[QuadList] Video Head Differences

[Trevor Brown]

I thought CAVEC out performed the Ampex equivalent (Velcomp and Autochroma)

It sampled Chroma on a line by line basis 

Ampex I think did it head by head

 

When I first fitted one to a TR70B it cost £7k  (UKP)

I was living in a £4k house at the time, and wondering if I would be able to
keep up the mortgage payments

 

TrevorB

UK Member

 

 

 

 

From: quadlist-bounces at quadvideotapegroup.com
[mailto:quadlist-bounces at quadvideotapegroup.com] On Behalf Of
Chill315 at aol.com
Sent: 27 March 2011 17:06
To: quadlist at quadvideotapegroup.com
Subject: [QuadList] Video Head Differences

 

I thought I would try a different discussion for this week.

 

RCA and AMPEX were the two types of machines that we see the most.  There
were different philosophies between the two for the manufacture of High Band
Quad Heads.

 

So what are these differences and how do they make the machine better or
worse.

 

My first comment is that the Ampex Mark X and XV had a pre amp in the head.
RCA used a pre amp below the deck.  There were advantages to the 1200 and
2000 series that you did not have to mount something below the deck.  RCA
had the slide in pre amp.

 

I know there were also differences in the mechanical designs.  So what were
the advantages for each.

 

Let the discussion begin.

 

Chris Hill

WA8IGN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://quadvideotapegroup.com/pipermail/quadlist_quadvideotapegroup.com/attachments/20110327/f2643a1d/attachment-0005.html>