I used to use a studio version of these machines doing transfers from tape to 16mm mag film in the mid 1960s. At the time the 16mm film would have been coated acetate and the track width 200mil with one standard perf per frame, 16 frames to 1 foot! running at 25 frames per second (all pre-decimal!). No erase head was used as electronic erasure was unreliable mainly due to the difficulty in erasing the depth of the mag coating on the film and the purity of the waveform. So the film was carefully bulk erased before use and the recording was one take!. I think also the bias frequency was low about 35kHz??. The coil that you see may be for bias only but multi-tapped for 2 track. Also at the time there was no EBU standard track format I think that that arrived about 1970?. The frequency response was similar to mono tape running at 7.5ips - 100hz to 14kHz providing head contact was good. Transfers were done from a Perfectone mains machine ( actually a modified 36 series REVOX) the 50Hz pulse was amplified to 240v 3 phase a.c. by 3 huge valve amplifiers which then drove the film recorder motor for sync!. The room got very warm!. Carry on the good work!
Does 200 mil mean 200 thousands of an inch? We usually use the abbreviation 'mil' to mean millimetres, but since 200mm width on a 16mm medium would be about 25 times too big, it's probably not what you were trying to say.
Pardon? Sorry, I couldn't make out what you were saying because someone was playing a Rolling Stones record all the time you were speaking. Have you got neighbour problems?
What speed is running the tape at? is the standard for 24 fps on 16 mm? If so, it's too close to 19 cm/sec (7½"). Another thing: which track width and position on tape uses this machine? full width unless the sprocket holes area or only the standard 2,5 mm side band area as in standard magnetic track 16 mm sound films ?
+Germannio Hi, yes, its 24FPS so very closde to 7.1/2 IPS, the machine is more or less 1/4" wide, it doesn't use the full width of the tape and no where near the perf
+Seblington Thank you very much. Pretty machine anyway, good sound even through camera mic (RUclips's digital compressions included) and too smooth in running as it could be seen!!!
+Germannio Yea, I-phones are great :-) the problem I have is that using proper cameras with the software I use to use takes forever and with a slow internet I stopped doing them but I can bang on a mov from the phone with no hassle.
that sounds beautiful
I used to use a studio version of these machines doing transfers from tape to 16mm mag film in the mid 1960s. At the time the 16mm film would have been coated acetate and the track width 200mil with one standard perf per frame, 16 frames to 1 foot! running at 25 frames per second (all pre-decimal!). No erase head was used as electronic erasure was unreliable mainly due to the difficulty in erasing the depth of the mag coating on the film and the purity of the waveform. So the film was carefully bulk erased before use and the recording was one take!.
I think also the bias frequency was low about 35kHz??. The coil that you see may be for bias only but multi-tapped for 2 track. Also at the time there was no EBU standard track format I think that that arrived about 1970?. The frequency response was similar to mono tape running at 7.5ips - 100hz to 14kHz providing head contact was good.
Transfers were done from a Perfectone mains machine ( actually a modified 36 series REVOX) the 50Hz pulse was amplified to 240v 3 phase a.c. by 3 huge valve amplifiers which then drove the film recorder motor for sync!. The room got very warm!.
Carry on the good work!
+Richard Daniel Hi and thanks for the information :-)
Does 200 mil mean 200 thousands of an inch? We usually use the abbreviation 'mil' to mean millimetres, but since 200mm width on a 16mm medium would be about 25 times too big, it's probably not what you were trying to say.
An error in my previous message - it should be 40 frames per foot!! - so the speed of the film at 25 fps is (almost) 7.5 inches per second.
Pardon? Sorry, I couldn't make out what you were saying because someone was playing a Rolling Stones record all the time you were speaking. Have you got neighbour problems?
What speed is running the tape at? is the standard for 24 fps on 16 mm? If so, it's too close to 19 cm/sec (7½").
Another thing: which track width and position on tape uses this machine? full width unless the sprocket holes area or only the standard 2,5 mm side band area as in standard magnetic track 16 mm sound films ?
+Germannio Hi, yes, its 24FPS so very closde to 7.1/2 IPS, the machine is more or less 1/4" wide, it doesn't use the full width of the tape and no where near the perf
+Seblington Thank you very much. Pretty machine anyway, good sound even through camera mic (RUclips's digital compressions included) and too smooth in running as it could be seen!!!
+Germannio Yea, I-phones are great :-) the problem I have is that using proper cameras with the software I use to use takes forever and with a slow internet I stopped doing them but I can bang on a mov from the phone with no hassle.
How is the sound quality, is it hifi?
+PA2OLD Yes, this can be classed as HI-FI, after the re-cap, I would guess the response has risen to about 14-16KHz
@@Seblington14khz and 16khz back in the 1960's were considered hifi.