Conference napalm::commusic_v1

I haven't seen any ads for this thing yet, but what I have been able to gather
from references in NAMM reports is that like the MT2X it has: 

	Dual speeds
	dbx noise processing

I think it also has a single effects send.

A major difference from the MT2X is that it has only 4 mixer channels instead
of 6. 

It might also only record 2 tracks at a time.  I would not be surprised if the
bolt-on MIDI-clock sync unit did not fit, but you never know. 

    I think I've seen this thing here in Reading. Stylish smooth contours,
    but NO EQ.
    
    Richard.

    
    Also, I don't think you can defeat the noise reduction system for
    only one track (to be used as a sync track) while retaining it on 
    the rest.  Some people might find this to be a problem.
    
    
    							John

    re .3
    John, 
    I didn't follow you.  Why would I want to retain noise on the rest?
    Hamid,
    

    Assuming .4 is not a ;^), .3 said retain noise reduction, not noise.
    
    len.
    

	I've never done this, but Dave Blickstein once told me about doing
	some interesting things with sync tracks.  For example, suppose
	you want to layer up a bunch of stuff, more than your SGU (sound
	generating unit) can put out all at once.  If you have a sequencer
	that can provide sync output and accept sync input (for example
	the sequencers in the ESQ-1 or SQ-80), you can lay down a sync track
	and then play it back to control each recording pass.  Naturally,
	you'll want noise reduction for the music tracks.  But you may not
	want noise reduction on the sync track since this *may* alter the
	waveform enough to mess up the synchronization circuits in your
	sequencer.  Then again, it may not.  Depends on how well calibrated
	the noise reduction system is and how robust the sync circuits are
	within the sequencer.  The MT2X and some other units take no chances
	and provide this one-track noise reduction defeat capability for just
	this reason.

	By the way, I'm not positive but I think this unit *can* record
    	four tracks at once, not just two at a time.  I'll have to look
    	at the brochure again.


							John

    Yes, the sync-track tactic works fine for the MMT8 aswell. 
    But if the noise reduction does confuse things, you can always get
    one of those frequency splitter box things that converts the
    hard-to-record square wave from your sequencer sync out to a pair
    of easily recorded frequencys (and back again).
    
    Richard. 

I would think an FSK sync signal would have no problems with noise reduction.

A year or so ago one of the magazines (Electronic Musician, I think) had
an article on how to add a track-4-dbx-defeat switch to a 4-track deck that
did not already have such a feature.

    I've got that article at home.
    
    Edd

   My Tascam 244 (with dbx) lacks a 'dbx defeat' feature, but it doesn't
   seem to need one.

   I've had absolutely no problems with tape dump/restore or tape sync
   on an HR-16 and an ESQ-1 with record levels set to -3dB.  (Oops, one
   problem -- I left the compressor in line once on a dump -- the HR
   wouldn't verify).

   It's particularly nice for dumps.  I run the dump data into both channels
   3 and 4 (for redundancy) and talk about what's being dumped on channel 1
   (helps to sort through old tapes and provides the 'beeeeeeep' to indicate
   it's time to press the 'load from tape' button.

   Enjoy,
   Dave

    I've been using a Tascam 144 w/dolby B for the last 2 years with no
    tape sync problems at all (at least not because of dolby 8-). 

    Come to think of it, I've never heard of anyone having any real serious
    problem with tape sync/noise reduction as long as the initial levels
    were properly set.  I wonder if this is some kind of marketing ploy... 

-b

Close inspection of the tiny picture in the latest Daddy's magazine, combined
with knowledge of how the MT2X works, leads me to think that the MT100 has
some of the same internal parts as the MT2X.

The transport is essentially the same, with dual speed, variable pitch,
a 4-channel permalloy rec/play head, and a 4-channel ferrite erase head.

There are 4 inputs.  Inputs 1 & 2 have trims knobs so they can take either
line or mic levels.  Inputs 3 & 4 are line in only.  Each of the 4 sections
of the mixer has:

	A linear fader
	A linear effect-send level
	A rotary pan-pot
	A record track selector, like the MT2X has

There is a master fader, and an effects-return level.  Also what I think
is a master headphone level.  There are four more rotary knobs that I think
are monitor levels.  Then some switches for dbx, what the headphones are
connected to, tape speed, and so on.

There are 4 record-enabled lights, and an LED level meter that I presume
is 4 channels, although you can't see in the picture.  So my guess is you
could record all 4 tracks at once.

There is no EQ.

Connectors:
   4 inputs
   4 tape outputs
   1 aux send
   1 aux return
   L+R stereo out
   phones out

When a mixer input channel has nothing plugged into it, that channel takes
output from the corresponding tape track.

It looks a lot like the Porta-05 from Tascam.  Clearly intended to compete
with that class of machine.  Also the Fostex X-30.  It looks better than
the MT2X, lacking that grooved look on top.

Advantages I see over the X-30 are dbx instead of Dolby, an effects loop,
	and the higher tape speed.  But the X-30 has EQ.

	Like I said, I've never used a sync track.  I was just going by what
	I had heard and read.  If it's not a problem it makes the MT-100 even
	more attractive.

	As to the one-track noise reduction defeat being a marketing ploy:
	sure, it's possible.  It seems like a trivial thing that could have
	easily been included in the MT-100, so maybe they left it out to help
	distance the MT-100 from the MT2X.  Or maybe they decided it was
	unnecessary because, as the last few replies have stated, most stuff
	works fine without the defeat.


							John

    
    
     I recently purchased a MT100 and I really am impressed with it.
     Price wise I think it's a steal.The only problem that you might
     encounter is that you may require an external EQ. Also this unit
     does NOT support MIDI via/interface.
     I find if your applications are limited to demoing and arrangeing
     songs this is a fine machine!
    
     Be Happy,
                Armen k.
    

I laid eyes on one of these things today.  It has a "quality" feel about
it that the X-30 lacks.  One surprise was that it has a solenoid-controlled
tape transport - not something one would expect in a $400 machine.  (On
the other hand, my stereo deck cost less than that, and IT has solenoid
controls...)

Specs similar to the MT2X:
	Freq response 40-18K or 40-12.5K, depending on speed.
	Wow and flutter < .05% WRMS
	S/N 85dB
	Distortion <1% at 315 Hz
	Channel separation >55dB at 1KHz
	Erase level >70dB

All input are at -10dB, except the mic inputs will go lower.

The guy at Daddy's said they were selling one a week since they came in.

External power supply via wall bug.  Much easier on the eyes than the MT2X,
with bright orange markings rather than the green, and without the distracting
grooves.

    I thought most of em had powered transport -- the X30 does, though
    maybe it uses a motor rather than a solenoid to drive the heads
    to the tape.
    
    Richard.

    OK I went ahead and bought one.  It looks great and feels great
    and works great.  But there is one little problem.  With no inputs
    and all the volume controls to min (zero) I here a fairly high hissing
    sound in the headphone.  My headphone isn't the best but the Yamaha
    technician in Calif. said I should not here any hissing with volume
    on min.  Also when I turn on the unit I hear a hiss from my KB-100
    amp.  Mind you, the amp is not hooked up to the MT-100 but ONLY
    plugged in the same outlet.  Does anyone have a clue what is going
    on here?  Did I get a lemon or is the hissing normal?  This hissing
    does carry over to recorded tapes specially when playing very soft
    music.  Am I expecting more than what I have paid or is there some
    thing wrong here?  I bought this from SAM ASH.
    
    Hamid 289-1303

    Most portastudio type things have noisy headphone amps, in my
    experience. Are you sure the noise gets onto the tape? 
    
    Richard.

    
    I plugged the stereo out to my amp and it sounds very clean.  So
    probably the headphone noise and tape noise are two different things.
    I did go to the local music store and tried another MT-100 to compare.
    With the volume down to min there was no hissing on the headphone
    on the store model.  Only when the volume is half way up I could
    start hearing hiss.  Also, I plugged my headphone to my tape deck
    with the volume min and max and learned my headphone is OK.  So,
    as much as I hated to go thru shipping it back and go thru the headache
    I went ahead and send it back for replacement.  Waiting for my 4-track
    to get back...
    
    Hamid,
    

I too, recently picked up an MT100 from Daddy's. Feature for feature, it is
the best unit in the <$500.00 class. I have not had the hiss problem, *but*
I am also working on my second unit (simple swap today at Daddy's... sometimes
it pays to buy local). The first, a floor model from the Manchester store,
had a problem whereby when laying a track onto channel 1 while listening to a
track on channel 2, the volume and  quality of sound on channel 2 would go
to hell as soon as channel 1's REC SELECT switch was moved to the record 
position. Moving channel 1's switch back to the OFF position would restore
full quality sound from channel 2. Problem would occur with phones in either 
monitor or stereo position.
	Gonna go over the new unit with a fine tooth comb tonight. Hopefully,
this and hiss problem are just a coupla flukes (demo units, etc) and are not
indicative of the overall quality of the unit.

- George

Maybe you are hearing the same thing that makes syncing a problem on these
narrow-format machines.  When recording on track n, playback on tracks n-1
and n+1 suffer.  This hurts when track n has your sync signal on it.  Was
there a high level being recorded at the same time?  Did it do this on all
adjacent pairs of channels?

>Maybe you are hearing the same thing that makes syncing a problem on these
>narrow-format machines.  When recording on track n, playback on tracks n-1
>and n+1 suffer.  This hurts when track n has your sync signal on it.  Was
>there a high level being recorded at the same time?  Did it do this on all
>adjacent pairs of channels?

No.. I don't *think* that was the case; I did some tests on all other adjacent
combinations, eg, 1st track on 1, recording on 2; 1st track on 3, recording on 2
(or 4), etc. The only problem occurred with 1st track on 2, recording on 1.
Definitely felt like some degree of signal spill over due to a (partial) short
somewhere. I mean it was really bad; I'd lose 10 to 15 db. I'll find out tonight
with the other unit. 

2nd unit is clean as a whistle! I'm psyched... time to start laying down some
flux!

    Thanks guys for your inputs,
    
    I got another one after a month of waiting.  This one is a lot better.
    They all seem to hiss a bit. The last one was a buzzing hiss which
    was annoying.
    
    Hamid,

Am I right in thinking that the MT100 has only a mono effects return?
How effective would a reverb be in mono?

Yamaha's advertising line for these things calls them the "Personal Studio
Series", which consists of the MT100 recorder, SPX50D multi-effector, R100
reverb unit, MS101 and MS102 amplified speakers, and MH100 headset mic. The
little brochure ("The cure for the one-track mind") says the R100 is
stereo-out.

    
    A mono effects return can be used quite effectively.  If you have
    to have stereo returns and your deck doesn't support them, just
    build a cheap passive mixer (plans elsewhere in this conference)
    and mix the four-track mixer outs (dry) with the reverb outs (set
    for wet only).  You can build such a mixer for about $3 worth of
    parts.
    
    

Could someone who has an MT100 answer this question regarding monitoring?

Say I have something recorded on track 4.  Now I want to record something on
track 1, so there is a mic going into input 1, and track 1 is recording that.
All other tracks are in playback.

Now, I plug another input (from an SGU, say) into input 4.  The MT100 does
input/tape switching based on whether something is plugged in, which means
that channel 4 of the mixer will be carrying the signal from input 4, and *not*
the signal that is already recorded on track 4.  The channel 4 fader, aux send,
and pan controls will be using the signal from input 4.  Ok so far?

Now the question.  If I turn up the number 4 monitor pot, with the headphones
set to the MONITOR position, what will I hear?  The signal from track 4 or the
signal from input 4?

    RE .8 & .9
    
    	Can you'ze guys supply the month of the Electronic Musician article
    that shows how to defeat NR on a single track.  I went hunting for it
    but found nothing (I have EM going back to '87 - possibly even '86).
    
    	Dan
    

    I know I *had* it, dunno if I still got it but will check...
    
    I did stumble across the schematics for the "$10 Harmonic Sweetener"
    in my bathro... {ahem} library....
    
    Edd

    	Well, I got the MT100 II last Friday and spent Saturday morning
    ignoring the kids while I ran it through some simple tests.  Much to my
    dismay, I found the quality to be too low in the wow/flutter category.
    I didn't notice it right away, but as I started to add reverb in the
    MT100's fx loop, it became more and more apparent.  Finally, I ran the
    meter test - I recorded a sine wave from a synth (no fx) onto the track and
    used a tuning meter to watch the momentary variances on both record and
    playback.  Watching the signal going in it was absolutely still. 
    Watching it on playback there was altogether too much variance.  I had
    performed this test on the mastering deck I had bought a few weeks
    earlier and had a good idea what to expect.
    
    	I realize there was a discussion on the types of tapes used that
    will account for more wow/flutter than others, but upon reading the
    specs on this deck it becomes clear that it is inherantly less than
    optimal (.15%).  Most specs I've read have a much lower tolerance (more
    like .05% or so, I think).
    
    	Anyway, I'm sending it back to Sam Ash.  I don't know whetehr I'll
    get a different deck or try to approach my recording plans differently.
    
    	Dan
    

    I haven't read all the replies to this note - but regarding wow and
    flutter, many times it's just a matter of cleaning the capstan and
    pinch roller !
    
    karl

RE: .30

Well, what happened ?

Is the MT100 II the one with the EQ built in ?
A buddy at a music store says he can sell one to me for $350.
Is that a competitive price ?  It's supposedly "a employee discount".

I've got an old timer Ross 4x4...I'm dying to upgrade.
I like the Ross, but WOW and FLUTTER is out in space someplace...
Like I have to tune the tape (with pitch control) to my guitar.

jc (Curious In The South)

	  Can anyone provide pointers/information about a Yamaha MT1X ?
	  
	  It seems to be the same as the MT2X, but only one speed.

	  What I need is an instruction manual/schematic and the address or
	  phone number of Yamaha USA if there is such a thing.

	  It records and plays OK, but unless there is a trick to it,
	  I can't get it to rewind or fast forward.
	  	  
	  I bought it at a flea market yesterday for $40, gambling that I 
	  could fix it myself.(Haven't opened it up yet.)
	  I bought it for my son, I have no musical talent, but I help
	  him out by hacking hardware.

	  And yes I did the obligatory DIR/KEY [TITLE..ETC] =STUFF,
	  that's what got me here.
	  				thanks
	  					Jack	 
	  

    I suspect that you have a broken belt.  Most porta-studio type decks
    have two drive belts - one for the capstan/drive mechanism and one for
    the high-speed transport.  In your case, I'd bet the latter is broken.
    
    As for phone numbers, try looking in topics 1-20 for "Manufacturer
    Addresses" of some similar title - there are several Yamaha numbers in
    there.
    
+b

>   <<< Note 1717.34 by DYPSS1::SCHAFER "I used to wear a big man's hat..." >>>
                                -< broken belt >-

>    I suspect that you have a broken belt.  Most porta-studio type decks

	  I knew that. :-)    

          You're right, the belt was broken. 
	  Thanks for the phone pointer.
	  					Jack