Cassette's Not Dead, Apparently!

[Dave Cawley]

Errrrr this one http://www.bristolshow.co.uk/next_show.lasso but this year of course!

Also here http://uk.cinenow.com/tv?event_id=10...stol-show-2008

Regards



Dave

[Adrian B]

Coming late to this thread as a recent joiner. A couple of months ago I put a freebie cassette (Smokin' Jazz or somesuch) on my Nak 600. I was simply checking that it still worked ok having not played it for a year. What I got was sublime analogue sound which lead to a whole evening's rediscovery of the joys of TDK.

Adrian

[DSJR]

My favourite Naks were the ZX9 and Dragon - toys for the boys, as well as recording and playing back at near the limits of cassette technology (the Dragon was tweaked quite a bit during its very long life and late ones were rather better than the earliest ones, one of which I owned for a short while).

You know, I took the CR7e I had so much for granted (familiarity -contemp?) that it sat unloved on the bottom shelf of a Sound Org TT stand. The Mentor with stone-like solid base sat above it. I'm not even sure I have a pic of it. Down at floor level I could hardly see the CR7 at all. Only when financial hardship (story of my lives at different times) caused me to sell it to a mate for his collection of DSJR cast-offs, together with a mint Revox B77 Hi-Speed mk2 and over a few drinks one Saturday evening, did I look properly at it when my mate was cleaning it prior to boxing it back up (he was a cleaning freak and all his stuff was covered in plastic dust sheets when not in use - I don't alf pick-em...).

For the first time I *really* looked at the CR7 and how good it was.

I feel no sadness at not having a CR7 I must admit and the auto azimuth of the Dragon was easily beaten by iffy pre-recorded cassettes. The machines I did like was the Revox one, which gave loads of trouble to my mate with hardly any use and the later TEAC three head machines, which were heavily built and the last 8000 series models sounded pretty good as well IIRC.

[DSJR]

I belive I have just added a Nakamichi CR7-E to my collection!

Regards



Dave

You're selling too many SP10's......

[niklasthedolphin]

The machines I did like was the Revox one, which gave loads of trouble to my mate with hardly any use and the later TEAC three head machines, which were heavily built and the last 8000 series models sounded pretty good as well IIRC.

The Teac Cassette decks worth going for are the Z- series of which the Z-6000 would be the most attractive to me.
Many would probably say Z-7000.
However, I find manual tape allignments better that auto ditto.
If you have the time, the ears and the skills, you can make better recordings manually alligning up the deck for the tape.

"dolph"

[niklasthedolphin]

Now that we're at it.

Allignment of a deck for a tape when best contains:

Bias for each channel and if more than one speed (R2R and a few cassette decks) also for each speed.
EQ for each speed, for each channel and seperate for rec and PB.
Rec level for each speed, for each channel and for Rec and PB.

Do these allignments over a distance of tape to make shure the tape is stable.
If not: Throw out the tape.
Do these allignments for every recording.

I don't want to debate the decks internal adjustment options.
Let's assume they are set. If not, get it done or throw out the machine.

Azimuth for the rec head everytime you make a recording and every time you flip the tape. Best point on the tape to adjust Azimuth is 2/3 through the tape.

Azimuth for PB head is not really advisable to touch.
Some people do adjust PB azimuth to tweak out the best from tapes recorded on other machines or pre-recorded tapes.
Play these tapes on what ever machine they were recorded if you really want them to sound that great.
Pre-recorded tapes will almost never give you any kick of great listening experience.

Azimuth is a non-R2R gimmick for the user. (It is better left for the tech guy doing the machine)

On great recordings using Cr or Me tapes try to get the best result without using Double ended NR systems like Dolby B, C, S, High Com, DBX I or II and similar.

HX-pro is really great.
Dolby HX is also ok just not as great as the original HX-Pro.
dbx 929 (and was it dbx 222 - a quite rare thing) is also doing a good job if not overloaded.

Some people would refer to these as head Room Expanders.
However, HX-Pro was first launched by B&O, who invented it and owns the patent, as a single ended NR system.
Later on Dolby bought the rights to launch a cheaper and not that sofisticated circuity called Dolby HX and threw it into some consumer tape decks.

HX-Pro is to be found on some of the absolutely best Pro Open Reel Tape Decks.
HX-Pro is sort of Dynamic Bias function.

DNL is another great single ended Noise Reduction system.
Unfortunately it was only found on mediocre decks.

Instead of seeking the highest possible saturation on a recording, my advice is to go for what would read out as 0dB to +2dB on a analog peak reading meter after eq on Cr.
A little less on Fe and a little higher on Me.

If you machine only does VU metering: BAD LUCK
;-)
Somehow it will be hard to translate to VU read out but count on the reading being less than on peak reading.

If needed on some Fe tapes, Dolby B can be activated.
Don't go for Dolby C - unless the recording is non-important.

First of all, there will be a lot of compatibility trouble between machines when using double ended NR systems like Dolby B, C and S.
Second, double ended NR systems are creating "punpimg" due to compression.
Third, Doubel ended NR systems are compromising microdynamics, stereo perspective and other important parameters in a similar way as digital encoding does.

Some machines have incooperated Dynamic Equalization, Actilinear recording technique and other great features and they are really improving sound quality of the recordings.

These allows no switching off.
HX-Pro allows no switching off neither.
They are all ON all the time.

There has been a lot of confusion over HX-Pro and Dolby HX.
Not only in debates online in HiFi communities/foras but also from manufacturer side in what was written on the decks as patent etc.
If it is to be found on your machine and it is possible to switch off, it will be the cheaper Dolby HX no matter what they write on the machine.
Anyway, leave it on all the time.
It does not harm your recording (nor Playback), it only works when recording and it only improves quality.

This post is only covering these subjects "on the surface".
I can go a bit deeper into explaining if needed AND when/if I have the time to do it.

"dolph"

[Alex Nikitin]

Hi Dolph,

You are not quite correct in your information on HX-Pro. I've looked through many circuit diagrams of cassette decks with HX-Pro, including switchable versions, I know exactly how it works, I did design and implement my own headroom extension circuit in 1982 and it was different from HX-Pro as it worked on the sum of currents (bias and HF part of the signal) and HX-Pro works from the sum of voltages on the recording head. HX-Pro (or Dolby HX-Pro) is one thing, "plain" HX is another. The rest is due to differences in implementation and adjustment (HX-Pro circuits in some decks just do not work as they suppose to). "Switchable" HX-Pro should work exactly as a non-switchable so there should be no difference if that feature is there or not.

HX-Pro was first launched by B&O, who invented it and owns the patent, as a single ended NR system.

It is not a NR system. Its purpose is to extend the maximum recorded level at high frequencies by dynamically adjusting the bias. It is more required on decks with poor quality recording heads as these need more HF EQ. For a good recording head (like on a 3-head Nakamichi or on amorphous head for Aiwa 9000/009) it is almost not required. I have better sonic results on my Aiwa 7000 when I switch the HX-Pro off for most recordings without excessive HF content, as the dynamic biasing does modulate the bias a bit even at lower levels and that eats in to the low-level dynamics of the recording.

Cheers

Alex

[niklasthedolphin]

Hi Dolph,

You are not quite correct in your information on HX-Pro. I've looked through many circuit diagrams of cassette decks with HX-Pro, including switchable versions, I know exactly how it works, I did design and implement my own headroom extension circuit in 1982 and it was different from HX-Pro as it worked on the sum of currents (bias and HF part of the signal) and HX-Pro works from the sum of voltages on the recording head. HX-Pro (or Dolby HX-Pro) is one thing, "plain" HX is another. The rest is due to differences in implementation and adjustment (HX-Pro circuits in some decks just do not work as they suppose to). "Switchable" HX-Pro should work exactly as a non-switchable so there should be no difference if that feature is there or not.



It is not a NR system. Its purpose is to extend the maximum recorded level at high frequencies by dynamically adjusting the bias. It is more required on decks with poor quality recording heads as these need more HF EQ. For a good recording head (like on a 3-head Nakamichi or on amorphous head for Aiwa 9000/009) it is almost not required. I have better sonic results on my Aiwa 7000 when I switch the HX-Pro off for most recordings without excessive HF content, as the dynamic biasing does modulate the bias a bit even at lower levels and that eats in to the low-level dynamics of the recording.

Cheers

Alex

I knew someone would disagree here.
;-)

However, my information is directly from the inventors at B&O and included views of the patent and historical explenation.

I believe, with proper research, you will be able to find this patent on the web to clear off your misinformation.

You might be right about the switchable stuff as I did not go through all machines on the market.

The description about the way it works are informative and valid, but the side effect of the way it works is that it also reduces noise.
At the time of the launch, this noise reduction seemed most commercial to the consumers (whom might not have got any idea about what headroom extension was) and that was the reason for the launch as a (single ended) NR system (as if it was).

Another thing was that using MPX filters (for filtering away pilot tones on FM broadcastings) caused many a Dolby B, C and S circuit to go crazy.
This issue was non-existing with HX-Pro.

Your problems with HX-Pro is, and was, not at all present on the Studer and Lyrec professional Open Reel decks with HX-Pro implimented, that I have been using.
You must be able to make adjustments for the system working as meant to, considering your technical skills.

It is not as much for the quality of the heads as it for the quality of the tape formulation.

Slainte Mhath!

"dolph"

[Alex Nikitin]

I knew someone would disagree here.
;-)

However, my information is directly from the inventors at B&O and included views of the patent and historical explenation.

I believe, with proper research, you will be able to find this patent on the web to clear off your misinformation.

You might be right about the switchable stuff as I did not go through all machines on the market.

The description about the way it works are informative and valid, but the side effect of the way it works is that it also reduces noise.
At the time of the launch, this noise reduction seemed most commercial to the consumers (whom might not have got any idea about what headroom extension was) and that was the reason for the launch as a (single ended) NR system (as if it was).

Another thing was that using MPX filters (for filtering away pilot tones on FM broadcastings) caused many a Dolby B, C and S circuit to go crazy.
This issue was non-existing with HX-Pro.

Your problems with HX-Pro is, and was, not at all present on the Studer and Lyrec professional Open Reel decks with HX-Pro implimented, that I have been using.
You must be able to make adjustments for the system working as meant to, considering your technical skills.

It is not as much for the quality of the heads as it for the quality of the tape formulation.

Slainte Mhath!

"dolph"

Hi Dolph,

Here is a link to an article about HX-Pro, what it is, how it works and what is the difference between HX-Pro and "Dolby HX" (not "Dolby HX-Pro" (!) ) - written by the authors of that system.

You'll need DJVU viewer on your browser to open it.

I think it will clarify most points for you.

Cheers

Alex

P.S. HX-Pro on a R2R would be engaging at much higher levels and frequencies so it should have considerably less noticeable effect on the low level dynamics than on a cassette deck (and even there it is only very slightly noticeable). And again - the implementation is very important.

P.P.S. - the site by Alexander Vostokov about magnetic recording is highly recommended - lots of information, old advertising and reviews there - mostly in English, some in Russian.

[DSJR]

If you've got to do all that to make a good cassette recording, I'd rather have a Revox or similar, thanks very much, as batches of r-r tapes stayed far more consistent I found at the time.