Best Cassette Deck?

[Chris F.]

I'm considering purchasing a tape deck, to replace my old Sony TC-WR570
which recently conked out after many years of service. I see some really
nice Sony and Yamaha decks on Ebay, but of course they go for some steep
prices. Of particular interest is the Sony ES series, with Dolby S noise
reduction. Is there any real advantage to Dolby S (especially when playing
the tapes on non-Dolby decks) ?. Also, which of these two brands is actually
better? There seem to be very few Yamaha's on Ebay these days, which is why
I'm leaning towards Sony.
Thanks for any advice.

--
*********
Reply to:
*********

[Richard Kuschel]

>
> I'm considering purchasing a tape deck, to replace my old Sony TC-WR570
>which recently conked out after many years of service. I see some really
>nice Sony and Yamaha decks on Ebay, but of course they go for some steep
>prices. Of particular interest is the Sony ES series, with Dolby S noise
>reduction. Is there any real advantage to Dolby S (especially when playing
>the tapes on non-Dolby decks) ?. Also, which of these two brands is actually
>better? There seem to be very few Yamaha's on Ebay these days, which is
>why
>I'm leaning towards Sony.
> Thanks for any advice.
>
>--
>*********
>Reply to:
>*********
>

Dolby S tapes won't play back correctly on non-Dolby decks.

The only thing that it is an indicator of is that the deck may have been built
better to begin with, as Dolby was pretty strict about that licensing.

Don't expect a personal reply on a newsgroup unless you link your real address

Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

[Chris F.]

I use it for copying LPs (mostly newer "digital" ones, not many old &
scratchies...). The tapes are usually played back on either on car stereos,
mini-systems, or other non-Dolby decks. I found that the TC-WR570 was a
dramatic improvement, in both features and sound quality, over the TC-FX205
I'd owned before. I rarely used the Dolby "C", as you know it sounds crappy
when on non-Dolby decks.
The cosmetics of the Sony ES are also appealing - especially the wood
sides and real-time counter.
I'd fix my old Sony if I could get parts for it (I'm a electronic tech,
BTW). Something appears to be wrong with the logic control; FF and REW are
both inoperative, and playback is stuck in reverse (though sometimes it will
correct itself it I keep fooling with it). I hate to give up on it, I paid a
lot for it when I bought it and it's still in (otherwise) mint shape. But I
guess everything wears out sooner or later.


--
*********
Reply to:
*********
"Jim Kollens" > wrote in message
...
> Just curious, what exactly do you need it for? A few years ago, just as
CD
> burners were beginning to show up in local studios, I got sick and tired
of
> clients telling me my deck was too slow or too fast. So, against the
advice of
> my pro audio dealer, I bought a Tascam 122 MK lll (can you believe that:
a pro
> audio dealer that actually gives you good advice! Berler in Chicagoland).
I
> think it was about a grand. It is a beautiful machine and you can
calibrate
> the thing. I've never used it once. I've thought of selling it but I'm
sure
> that is just when I'll have a call for it again.

[Dairenn Lombard]

I like the Tascam 202mkIII dual well deck, features dual well
recording as well as high-speed dubbing, CD Sync, Intro check, song
search, Dolby B/C and HX-Pro; recordings come out sounding Extremely
clean/CD-like in quality. I archive tapes to CDs and MP3s for people
on the side and the reproduction is as faithful as I've ever heard.


Dairenn Lombard
Los Angeles, CA

[David Nobel]

No cassette deck I have heard sounds better than a good Nakamichi when
it is properly calibrated; with my components, it is very, very
difficult to tell the difference between the CD source and the tape
during an A-B test. Although they sound best played back on a Nak
deck, the tapes sound spectacular on car stereos, etc.

I have a ZX-7, manufactured sometime between '81 and '84. It and the
similar ZX-9 allow the user to finely calibrate the machine so as to
optimize recording for each cassette inserted: bias, playback and
record levels, and azimuth. The later CR-7A, mentioned earlier in this
thread, permits the same adjustments but automates them into a single
auto-calibrate button. These machines are reputed to be far more
reliable than the Dragon.

Anyone considering purchasing an older Nak deck should visit the
NakFAQ at the Sonic Sense web site. (It hasn't been updated since '98,
however, so the suggested used prices are not current):
http://www.sonicsense.com/nakfaq42.html

And also the Unofficial Nakamichi Web Site (use this URL; the link on
the NakFAQ page is broken):
http://www.naks.com/

[Rob Adelman]

David Nobel wrote:

> No cassette deck I have heard sounds better than a good Nakamichi

I found that tapes recorded on the Nak didn't sound quite right when
played back on other decks.

[Sugarite]

> Then do what I do and create an email account JUST for spam. Search it
> occasionally for responses to messages you post, like this one, and ignore
> it the rest of the time.

I disagree. I think the onus is on the sender to make the effort to reach
the recipient in such a way as can be found and read easily. Simply spell
out the email address like "user at hotmail dot com". If putting the email
into its proper format is too much, then the message simply isn't worth
reading.

And Hotmail serves no earthly purpose. There are tons of other web-based
email providers, and I think we're beyond the need for "easy to remember"
email domains. If the sender can't remember the email domain, read above.

[Sugarite]

> I'm considering purchasing a tape deck, to replace my old Sony TC-WR570
> which recently conked out after many years of service. I see some really
> nice Sony and Yamaha decks on Ebay, but of course they go for some steep
> prices. Of particular interest is the Sony ES series, with Dolby S noise
> reduction. Is there any real advantage to Dolby S (especially when playing
> the tapes on non-Dolby decks) ?. Also, which of these two brands is
actually
> better? There seem to be very few Yamaha's on Ebay these days, which is
why
> I'm leaning towards Sony.
> Thanks for any advice.

Any Nakamichi 3-head deck will cover your needs. The Dragon is the most
versatile but over-glorified and overpriced. The RX-505 sounds as good or
better and is more reliable, easier to fix, and less expensive. Dolby S
isn't widely supported. Dolby B sounds better than C (despite less noise
reduction) and is more widely supported. Denon HD-8's were the best CrO2
tapes I ever encountered.

[P Stamler]

On a 3-head Nakamichi, record Type II tapes using Type II bias but Type I EQ
(120uS) and you'll get something that comes very close to sounding right on
non-Nak tape decks, and despite being not-quite-perfect, will still sound way
better than anything I've heard make on a non-Nak machine. The reason is that
3-head Naks push the internal pressure pad of the casseette away from the tape
and maintain the tape tension via a dual-drive system. This means *way* less
modulation noise (scrape flutter) and much cleaner sound.

2-head Naks, by the way, sound about the same as non-Naks. Only the 3-heads
have the pusher mechanism.

Peace,
Paul

[Cossie]

"P Stamler" > wrote in message
...
> On a 3-head Nakamichi, record Type II tapes using Type II bias but Type I
EQ
> (120uS) and you'll get something that comes very close to sounding right
on
> non-Nak tape decks, and despite being not-quite-perfect, will still sound
way
> better than anything I've heard make on a non-Nak machine. The reason is
that
> 3-head Naks push the internal pressure pad of the casseette away from the
tape
> and maintain the tape tension via a dual-drive system. This means *way*
less
> modulation noise (scrape flutter) and much cleaner sound.
>
> 2-head Naks, by the way, sound about the same as non-Naks. Only the
3-heads
> have the pusher mechanism.
>
> Peace,
> Paul

Thank you so much for explaining this, Paul. I have often heard the "Tapes
recorded on a Nak don't sound right on other decks" claim and never
understood it. I have a two head Nakamichi, and I've never had this
problem - now I know why. And by the way, my two head Nak sounds better
than most three head decks I have heard.

Bill Balmer

[Scott Dorsey]

Chris F. > wrote:
> I'm considering purchasing a tape deck, to replace my old Sony TC-WR570
>which recently conked out after many years of service. I see some really
>nice Sony and Yamaha decks on Ebay, but of course they go for some steep
>prices. Of particular interest is the Sony ES series, with Dolby S noise
>reduction. Is there any real advantage to Dolby S (especially when playing
>the tapes on non-Dolby decks) ?. Also, which of these two brands is actually
>better? There seem to be very few Yamaha's on Ebay these days, which is why
>I'm leaning towards Sony.

What do you want a machine for? These days, hardly anybody wants stuff on
cassette any more, so my cassette deck mostly gets used for playback of
old material.

You want a machine designed for playing old tapes, or a machine to make
new ones?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Vladan]

On 6 Sep 2003 17:09:34 -0700, (Dairenn
Lombard) wrote:

>I like the Tascam 202mkIII

I use TEAC consumer version.

Vladan
www.geocities.com/vla_dan_l
www.mp3.com/lesly , www.mp3.com/shook , www.mp3.com/lesly2
www.kunsttick.com/artists/vuskovic/indexdat.htm

[Chris F.]

> You want a machine designed for playing old tapes, or a machine to make
> new ones?


I copy high-quality LPs, and play the tapes in portable or car stereos.

[William Sommerwerck]

If the tapes are played on such systems, which don't have very good fidelity,
the quality of the recording deck is almost meaningless.

> I copy high-quality LPs, and play the tapes in portable or car stereos.

[Scott Dorsey]

Chris F. > wrote:
>> You want a machine designed for playing old tapes, or a machine to make
>> new ones?
>
>I copy high-quality LPs, and play the tapes in portable or car stereos.

The Naks can be tweaked to eliminate the compatibility issues, but I think
you'll be almost as pleased with the Tascam 122, if you make sure the belt
and pinch roller are fairly recent and you don't use the HX-Pro. The 122s
can be purchased for next to nothing on the used market and they are built
like tanks.

They don't sound as good as the Nak, but neither does your portable or
car stereo either, so it probably doesn't need to.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Chris F.]

The HX Pro can be turned off on these?
I always thought it made a big difference in the higher frequencies.

--
*********
Reply to:
*********
"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Chris F. > wrote:
> >> You want a machine designed for playing old tapes, or a machine to make
> >> new ones?
> >
> >I copy high-quality LPs, and play the tapes in portable or car stereos.
>
> The Naks can be tweaked to eliminate the compatibility issues, but I think
> you'll be almost as pleased with the Tascam 122, if you make sure the belt
> and pinch roller are fairly recent and you don't use the HX-Pro. The 122s
> can be purchased for next to nothing on the used market and they are built
> like tanks.
>
> They don't sound as good as the Nak, but neither does your portable or
> car stereo either, so it probably doesn't need to.
> --scott
>
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Chris F. > wrote:
>The HX Pro can be turned off on these?

Yup. Toggle switch allows you to select Dolby B, Dolby B+HX, or an external
NR box (which translates to no NR if you have no box).

>I always thought it made a big difference in the higher frequencies.

Depends on the implementation and on the tape formulation you're using. And
it also means the bias has to be set properly. I have heard some HX-Pro
implementations that sound almost completely transparent, and I have heard
some that add really offensive pumping artifacts to the top end. I could
never make it sound decent on the 122, so I turn it off.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Richard Kuschel]

>
(P Stamler) wrote in message
>...
>> On a 3-head Nakamichi, record Type II tapes using Type II bias but Type I
>EQ
>> (120uS) and you'll get something that comes very close to sounding right on
>> non-Nak tape decks, and despite being not-quite-perfect, will still sound
>way
>> better than anything I've heard make on a non-Nak machine. The reason is
>that
>> 3-head Naks push the internal pressure pad of the casseette away from the
>tape
>> and maintain the tape tension via a dual-drive system. This means *way*
>less
>> modulation noise (scrape flutter) and much cleaner sound.
>>
>> 2-head Naks, by the way, sound about the same as non-Naks. Only the 3-heads
>> have the pusher mechanism.
>>
>> Peace,
>> Paul
>
>Hey Folks,
>
>If you'll permit me; please let me clear up some stuff up about Nak
>decks. First of all, I have 4 of them: 3 high-end home decks with the
>calibration features, and a car deck. I have the necessary equipment
>and calibration tapes and align all my Naks on a yearly basis.
>The "Nakamichi used different EQ" phrase and "tapes made on a Nak
>don't sound right on a non-Nak deck" are not entirely correct. I've
>recorded tapes on all 3 decks and played them back on other non-Nak
>decks and they sound great ! In my truck, I have a Kenwood KRC-308
>cassette receiver; tapes made on my Nak decks sound fantastic on the
>Kenwood. If a Nak recorded tape sounds poor on another deck, its more
>than likely because the playback head azimuth on the other deck is out
>of alignment.
>Now, the one exception I've had is that tapes made on early Naks like
>my ZX-7, 682ZX, and an LX-5 I aligned sounded a touch dull on my
>CR-7A. I've heard that the early CR-7A's before a certain serial
>number had a nonstandard bias/eq curve, but, I have not yet been able
>to confirm that.
>Also with regards to the pressure pad lifter - all of the dual capstan
>Naks have it - including the 2 head models like the LX-3, RX-303, 480,
>480Z, 580, and 580M. The later 2 head machines utilize a single
>capstan drive and do not have the pad lifter.
>
>Mark
>


The differences are well covered in Nakamichi service manuals and service
bulletins.

The difference arises from the fact that the Nak playback head produces high
frequencies better than conventional decks. The difference is slight 2dB@
10kHz, but it does exist. The problem is setting up the record EQ. If it reads
right on the Nak, it is too dull on other machines.

Nakamichi made "B" models of the MR-1 and MR-2 that compensated for this.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty