problem of all 3M tapes.


For years I used only Emtec (BASF/AGFA) tapes. The slitting was perfect, and the tape sounded fantastic. To this day, I have never heard a tape that sounds as good as SM-911. It was simply amazing!

It looks like you get your choice:

Sticky-shed or flakey-shed.