Cassette Crosstalk

TDK was making metal tape right up to the late 90's. I don't recall what makes TDK 1987 stock better or more "real" than 1989 or 1992 stock. Companies were always changing their tape formulations. They got better, not worse. Now if you try to use a new tape on some 1976 cassette deck that might be an issue. But to my knowledge there was nothing inferior about TDKs 1990's stock.

Maybe Mclover you could enlighten me on this subject. I would be interested to know if TDK was dropping their standards in the 90's.

For example, you can record at a hotter level on a modern 2 inch tape then say a Scotch 205 but if you have a Stephens 8 / 16 / 24 / 32 or 40 track machine it will perform better ( quieter) with Scotch 206 or 207 stock. But it isn't that 206 / 207 was superior, just better suited for the Stephens tape machines. But I wasn't aware of cassette decks having these issues.....Or do they?

 

I just use the pharmacy rubbing alcohol and cotton swabs. For decades this is what I have been using. And no, it has never destroyed the rubber pinch rollers. This is a myth! A demagnetizer is just as a as important. Use every 10 hours. For 7 years I kept my two head $175 cassette deck in brand new condition using just the materials I mentioned. Don't play experiment with your heads. Used it on the:
1985 Hitachi (2 head) $175
1992 Kenwood (2 head) $300
2004 Denon (2 head) $375
1983 Denon (3 head) $400 (used $95)
2007 Sony (2 head) $250

 

This cat looks familiar. Yea...Now I remember. This was the cat that did those horrible ELO Eldorado remixes back in the mid 90's.

 

Agreed. New cassette decks are garbage. Go used.

 

I been using TDK since 1981 till today. The normal 120us bias with the white covering came 1981 till 1984 was a real normal standard but later on the formula changed especially with the frosted clear jacket. they wear out so fast. However non comparable to the SA and SAX. (the rest of the higher ones besides the "metal for master cassette recording" I don't use) Maxell was really competing with them in price so they were forced to mass produce in 1988 and later. Its not really all the same result all the time for I know this is we deal with 3M, TDK, Scotch and we know what kinds of media and where they get them. The dark shiny 3M media is always the best on the high positions. they tend to change from time to time but still in its standards.
Most of the cassette tapes today and from where we stand, besides my personal preference which is a high position, I'm not too much concern on the year how they made it and more on the physical looks of it, knowing the history on how it was stored could be your best bet. I have a lot of tdk SA-SAX that's saved up even the later ones which blows away the sound quality of the 1983-85 SAX.
I choose TDK over Maxell. Nothing better or best but I grew my way around it and I have recordings that I made from 1983 and still sounds remarkable today.

 

I feel like were lucky to have the same machine. Its just incredible the way it sounds!
Which reminds me, I got a used NaK BX-300 on a garage sale last 3 weeks ago. Man with a stroke of luck, it was running and in real good shape. I bought a set of belts last Sunday and hope its in the mailbox now. I cant wait to pop it in an finish it all up. I'm gonna use both sony and the nak. for my personal recording.

 

The old ones are really good but the only thing that's bugging me is changing all the electrolytic caps and its like 10 million of them inside. By the time I finish, I'm already 103 years old....

 

TDK standards dropped due to cost and mass retailer pressure. 1988 was a bad year for TDK SA Type II tape, it became railroad crease prone. TDK and Maxell dropped and lowered their quality as time wore on in cassettes. TDK sold out the tape division to 3M/Imation as time wore on and Maxell cheapened and with the last UR range, outsourced it to Panggung. I am commenting on cassettes here. Maxell open reel tape was superb quality to the end of production, while consumer tape, it was always excellent and consistent.

 

The belt kit finally came in for the Nakamichi BX-300. Was so excited and opened up the cassette deck. In 5 minutes, I decided that I wanna take an 8 hour sleep, start fresh tomorrow and do it the right way before I touch this. Looks like Ill be going to a lot of this. the one that concerns me is the from tire. The loading mechanisms and doors is in the way....
The other good news is the inside of this deck is virgin territory and its really clean. kind of hesitant to change the capstan belt looks like its still good but we'll see tomorrow.

 

CCG: Will be doing this with my similar MR-1 and would very much appreciate your solutions. Good Luck. And if you become expert, have I got a Denon M24HX for you...(LOL).

 

Absolutely. When I wake up tomorrow, Ill take a good shower, drink a nice cup of coffee and say a little prayer before I start on this.
Will try finish this BX-300 tomorrow. Whatever is the result Ill take it as mana from heaven...

 

Yes.. Sir.. Riiieh. I got it man...! Dust clean, Deoxit, Lube all pots - switches, change all the belts, clean all the pulleys, clean heads, ,super light oil / silicone grease mixed all the moving parts and gears, double check all screws and align transport and housing clean it. test driving right now with Al Jarreau....
Looks like I'm ready to record this weekend. Happy 4th!

 

Bias is an ultrasonic frequency added to the recording to prevent distortion. 95 - 115 khz. (For cassette anyway) A good working three head cassette deck shouldn't have any problems maintaining a top end. Even my 1979 Nak 581 could track Dolby B perfectly and managed 20 - 20 000hz +-3db. What went in always came out perfect. But some old machines don't cut the mustard.

But an interesting story. I was horrified and delighted to here what mods you had done to your cassette deck.
I often added high and low EQ to my tapes but I only had a $180 (none Dolby HX pro) deck. Even with Metal tape 17 khz was the max.

 

Ahhhhhh! Where did you get all the cool quality blank tape? Damn! Do you make it in the basement?

 

Oh no! I afraid of something like that. I switched to Maxell long time ago. I can't speak for TDK SA but the TDK MA-X were great right up to the late 90's.

 

Acquiring most of it throughout the years including several blanks tapes that were not stored correctly. either its a maxell, tdk, basf, denon... if I open a package of 10 and I found 2 that are not recording right, I discard it. I have 135 pcs of 90 mins. no label cassette that has a TDK columbia and high position media that I got from 3M company in 1988. It doesn't have a cover but its a good thing I store that cassette group on a static free white liner and shrink wrap. I recorded a demo on it 2 months ago and thank god they're still excellent.

 

It does get silly after awhile. Spending thousands on amps. Especially tube amps.

Here is my opinion on tube amps.
1. At current I net a little under $18 000 CAN a year. I get a drug and dental card. In my current situation I feel tube amps are a rip off. It isn't worth the money. And isn't 1959 anymore. Transistor amps have come a long way.

2. If I win $20 million in the lottery (tax free here) tomorrow: I only buy tube amps. They are the best. I don't waste my money on inferior transistor amplifiers.

 

They say the MR-1 has a soul. Great machine.

 

I found a worn 1970 record in the garbage that played back on a dual 505 sounds better than the remastered CD.

 

I was looking at the machine to make the LP.. forget it man. $500,000.00...

 

Been thinking about getting a solid state amp along the way. Don't get me wrong but beside having tube amps today, I went through a few solid state amps. The one amp that got my attention and sounds very dimensional is the old Marantz 45 watts per channel receiver. I was planning to restore fresh but when I open the box it was full of wirings and capacitors that are cobb-webbed. I told myself forget it. I got scared and sold it right away. I like good sound but I cant enthusiast myself in something that I don't know. Which I met a lot of people along the way that has a sought after fisher or old Marantz tube amp but when I heard them play, the bass is loose, the highs are off the signals, basically not dialed and matched correctly like a headache factory for a $5,000.00 investment and sounds worst than a walmart transistor radio... Lol...
I want to look for an integrated mosfet solid state amp especially with the Motorola J transistors or those equivalents. which I don't have any idea if they still make amps like these today. But the parts are still there.

 

I know about bias, after I found the speed trimmer on my tape deck,nothing radical, a 90 minutes tape gave me around 70 minutes of recording time after the speed increase, and i clearly noticed that with Basf's Chrome Maxima II tape I could clearly heard my tape deck was able to record higher frequencies. I then did some testing and I noticed that with Basf's Chrome Maxima II tape after the speed increase I noticed that setting bias lower got my tapes sound better.
This, coupled with my custom equalization and not using Dolby got my non standard tapes (they could only played on my tape deck) sound great.

 

john: the Mr-1 is truly over the top. It's the first cassette deck I have ever heard that, in XLR balanced mode, sounds TOTALLY non-cassette. All you hear is the music.
Quoted you in a post on the New Multitrack thread. Am in the process of setting up my studio to record in analog and have just installed an Otari 5050 BII (best 2 track I could find). Am just now setup to record simultaneously in high res digital (192/32 floating) and 15ips all analog. Am starting to analyze and compare the two and finding some interesting things. The next step will be to locate someone who can cut lacquers from finished analogs. Have some recommendations from Acoustic Sounds and ATR and am looking for others.
OH...and "has a soul" describes the unit perfectly.

 

Funny. Some member on Gearsultz slammed the MR-1. This engineer who had worked back in the days of analog didn't seem to know what bias was or how it worked. He was saying, "The MR-1 put so much bias on the tape that their tapes were incompatible with other tape machines..."
WTF?! I had to go and explain to him what bias was and what it did, because this "engineer" was out to lunch.

Bias (as you know) is the ultrasonic frequency added to the recording to prevent distortion. The machine doesn't actually record the ultrasonic tone to tape. That would be impossible. Even a 1 inch full track running at 30 ips couldn't do it. For cassettes it is 90 - 115 khz. And for 2 inch 24 tracks it can be around 215 khz. Let me know if my figures are out. A tape machine tries to record this super high frequency to the tape but of course it can't. The attempt is what lowers the distortion during recording. Assuming the level of 115 khz (per say..) is right. For cassette we set that bias level with a 400 hz tone.

No bias (ultrasonic) signal is recorded. And no ultrasonic signal needs to be played back. The "engineer" at Gearsultz had some wierd notion. If a $200, 2 head 1985 cassette deck could record a 115 khz tone well that would be news. WOW!! If a quarter inch half track machine could record a 115 khz tone that would be incredible. That is right up into the AM radio band.

The amount of Nak bad mouthing is astonishing. I owned a Nak 581 back in 1980. The machine didn't even sound like a cassette deck. It was like I had a professional quarter inch RTR.

Some guy has his Dragon serviced with whomever. (If it ain't Willy Herman then forget it!) and then declares that all Nak Dragons cut off at 10 khz. My guess is the ***** who serviced it has the auto-alignment going in reverse. Instead of adjusting the playback head height azimuth for maximum treble, the deck instead is doing the opposite. I have heard this nonsense more than once. Do they really think that the flagship deck of Nackamachi would roll off at 10 khz? Even a cheap $170 cassette deck back in 1985 could manage up to 16 khz with Type 2 tape. Or even 14 khz with normal. But apparently Nak's top machine rolls off at 10 khz? GET OUT OF HERE.

 

Oh I know you do. But many don't. The bit was for others..
But (sit down for this one)! many "audio engineers" who have actually worked in the days of analog apparently don't. There was a member on Gearlutz who said in regard to the MR-1, "...The MR-1 put such much bias on the tape during recording that the tapes were incompatible with other machines..." WHAT THE FUDGE!

For those who are curious:
Bias is like an electronic bribe to the tape’s magnetic particles. Without it, analog tape would sound like a digital children’s toy. It's basically a minimum distortion adjustment. Sort of like tuning an old-fashioned AM radio. Too little bias makes the sound bright on top and fuzzy on the bottom. Excessive bias results in dull and dirty recordings. Bias is a RadioFrequency (RF) signal anywhere from 60 kHz (for cassette decks) to 432 kHz (for the Ampex ATR-100 Series) that is mixed with the audio signal. As with digital sample rates, the higher the bias frequency, the better (for lower high-frequency distortion).

Of course the bias frequency is not recorded to tape. That would be impossible. The comment about the MR-1 putting too much bias on a tape is silly. Too much bias used on any tape on any tape machine would sound like crap. The "pro engineer" actually believed the tape was playing back bias. Or that too much bias would make it sound good on the MR-1 but bad on other machines. This is basic analog recording 101.
I am NOT in any way an analog tape expert. I know enough to align and calibrate them at work for recording and playback. And 5 years ago I learned to change a head stack. But i can't repair them if they break down. I am not a electrical engineer. It disturbs me that a "professional audio engineer" from the early 90's can be that ignorant on the basics. And spreading false information.

I envy your ability to open up tape machines and do mods. I could never do that.