The greatest consumer cassette tape deck ever produced?*

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Cowboy Kim, Feb 3, 2017.

  1. harby

    harby Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    The lack of HX Pro is why Nakamichi cannot be a contender. HX Pro is technology to make recordings correctly.

    Offsite, you'll find this thread, so I don't have to type.

    From Pacific Stereo:

    Perry, I too am an audio engineer, and I would respectfully suggest that you have minimized the consequences of the self-biasing effect of high frequencies. This is precisely what HX Pro was developed to overcome. It doesn't mater how well-calibrated the deck is or how awesome it is, because calibration and design is static. Program material is not. Setting bias for lowest overall distortion results in rolled-off high-frequency response due to the self-biasing nature of those signals. The bias setting for best HF response will not result in the best sounding tape because of the distortion introduced by the underbiased condition.

    In a deck equipped with HX Pro, you can set bias for lower overall distortion and still get great highs because HX pro dynamically adjusts bias based on spectral content. Lots of highs? HXP will take bias down. Nothing going on at the top? Bias up.

    HX Pro is a win-win situation. Adding it to an awesomely designed deck only makes that awesome deck even better. There is absolutely no downside. ​
     
  2. jusbe

    jusbe Modern Melomaniac

    Location:
    Auckland, NZ.
    From jwrosehthal, later in that thread:

    'Further testing done now. I pulled the BX-300 and put the CR-3 (that was in the living room system and gets used primarily for play) in it's place in my main system, the Tascam still on the floor in front of the Revox. I set the CR to match the Tascam and ran the same test as above. Immediatly is was apparent when switching between source and tape while recording that there was no change...as in it was true to source.

    I did the walkman test and what I heard was startling. The tascam again...powerful, big sound, lots of good highs and great soundstage. Then the CR3 part came in...and it was BETTER! I say better, but let me clarify. There was slightly less bass and presence but the separation was much better than the tascam, and the detail was amazing...this without the HX Pro on the Nak. Plus, the Tascam was tubby, which sounds like fuller bass, but is in fact just sloppy bass, and the Nak was much tighter. The Cr3 gave me my imaging, my 3-dimentional sound, and far more detail than the Tascam could deliver....I have been overlooking this deck as I thought the BX-300 was a far "better" deck, which it may be if it were up to snuff, but in this case, my CR3 won. So....through all this I discovered that my shiny minty BX-300 needs help, and my beater CR-3 sounds amazing! I still think the HX on the Tascam adds a touch of dazzle to the sound that the Nak can't touch, but that imaging and layering of instruments that I got from my Nak is more than enough trade-off to keep it in the main system and the tool of choice for making my commuting cassettes!

    James R."
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2021
  3. jusbe

    jusbe Modern Melomaniac

    Location:
    Auckland, NZ.
    And from Perry, after that:

    "Let me say, I like HX-Pro. For the reasons stated. It works. And as Pacific Stereo correctly stated, it also allowed a lot of mediocre decks to sound much better. They especially make many pre-recorded tapes quite tolerably good. I stated the trade off between highs and distortion is real...but here's my point. I believe a top Nak will have as low or lower distortion even with a compromised bias setting, than most any deck with HX-Pro. Part is the heads, part is the electronics. The Nak hype, isn't...it is real, the top Naks WHEN PROPERLY SET UP, are freaking amazing. A properly set up BX-300 should be flat within a dB (depending on tape used, obviously) at -20dB input from 18 to 22kHz with distortion under .5%, with no NR. With dolby C you can usually go to -5 to 0db input and still be flat within 2db from 20-20k, with about the same distortion. I am not surprised at all the JWR found there is something amiss with his BX300. If I had to consistently fault anything major on Naks design, it would be the azimuth adjustment design. It's simple, but WAY too touchy. Revox, on the other hand, almost needs a wrench to adjust and it STAYS there, though over time, they all do drift some. You may remember when HX-Pro came out, all the mags had articles on it. So I base a lot of what I state on what I remember (which may be all wet, too). Here's the jist of what I remember:

    The music content above 12k or so is almost nill. What IS up there are the harmonics and decays, etc, that make recorded music sound real. It is also the area most easily distorted by a poorly set up NR or azimuth error. No secret or revelation there. DOuble sided NR is adjustment sensitive, so, in general, it is easier to use an automated on th efly single ended system. It is not an NR system, and does nothing for tape hiss. You know this. Improvments come in layers. Tape hiss is the worse, IMHO, so NR removes it, bt can add distortion. Compression is an issue, so either buy a tape with huge MOL, or come up with a system that fools you, like HX-Pro, by using bias adjustment to alter the bias to allow more signal based on the dominant signal present. But it has issues as well. There is a time delay with the on the fly bias adjust. There has to be. No adjustment is instant. There is no buffered delay to apply the correct bias (or remove it) as the high frequency requires, or as it is gone. It is an averaging system, that takes into account both the level and major frequency component. So it's a compromise. How much depends on music content and tape used. And I am not minimizing how well it works, but to say it optimizes bias for correct high frequency playback while minimizing distortion is an oversimplification. The correct bias level can easily be looked at as a personal preference. Some people listening to the exact same music will disagree on what is more accurate based on how much bias is applied. Heck, there are plenty out there that insist that no NR ALWAYS sounds better than even properly set up NR. Personally, I can't agree with that.

    ..."
     
  4. jusbe

    jusbe Modern Melomaniac

    Location:
    Auckland, NZ.
    I quite like the effect that Dyneq and Actilinear have on recordings on my Tandbergs (similar to HX Pro), but my ZX-7 ain't no slouch either. And the dynamic nature of these systems would seem to have its own effect on recordings too, much like negative feedback designs in certain amplifiers.
     
  5. harby

    harby Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    That's a forum no different than this one; one can weigh in if they feel their choices are insulted by overwhelming logic, want to slight technology, or if they want to cling to manufacturer's spin, just as Nakamichi denied HX Pro for too long to comfortably go back on their position.

    Not inconceivable for the most determined reverse-engineer is a HX Pro (or Dolby S) retrofit, stealing the components out of a donor deck.

    For an overview of what's going on behind the scenes on your tape deck: Tape bias - Wikipedia (needing an amendment; my JVC biases at 210kHz.)
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2021
  6. jusbe

    jusbe Modern Melomaniac

    Location:
    Auckland, NZ.
    Thanks. The history of this is well documented, including Nakamichi's intransigence. No need to revisit that here.

    As I said earlier, I enjoy Tandberg's version of HX Pro. I also enjoy my Nakamichi ZX-7. While HX Pro (and Dyneq/Actilinear) are useful additions, they don't come without other compromises. And I wouldn't be without the ZX-7 because of the absence of such a system. I'm sure I'm not alone.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2021
    macster likes this.
  7. jusbe

    jusbe Modern Melomaniac

    Location:
    Auckland, NZ.
    And for a fun, audiophile interlude - just arrived today (NOS, sealed):

    [​IMG]

    Apparently JVC tape stock, from way back when. Presumably early 80s -ish production. Still some out there, for giggles.
     
  8. Classic Car Guy

    Classic Car Guy - Touch the Face of God -

    Location:
    Northwest, USA
    Its all personal preference. I have both HX-pro to Dolby. I prefer not using it at all. I have many reason for myself why. But I will not encourage or convince anyone which is the ultimate or not. Its all a matter of settings, outcome and just personal preference.
     
    brockgaw likes this.
  9. Rich C

    Rich C Forum Resident

    Location:
    Northbrook, IL
    I have no idea what might have been the best. All I can say is that I had a Toshiba cassette deck made in '78 or '79 that was my best sounding component. All I had was a tuner, turntable and the deck. Well built. It had real nice action on the buttons and the door ejected nicely.

    My other components were Toshiba 50 watt per channel receiver/tuner, Toshiba TT that was similar to Technics at the time, And Toshiba 3-way speakers. When I engaged Dolby it simply took all the hiss AND highs instantaneously. Never used, though I was always tempted and tried it all the time if some music may in fact sound better in Dolby. It never did. That seemed to be the experience of all of my friends as well who had similar set-ups.
     
  10. harby

    harby Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    I've never seen a deck where you could turn off HX Pro. You wouldn't want to.

    Dolby noise reduction is not simply "press button, hear difference". You must select the same setting as was used to record. On a good deck, it sounds just the same, minus tape hiss.
     
    Shak Cohen and sunspot42 like this.
  11. sunspot42

    sunspot42 Forum Resident

    Location:
    San Francisco
    Some people think tape hiss is high end. They can't tell the difference. If you remove the hiss the recording sounds "dull" to them.

    :shrug:
     
  12. Classic Car Guy

    Classic Car Guy - Touch the Face of God -

    Location:
    Northwest, USA
    I don't really need to go to where everyone is going. You could be banking easily by the use of on-line, but it doesn't mean I will do the same. I'm not just another common-follower.
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2021
  13. jusbe

    jusbe Modern Melomaniac

    Location:
    Auckland, NZ.
    Not sure that's completely fair. Though I understand how you got there. I often found (in the 80s) that Dolby was heavy-handed in its application and could significantly dull the apparent response of recording playback.

    Yes, it needs to be all tuned up and so on, but there's important musical up there in the harmonics (like the effect of string on bow), which may well be intertwined with the hiss noise-floor in level. Thus removing one with a blunt instrument such as blanket NR will more often than not, remove the other.

    Important to note that in my experience, this was most notable when musicians or music-lovers shared tapes with each other, made on other decks by necessity. It was less of a problem when I played back my own recordings made on my own deck.
     
  14. Classic Car Guy

    Classic Car Guy - Touch the Face of God -

    Location:
    Northwest, USA
  15. sunspot42

    sunspot42 Forum Resident

    Location:
    San Francisco
    If Dolby is working correctly, it should have no impact on the highs at all. Of course, we know it often wasn't working correctly - that's why Dolby tightened their standards (dramatically) for Dolby S. And I think it's completely fair to point out that hiss can easily be mistaken for more high-end, especially on decks where the actual response begins to roll off dramatically around 14kHz, which is typical for virtually all inexpensive 2-head decks using normal bias tape.
     
    Chris Schoen and Hymie the Robot like this.
  16. jusbe

    jusbe Modern Melomaniac

    Location:
    Auckland, NZ.
    Yes, would have loved to have tried a high-end deck with Dolby S. One from Nakamichi would have been something, I'm sure, if it had been made. I once had. Yamaha deck with it but didn't like it for other reasons, so partner ways. In that instance, Dolby S was not able to overcome or address the tonal attributes I didn't like.

    Your point about basic decks is taken. But I guess this thread is aimed at other decks.

    One thing seems sure: there are still a lot of us who just love tape decks and cassettes.
     
    macster likes this.
  17. Classic Car Guy

    Classic Car Guy - Touch the Face of God -

    Location:
    Northwest, USA
    Talk about a guy that’s fully qualified and knows everything...:-plnktn-:

     
  18. perryinva

    perryinva Forum Resident

    Location:
    Richmond, VA, USA
    Plenty of decks have switchable HXPro. There is a reason for that. The only reason switches wouldn’t be installed is added cost. I’m glad you are convinced that HXPro can have no faults and is always win win. I will respectfully disagree in the case of Nakamichi. Someone already posted my years ago response. Why would any company invest in a technology that only provides a benefit in an area that it is already far superior in, against all its competitors? Especially when they were already one of the most expensive consumer decks available. MORE gains in THD & SOL with HXPro on a Nak? Again, why, IF that is even possible. (THD can only drop so low on a tape based on bias level) I’ve recorded THD as low as 0.2% with a Nak. Show me a deck that uses HXPro and can meet what Nakamichi already did. Otherwise the “benefit” is of what consequence? Basically bragging rights with what result?
     
  19. Classic Car Guy

    Classic Car Guy - Touch the Face of God -

    Location:
    Northwest, USA
    I didn't want to say anything for my own reason. I have 3 decks with switchable HX-Pro. Years ago I found out I don't need it for my own preference. Neither using a Dolby is just a personal preference. See I can crank a several tapes of my Type I collections up to +5db especially when the source is rich and I'm in a good mood. The playback is just phenomenal....
    Good to see you Perry. I'll get in touch with you on message. I could have had a zx-7 today. I missed out coming from work a little late.
    Peace.....
    [​IMG]
     
  20. perryinva

    perryinva Forum Resident

    Location:
    Richmond, VA, USA
    Let’s remember that the improvement in using HXPro is a whole 2-4dB in recording level before saturation. Also, because of the increased linearity of the music +bias signal with regards to frequency, when the tape starts to distort from saturation, the distortion starts off lower (less peaks) before it “falls off the cliff”. This same linearity can also aid Dolby encoding and decoding, depending on a variety of factors. Typically the switching on or off HXPro was related to artifacts that may be heard with noise reduction and metal tapes. HXPro was designed before metal tapes, and well before they matured, and could take loads more signal than I,II, or III. Apparently the boost in HF level with TypeIV at times when in use with HXPro could cause artifacts, when “unanticipated” peaks occurred at the recording level used. I suspect this is another reason why I see mostly later decks with HXPro have the switch, and earlier ones do not. Though some manufacturers seemed to have always made it switchable, from the beginning.

    Regardless, and I have stated this before, HXPro is a boon for most other tape decks, and especially with easily overloaded tapes. More level on a cheap tape is always good. That 2-4 dB gain improved the S/N ratio (if recording level takes advantage of it) against the base level used, allowing recordings to be a few dB higher recorded in a range where Dolby is essentially null, ( so also lowering that source as a possible distortion) while also helping those heads keep the tape energized in their best range. But in the end, its the tape/head interface that is limiting signal to the tape, and on non Naks, the head is usually the primary reason. Why else would identical tapes perform so differently on different decks?

    Nakamichi heads just are able to put more signal down on the tape with the same distortion than it’s competition , or less distortion for the same signal level. Typically well more than 2-4dB difference.

    Whether it is the fully independent heads, dual coils per channel, gap sizes and track widths, material or contours, I am not expert enough to say. They are superior. It is almost impossible to overload a TypeIV to 3% THD on a Nak. Peaks at +6-7dB are easily handled on a Nak with TypeII. A lot of other manufacturers meters don’t even GO to +5dB. Some top decks can’t even record metal tape with optimal sensitivity and bias settings because there is only one sensitivity setting used for all tape types.

    I’m not saying that there absolutely would not be any measurable gain to be made with HXPro on a Nak. But for them, the differences are so slight, it really made little sense.

    I suspect they probably made the same decision about Dolby S, which released in 1989, and didn’t show up in decks until a year or two later. But licensure costs etc and approved deck design were hurdles they didn’t want to deal with when cassettes were clearly already on the ropes and Nakamichi was already on a cost cutting binge with all their premier models in production already designed in the past, and deck production numbers dropping every year.

    I certainly have not heard every tape deck made by other manufacturers out there. It is certainly possible that Teac for instance, whom remained far stronger for far longer than Nakamichi did, in the late ‘90s and even through the ‘00s, with the advances in electronics & technology met or beat what Nakamichi did years earlier, with smarter automatic calibration, etc. I don’t know.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2021
  21. anorak2

    anorak2 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Berlin, Germany
    Anyone know about @john morris ? I hope he's doing fine.
     
    sunspot42 likes this.
  22. harby

    harby Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    JVC TD-V662. Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD. Sony Metal SR 90 minute. 3-head "live" monitoring, -20dB meter level (frequency response measurement point, instead of lowest THD at ~30dB), after deck self-bias and level calibration. Dolby C; Dolby HX Pro.

    [​IMG]

    THD in "source monitor" at -20dB is 0.006%/0.011%. 0.43% at -2dB Dolby calibration indicator level.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2021
  23. harby

    harby Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    Just dialed in some more calibration to ensure I was measuring at -20dB instead of by the lower resolution of the deck's meter. And put sound card into bit-accurate mode instead of mode with some volume boost. Line-in instead of CD in, so channel level trim works.

    THD averaged over several seconds instead of jumping around:
    [​IMG]

    -20dB (fast sweep makes the ringing/aliasing on the left) Dolby C/HX Pro:
    [​IMG]

    20.5kHz +0 / -3dB
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2021
  24. harby

    harby Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    This deck has another "I've never seen" - Dolby playback calibration on the outside, on the back of the deck. The manual offers you a calibration tape you can order, and then tweak with the user-presented knobbies!

    Might be just the trick for old tapes that are losing their signal - instead of turning off Dolby, or going inside the deck to temporarily boost the head amp, tweak the knob. (Or never get it set right again.)

    Couldn't find any full-blown reviews, but you've probably seen the Dec 1980 ad - "HX Pro makes normal tape good as chrome"
    [​IMG]


    (Reading 1980 Stereo Review from just a bit before my time, be amazed at an actual reviews, instead of a pay-for-play 6moons gaslighting about the pace of holistic quantum ions)

    [​IMG]
     
    ispace and sunspot42 like this.
  25. Classic Car Guy

    Classic Car Guy - Touch the Face of God -

    Location:
    Northwest, USA
    Well I thought you own one besides looking at reviews and clipping magazines. I own both HK and several Nakamichi. I wouldn't compare the two besides I use the Nakamichi more than any on (separate decks) recording and playback. Why? Numbers of things just to simplify. Its all a personal preference. I believe I did mention it on my previous post.
    Good luck.
     

Share This Page

molar-endocrine