Uher 1200
Konton the Greyman
well it could be used with a 16mm camera that had a Pilote Sync Pulse
generator attached to it?
Scott Dorsey
Which Uher 1200? And which modification kits have been added?
I'll say that I think using anything older than a 4200 Report-Monitor
is probably a mistake, if you absolutely have to use a Uher.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Konton the Greyman
and I'm waiting to recieve it. I was told it was a "Uher 1200 Reel to
Reel Report Synchronous Sound/Film Recorder." I don't think there was
any modifications. It shows in the manual (I was told) that you can
hook it to a Beaulieu R-16 with the Synchro Pilote Sync Pulse
generator attached. Since that is what I wanted to do with it, I
thought this would be good to get.
The reason I did try to get a 4200 Report-Monitor is because I was
told most placed could not resolve it's pilotone sync based on it's
location.
Do you know which is older? The 1000 or the 1200. I'd assume the 1000
is older. I wish I know when both were made.
Scott Dorsey
>and I'm waiting to recieve it. I was told it was a "Uher 1200 Reel to
>Reel Report Synchronous Sound/Film Recorder." I don't think there was
>any modifications. It shows in the manual (I was told) that you can
>hook it to a Beaulieu R-16 with the Synchro Pilote Sync Pulse
>generator attached. Since that is what I wanted to do with it, I
>thought this would be good to get.
Yes. This is stone-age technology. The 1200 is a 2-head machine, so
it's a pain to align and has no confidence monitoring. It records
pilot on lower track, which some post houses can still deal with.
If you have a camera with a pilot tone output (which is hard to find
in this day of crystal synch), you can record synch sound with it, and
you can resolve to the pilot track on the tape on playback. Not that
this is very useful any more since you have to figure out what to do
with the signal once you have resolved it.
>The reason I did try to get a 4200 Report-Monitor is because I was
>told most placed could not resolve it's pilotone sync based on it's
>location.
Most places can't, but most places can't resolve signal from the 1200
either.
>Do you know which is older? The 1000 or the 1200. I'd assume the 1000
>is older. I wish I know when both were made.
They were both made in the late sixties, in the days of germanium
PNP transistors and capacitive coupling.
Konton the Greyman
I take it then all Uher's place the pilotone on the lower track. Well
that doesn't do me much good since the place I go to resolves in the
middle track. Guess the Nagra is the only way to go, or are their any
other recorders that resolve in the middle track?
Scott Dorsey
>
>I take it then all Uher's place the pilotone on the lower track. Well
>that doesn't do me much good since the place I go to resolves in the
>middle track. Guess the Nagra is the only way to go, or are their any
>other recorders that resolve in the middle track?
None of these machines resolve.
Considering that you can pick up a Nagra III (again all germanium) for
around $300, I don't see any reason why you'd use anything less. But
by the same token, I am not sure why you'd really want to run pilot tone
with umbilical in this day and age.
Konton the Greyman
Foundation to get it resolved. They only use the middle track for
pilotone sync. Which means the Uher is useless to me. Oh well. It
still will look nice on my shelf.
Where can you pick up a Nagra III for $300?
Justin
craig...@my-deja.com
> >hook it to a Beaulieu R-16 with the Synchro Pilote Sync Pulse
> >generator attached. Since that is what I wanted to do with it, I
> >thought this would be good to get.
Yes you can.
>
> Yes. This is stone-age technology. The 1200 is a 2-head machine, so
> it's a pain to align and has no confidence monitoring. It records
> pilot on lower track, which some post houses can still deal with.
Actually the 4000 and 4200 record the tone on the lower track. The
1000 and 1200 use the full track method as in I beleive Nagra 3 (film
isn't my field so please forgive me for lack of knowledge.
>
> If you have a camera with a pilot tone output (which is hard to find
> in this day of crystal synch), you can record synch sound with it, and
> you can resolve to the pilot track on the tape on playback. Not that
> this is very useful any more since you have to figure out what to do
> with the signal once you have resolved it.
The nice thing about the 4200 is that it has a complete extra channel
for any signal inclucing SMTPE.
>
> >The reason I did try to get a 4200 Report-Monitor is because I was
> >told most placed could not resolve it's pilotone sync based on it's
> >location.
>
> Most places can't, but most places can't resolve signal from the 1200
> either.
Are you sure?
>
> >Do you know which is older? The 1000 or the 1200. I'd assume the 1000
> >is older. I wish I know when both were made.
>
> They were both made in the late sixties, in the days of germanium
> PNP transistors and capacitive coupling.
The 1000 came first then there was a later 1000 and then the 1200.
They were actually made in the late '70s when UHER was expanding and
attempting to get into some more markets, in this instance film sound.
I hope I have been some help.
Sincerely,
Craig Rogers
IAU American Rep for UHER
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Scott Dorsey
Kludge wrote:
>> They were both made in the late sixties, in the days of germanium
>> PNP transistors and capacitive coupling.
>
>The 1000 came first then there was a later 1000 and then the 1200.
>They were actually made in the late '70s when UHER was expanding and
>attempting to get into some more markets, in this instance film sound.
So, then what is the machine I am thinking of? Uher made a 2-head machine
around the 4000 Report-L era that was designed for film sound work, and
I remember seeing them back then.
Fabian Oliver
Talking about resolving: 3 month ago i make a funny test with my protools:
I record in one cassette deck ( 2 heads, JVC from 1980....so not accurate) 15
minutes of one tv film: in the left channel the sound of the film, and in the
right: the timecode. The source was the protools were the sound post was
done.
So, after do that y record again in the the protools the sound from the
cassette. The first time without connecting the time code. So nothing to
resolve. I syncronize with my first frame ( sound and image), and the result
was a lost of syncro of 7 seconds ( in 15 minutes).
I do that once again but connecting the time code track and let the protools
resolve. Result: perfect syncro in 15 minutes.
I think if you have a pilotone output in your Uher, you can use it like
player too, and let the protools resolve. It will work.
And you reproduce with the same head you record it, not bad.
Anyway, i agree with the Nagra III way.
Again sorry for my english.
Good luck.
Fabian.
Konton the Greyman
Thanks for the info and clearing everything up. I tried to call you
and ask you these questions but I guess I had the wrong number. I sure
hope the Uher 1200 can place pilotone sync in the center like the
Nagra's do. I'm quite excited to get it and find out.
>> They were both made in the late sixties, in the days of germanium
>> PNP transistors and capacitive coupling.
>
>The 1000 came first then there was a later 1000 and then the 1200.
>They were actually made in the late '70s when UHER was expanding and
>attempting to get into some more markets, in this instance film sound.
>
>I hope I have been some help.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Craig Rogers
>IAU American Rep for UHER
>
>> --scott
>> --
>> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>>
>
>
Konton the Greyman
was supposed to be here today . . . I don't know what is taking UPS .
. .
On 10 Aug 2000 10:40:35 -0400, klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>In article <8mu66v$etc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, <craig...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>Kludge wrote:
>>> They were both made in the late sixties, in the days of germanium
>>> PNP transistors and capacitive coupling.
>>
>>The 1000 came first then there was a later 1000 and then the 1200.
>>They were actually made in the late '70s when UHER was expanding and
>>attempting to get into some more markets, in this instance film sound.
>
>So, then what is the machine I am thinking of? Uher made a 2-head machine
>around the 4000 Report-L era that was designed for film sound work, and
>I remember seeing them back then.
Konton the Greyman
one up if I come across it. But I'm hoping this Uher 1200 will work
well with an R-16.
Konton the Greyman
states:
"The gap of this signal record head is centered on the tape and turned
at an angle of approximately 90 degrees to that of the audio heads.
Thus the sunc signal will not interfere with the full track sound
recording on the tape."
So it looks like the Uher 1000 and 1200 will revole very well.
I only wish the guys who sent it had not botched the packing job on
the power unit. It's smashed to pieces. If anyone know's where I can
get a UHER Z 114 Power Unit so I can plug this into a wall please let
me know.
Clive Tobin
> and turned at an angle of approximately 90 degrees to that of
> the audio heads. Thus the sunc signal will not interfere with
> the full track sound recording on the tape."
If true, this is the Rangertone method and not the Pilotone
system. Pilotone and Neopilot uses a split head about the track
width sizes of a stereo cassette head, to record a push-pull
track down the center of the tape, which cancels out in the full-
track audio reproduce head. The two methods are not compatible
unless the head tilt happens to be just exactly right, and then
the output level is still very low.
The thing is, that I don't think the above description is
correct. My recollection of the Uher 1000 is that it records a
normal Pilotone push-pull track that is compatible with Nagra. I
suspect your manual has an obsolete or erroneous writeup.
Look at the pilot head... does it look like a regular wide-track
head that has been laid down on its side, or does it have two
half-heads (for lack of a better word) to record a normal
Pilotone track?
Clive Tobin
http://www.tobincinemasystems.com
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
Konton the GreyMan
like a hype piece (write up) for trying to sell the reel to reel
recorder. It was for "The Uher 1000/N Neo-Pilot System for Syncronous
Sound/Film Recording." I just assume the information was correct for
the Uher 1200 Report Synchro as well. I tried looking to see the type
of heads but I guess I'm going need to see an example of what I am
looking for.
I do know that it is a seprate heads that records the pilotone sync.
At least that's the only think I'm sure about based on the manual. I
guess I'll just have to try using this once and then resolve it.
adriaan03...@hotmail.com
> Can anyone tell me about the Uher 1200 reel-to-reel recorder and how
> well it could be used with a 16mm camera that had a Pilote Sync Pulse
> generator attached to it?
I possess some valuable tapes recorded with the UHER 1200 synchro, but I don't have this recorder available to reproduce what is on the tapes. Cn anyone help me to transfer these tapes to another medium, such as mp3. I am not interested in the synchronicity, only in the reconstruction of the sound. I can use other means to bring the sound and image together again.
If anyone had a working Uher 1200 synchro, I would be willing to visit you with the tapes and do the trandfer myself.
With the best wishes,
Adriaan Brouwer