Portable Recorders
The apparent choice facing the oral historian in selecting a recording machine is between open reel and cassette recorders. Much has been written about the relative merits of these two alternatives, particularly as regards portability and ease of operation.
In the sector which equipment manufacturers refer to as the domestic market (in Britain this could be marked as the retail price range of £15.00 to £50.00)1 the question of choice between open reel and cassette portable recording equipment does not really arise. One of the consequences of the cassette 'revolution' of the 1970s is that manufacturers have phased out the production of inexpensive open reel recorders and replaced them entirely by cassette machines. If budgets are restricted to this lower end of the equipment price range, then a cassette recorder it has to be (unless recourse is made to the second hand market).
Apart from the very cheapest, the recording quality which cassette machines in this price range can achieve does not vary very greatly. The universal principle that the more you spend the more you get still operates, but it applies less to the sound quality of which the more expensive models are capable and rather more to the additional features which they usually incorporate. For example, they may have manual as well as automatic recording level controls and sockets for external microphones. These features are often not provided on the cheaper recorders and they are essential requirements for oral historians who are concerned with the technical quality of their recordings. Additionally, reliability of performance and robustness of construction generally increase in direct proportion to the cost. Oral historians need reliability of operation in the field because they are not usually able to correct breakdowns themselves. Robustness of construction promises a longer working life for the recorder, with the result that a higher initial investment may turn out to be a longer term economy.
Relatively cheap cassette recorders can be used to quite good advantage. Observance of common sense recording practices (see Chapter 5) is obviously essential. The use of microphones which are built in to the cassette recorder is to be abhorred. By employing an external microphone the noises made within the machine it· self are not recorded and an audibly better quality recording will be produced. The choice of cassette tape is equally important. All recorders are set up for a particular tape type and the machine will produce significantly better results if one of the brands recommended by the manufacturer is used.
Next in the order of recording equipment comes a large group of cassette machines most of which, on the British market, fall within the price range of £70.00 to £200.00. The bulk of this equipment is designed for home recording and playback purposes and to be mounted as part of the living room furniture along with the radio and other audio systems. Although much of this equipment is capable of quite a high technical performance, the convenient recording application of such machines is generally confined to copying radio broadcasts and commercial recordings. This range of recorders, not being truly portable, therefore falls outside the useful area of choice for interviewing purposes.
For recording to a high technical standard, the principal drawback of the cassette format arises from the difficulty of obtaining a good frequency response with acceptable noise and distortion levels. To minimise the inherent limitations of the cassette recorder, various noise reduction systems are employed with the more expensive machines of which the Dolby process is the best known and most widely used. Without such devices the technical performance of cassette machines cannot compete with that of reel to reel equipment. But with the incorporation of such aids, the character of the cassette recorder also begins to alter. In short, it ceases to be a highly portable and inexpensive machine.
In terms both of cost and performance, portable cassette and open reel recorders are only truly in direct competition with each other at the upper end of the audio market. At this level, of the so-called professional and semi-professional machines, prices vary from about £250.00 to over £1,000.00. Cassette recorders in this price range are fully capable of achieving as good a technical performance as similarly priced open reel machines. In some respects, however, the usual advantages of the cassette format are neutralised at this level, while in others the open reel format is to be preferred.
For example, the weight and size of these cassette recorders are comparable to that of open reel equipment, so that the portability factor is no longer so relevant to choice. Secondly, the operating parameters are less critical on open reel machines, so that recording results are less likely to be unsatisfactory through inconsistent use by the operator. Thirdly open reel recorders in the category of the Uher 4000 series, for example, are machines of proven reliability and durability. While cassette equipment may prove to be satisfactory in these respects, as yet the evidence is not available for this to be claimed for it with any certainty. Logically one might expect them to stand up to a heavy work load less well than open reel recorders, if only because many of their components are physically smaller. A degree of wear which would not significantly affect the performance of an open reel machine could be critical on a cassette recorder.
The physical slightness of a cassette machine's parts certainly can be a disadvantage. For example, a speck of dust on its narrow recording head can prevent the cassette tape from making proper contact with the head. The same size particle on the much wider recording head of an open reel recorder could have no noticeable effect. Maintenance and servicing will also need to be more stringent for the cassette than the open reel machine. If the collecting centre does not have its own technical staff, it will therefore be even more dependent on equipment manufacturers or service agents for maintaining its recorders in good running order.
It should be said that compact cassette tape is not without advantages. It is cheaper, easier to carry and less demanding on storage space. But against this, its suitability for long term preservation is at best uncertain. In this respect, quarter inch tape -which has been stored in some archives for a quarter of a century without serious degradation -is very much more of a known quantity. Whereas interviews recorded on appropriate open reel tape can with some confidence be treated as preservation copies, oral historians recording on cassette would be very strongly advised to transfer their interviews onto the larger format for conservation purposes.
Despite the remarkable advances which have been made in cassette technology during the past few years, the balance of advantage continues to rest decisively in favour of the open reel recorder. Collecting centres that need a consistently high quality of recording, reliable and durable equipment and a tape format with the maximum assured lasting qualities should spend their money on open reel machines.
In selecting an open reel recorder, separate microphone sockets for the interviewer and informant are a useful feature. It is somewhat easier to achieve an equal balance on both voices when the levels from the two speakers can be separately controlled. Even more important, however, is the greater flexibility which separate microphones as regards the positioning of interviewer and informant (see also Chapter 5).
Some mono and all stereo recorders have this facility of two microphone inputs. Stereo machines have an additional advantage which can be useful when making a copy tape. As the two microphones record on separate tracks, any extraneous noises recorded via the non-speaker's microphone can be turned down during the transfer so that such defects are not carried onto the copy. Apart from this feature, stereo recorders have no particular advantage over mono machines for recording two fixed voices.
Open reel equipment can record to full, half and quarter track configurations. Full track recording affords the maximum technical advantages but is, of course, most expensive in tape and storage space. Quarter track machines should be avoided, despite the attraction of minimising the amount of tape which needs to be carried. The narrower the track width the greater is the effect of the electronic and hiss noises recorded. On the other hand, the wider the track the less effect damage to any particular part of the tape will have on the overall signal recorded.
One feature of all portable recorders, except the most expensive, is that the recording level meters are too limited to provide good monitoring of the signal levels. With most models it takes considerable experience to interpret needle movement. Practice and familiarity with the equipment will enable interviewers to compensate for this inadequacy and, if in doubt, it is always best to err on the side of under recording your tape than of overloading it.
Having considered the main principles involved in choosing a portable recorder, what machines may be recommended? The range of domestic cassette equipment is so wide that the size of your purse and the advice of a specialist retailer are the most useful guidelines. In contrast the range of open reel equipment is quite small. The Nagra and Stel1avox recorders are the most sophisticated and expensive machines. Below these, the Uher 4000 series is the most widely used portable in Europe, and the Sony TC 510 its main competitor. Portable cassette recorders capable of a comparable technical performance include the Sony TC 158, the Nakamichi 550, the JVC KD2B or CD 1635, and the Uher CR 240.
- All prices quoted in this chapter are those applying at the end of 1977.
