Fluxivity for Newbies: How to Select a Test Tape

July 31, 2020

Hi everyone.

A couple of years ago I posted an explanation of "reference fluxivity" for someone who was struggling to figure out
what test tape to buy in order to calibrate his tape deck. Since then, I've been asked for this post several times, and
someone dug it up yesterday while looking for this information. So to make it easier to find in future searches, I'm
reposting it here, slightly updated. This is very long, but I think it contains a lot of useful information for people who
are returning to the tape hobby after many years, or just getting into tape.

So here goes:

Proper calibration of a tape deck requires using a test tape. Ok, fine. But WHICH test tape? My first visit to
Magnetic Reference Labs’ web site was like a rat getting thrown into a maze. There were dozens of different tapes,
and a key to picking the right tape was picking a “reference fluxivity.” What the heck was that? And what was this
“nWb/m” abbreviation I kept seeing everywhere?

Fluxivity, I learned, can be thought of as a measure of the strength of a magnetic field. This is important for analog
tape recording, because tape recording works by magnetizing particles on a tape. The strength of this
magnetization – the magnetic flux strength – is important because it largely defines the dynamic range (S/N ratio)
available. All tapes have residual noise that we hear as tape hiss. Some tapes have less noise than others, but all
have it. When you record something to tape, the difference between the strength of the recorded signal and the
residual noise (hiss) is your dynamic range. Accordingly, it becomes important to record signals on the tape as
strongly as possible, without inducing distortion or “saturating” the tape (“saturation” is the point at which the tape
can no longer absorb more magnetic flux without compressing dynamics or adding distortion or both). The stronger
the recorded signal, the “louder” it is in relation to the noise, and that in turn means that when you play that signal at
normal listening levels, the background noise will be lower in volume – ideally, so low that you won’t even hear it.
“Nano-Webers per meter” (nWb/m) is the measurement system for the strength of magnetic flux applied to tape.
When we use that term in tape calibration, we are usually using it to define the recording flux level at 0db on the VU
meters. Obviously, the flux applied to the tape will vary as the signal varies above and below that 0db reference.

In the early days of magnetic recording, the magnetic particles on tape were relatively crude, and their ability to
absorb magnetic flux was limited. The 1000-pound gorilla of tape recording at the time, Ampex, decided that it
would standardize its tape recorders to record signals at an average level of 185nWb/m at 700hz (which translates
to 180nWb/m at 1khz, which is the frequency most people use today for doing recorder calibration; from here on, I
will use nWb/m numbers at 1khz). By setting the average recording “strength” at 180nWb/m, Ampex left some
“space” or “headroom” for signals that would go over the average level. If 180 was the average level (let’s call this
0db on a VU meter) at 1khz, then a peak signal of 6db would correspond to 355nWb/m at 1khz. That was about all
early tapes could handle; beyond that, tapes would saturate and compress/distort.

But like everything else, over time magnetic tape improved. Manufacturers found ways to make the magnetic
particles smaller, packing more of them into a given area on the tape, and found different “formulations” for the
particles that allowed them to absorb more magnetic flux. Instead of saturating at 355nWb/m, the saturation level
crept up. The best modern tapes, like ATR Master and RTM’s SM900, now saturate at very high flux levels –
something like 1600nWb/m for SM900, for example. Put in terms of db, the difference between 355nWb/m and
1600nWb/m is about 13db. Or put another way, today’s best tapes can absorb maximum magnetic flux that is about
13db higher than the tapes in use when Ampex set its standard.

That, in turn, means that we can record on these new tapes at much higher average flux levels, while still
maintaining excellent headroom for peak signals. And recording at much higher levels is what we want – the higher
the level, the greater the S/N ratio and the lower the apparent noise floor. Recording engineers recognized this, and
started referring to the new tapes by their ability to record signals at higher average levels than the old Ampex
180nWb/m standard. A “+3” tape referred to one in which you could record safely at an average level of 250nWb/m
while still leaving good headroom for peaks; a “+6” tape referred to an average level of 355nWb/m, and “+9”
referred to 500nWb/m. Note that these are average levels. If you are recording to a tape at an average level of
500nWb/m, a 6db peak will be recorded at over 1000nWb/m; a 9 db peak (roughly corresponding to a +3 peak on a
standard averaging VU meter) is nearly 1500nWb/m, which is now approaching saturation for the SM900 tape.
So what does all this have to do with tape recorder calibration? Well, remember that we want to record on a tape at
the highest level possible, while still avoiding saturation and distortion. With modern tape formulas, this average
level can be much higher than the old Ampex standard. “Standard” tapes today (like Capture 914/930 or RTM’s 468
tape) can use fluxivities that are 3db higher than the old Ampex standard – so 250nWb/m would be the right
fluxivity for these tapes. More advanced tape formulas, like RTM’s 900 and 911, can record at even higher flux
levels: +6 for 911, +9 for 900. If you are using these tapes, you should set up your tape recorder to record at higher
average fluxivity - 320 or 355nWb/m (or even higher with SM900 or ATR Master).

However, you need to be sure that your tape recorder can actually generate these very high flux levels at peak
recording. Not every tape deck, particularly consumer decks, can do so. For those, you might have to calibrate the
deck at a lower fluxivity, which means you won’t be getting every last ounce of performance out of the new tape
formulas that you might otherwise be able to. Tape manufacturers like Recording The Masters have data sheets
that show the various magnetic properties of their tapes; often they will be measured at a given flux level (RTM
generally uses 320nWb/m@1khz for its measurements on SM900, SM911 and the corresponding long-play LPR90
and LPR35 tapes, except at 3.75 ips, where it drops back to 250nWb/m).

Now let’s get back to test tapes. Ideally, you would want to set up your recorder with a test tape recorded at the
fluxivity level you want to use. And MRL sells tapes at a wide variety of flux levels. BUT . . . you can use a test tape
recorded at one flux level to set your recorder up at other flux levels. Doing so is just a matter of translating the flux
level on the tape you have to the level you want at 0vu on your deck.

For example, suppose you have a test tape at 250nWb/m, but want to set your recorder up at 355nWb/m, which is
3db higher (+3db) than 250nWb/m. You can do this, simply by following the procedures in your service manual, but
making sure that the meters read -3vu instead of 0vu when doing the repro amp level setting. By setting up your
recorder so that a 250nWb/m tape reads -3vu, a signal recorded at 0vu will be 3db higher. So 1khz at -3vu =
250nWb/m; 1khz at 0vu will equal 355nWb/m. MRL has a handy conversion table on page 8 of the following
document:

http://www.mrltapes.com/choo&u.pdf

If you are only going to get one test tape, my recommendation would be to get one at 250nWb/m, since this is
pretty much “in the middle” of various flux levels you might want. With such a tape, you can set up a recorder for
200nWb/m (-2db) by setting the meters at +2, instead of 0vu, in the calibration process; or you can set the recorder
for 320nWb/m (a standard often used in Europe) by setting the meters at -2db. If you want original Ampex level
(180nWb/m), set the recorder for +3db on the meters; if you want to use 355nWb/m for a tape like SM911 or ATR
Master, set the meters at -3db. And so forth. So a 250nWb/m test tape is VERY useful, even if you want to calibrate
your deck at a different flux level.

Finally, here is a list of fluxivities I use for various tapes on my Studer A810 at 7.5 ips.
Current production tapes:
Capture 914/930 – 250nWb/m
RTM SM911/LPR35/LPR90 – 320nWb/m
ATR Master/MDS36 - 320nWb/m

NOS/used tapes:
Scotch 206/207 – 250nWb/m
Maxell UD 35-90 – 250nWb/m
BASF LPR90 – 250nWb/m
TDK Audua – 250nWb/m
Ampex/Quantegy 632 – 250nWb/m

Note that for recording at 3.75 ips, I drop the fluxivities by 2db; so 320nWb/m becomes 250nWb/m; 250nWb/m
becomes 200nWb/m. And if I'm recording at 15ips, I up the fluxivity 1db - instead of 320, I use 355.

And that's my intro to fluxivity.

John D. Columbo