To the OP’s question...I was not an “audiophile” as a teenager in the 70’s but became a big cassette fan that continues to this day. Almost all recording at that point was vinyl that was played on a Pioneer Supertuner in my car or on my home system. I didn’t have enough money to buy all vinyl in high school or college but benefited from taping LPs of my friends. Today I own a Nak CR7-A and a Nak BX-300, both beautifully rebuilt by Willy Hermann. Tapes recorded literally 40+ years ago and certainly the ones recorded in the late ‘80s thru today on metal tapes sound fabulous. Not quite as good as vinyl but awfully darn good. Case in point...I recently recorded 40+ of the Blue Note Jazz reissues (many at 45 RPM) that sound great on metal tapes that were new 30+ years ago. No way I would invest the $ to buy all the vinyl but still enjoy via recording my friend’s collection. With 1000+ cassettes and 3000+ LPs, I am very content.
154 responses Add your response
Head alignment was also critical which is why the "auto reverse" feature was often avoided by many. Nakamichi introduced an auto reverse machine that thay called a "uni-directional auto reverse". The playback head was fixed but the machine actually pulled the tape out of the deck, flipped it, and reinserted the tape. The top of the line Dragon deck from Nakamichi electronically aligned the heads. It was always important in top performers to have the record and playback heads independent. The listener could then, with the push of a button, compare the tape recording to the original input signal. |
From roughly the early 50's to the mid/late 60's, RtR tape sources delivered the highest fidelity possible for a home listener. The average home hifi system was of mediocre or worse quality for a long time. LPs were compromised to ensure playback on the average home record player. Most people aspired to a large console, with decidedly low quality components. It was only when the masses began to embrace higher quality home equipment did the average person begin to have the ability to create playback system that was better than RtR. Cassette offered convenience, but it was never a serious rival for the best one could have. It was inferior to LP and certainly to RtR. |
I listened to records then eventually CD's in the 70's then 80's. Back then I taped to gain portability or reduce wear on my records. I did not have the best tape equipment. Life started early with a simple Pioneer CT-F650 then a Denon DR-M2 then a Sony TC-K870ES before leaving audio for 20 years. Now I have all sorts of sources including 75 cassette decks I have collected and restored. I truly did not know what a humble cassette tape could do until I got back into them starting 4 years ago. I have some of the best decks ever made by most manufacturers. I get a great deal of enjoyment from them. It saddens me so many make blanket statements about a format based on limited experience. I myself did truly not know until I experienced better. It was a revelation. I use cassette tapes a lot today... along with CD's, Records, SACD's and digital files. I even have a box of 8-tracks somewhere I have not listened to in 40 years. I realize I am probably an extreme case for cassettes just as others have invested more in vinyl, digital or reel tape front ends. Its all ok. I am enjoying the journey. |
There seems to be a lot of pre-conceived notions a goin’ on here. Or wishful thinking perhaps, or even mass hypnosis. Yes, I know what you’re going to say, “but my system sounds fabulous!” When cassettes were peaking circa mid 90s they were just beginning to aggressively compress the life out of CDs and LPs. So sad that was the end of the cassette era. 😢 The industry wins again! Score: industry 2, audiophiles 0 |
There were a number of manufacturers that made some really nice Halo decks that are coveted today by those who still enjoy the format. Nakamichi comes to mind of course. They pushed the envelope with their amazing tape heads, transports and electronics. I have 12 of their various decks including a 1000ZXL restored by Willy Hermann a couple years ago. I have many of the other Nakamichi models but the 1000ZXL computing deck is the pinnacle for me. I also have decks by Aiwa, Akai/A&D, Alpine/Luxman, B&O, BIC, Denon, Eumig, Harman Kardon, Hitachi, JVC/Victor, Kenwood, Kyocera, NAD, Pioneer/Phase Linear, Realistic/Hitachi, Revox, Sony, Tandberg, Teac, Technics, Vector Research and Yamaha. I have collected many tape decks and learned to perform repairs and restoration on them using the tools of the trade. |
I was living La Vida Loca in Dade county in the mid 70s- mid 80s; sex, drugs and rock n roll. I woke up from a sex stoned night too many times with expensive needles (Fidelity Research, I think) scratching against the inner grooves. I had little choice but to record on cassette to save my records, cartridges, and styluses Also, dade county was, and still is, one of the very worst areas for musical radio programming choices |
I used vinyl to Tandberg 3041x rtr. They sounded indistinguishable from the source at only 3.75 ips. Compilation tapes were a time consuming affair. Worth it back then, but the challenge of not cutting off a song in the beginning of the track was always a challenge. I then moved on to DAT. Cassettes were only good enough for the car. |
Your responses are true and fun to recall. Yes, cassettes started just for dictation, then with improvements and Dolby noise reduction, as a reliable replacement for 8-Track in cars, and people could then make their of mix tapes....but everyone had records first, then taped them, sometimes for friends and then the record companies tried to stop it. Musicians were more likely to buy a reel-to-reel to record their own stuff and once the Teac 3340 simul-synch 4 channel came out to do our own multi-track recording,, even more so. Younger audiophile folks could really enjoy the video "Tom Dowd and the Language of Music". He and Les Paul deserve sainthood! |
Owned a Revox A77 for awhile, but the cats found it too hypnotic to ignore...the *whirrr* of 10" reels.... Ended my 'serious cassette era' with a nicer Sony.... ....then discovered one could use a VCR to make seriously good recordings, near CD quality... ...then CDs'....then 'puters..... What's next? *G* |
asvjerry, "....then discovered one could use a VCR to make seriously good recordings, near CD quality..." Yes, I always wondered whether VCR with a bit of tech tweaking could have matched reel to reel quality audio. Nice wide tape and up to four hours of it in standard mode! Sounds good. According to the following article Ethan Winer didn’t seem convinced, but it’s not a direct quote. In any case I’m not so sure. After all tape speed was fairly similar (cassette 1.87 inches per sec and VHS ran at 1.31 ips). What if VHS speed had been doubled? Twice the thrills? Alas, we’ll never know now. The future must be all about getting digital to live up to all its extravagant promise, and to do that expectations amongst the non audiophile consumers first need to rise. How VHS belatedly re-entered music’s format war https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2015/nov/13/vhs-music-format-war-ty... |
Once Dolby B and other exotic tech came out in the mid 80s tape hiss virtually became a thing of the past. Digalog, Dolby B, HX PRO, HiQ, etc. Look for them. 👀 Blow your mind. 🤯 not to mention the plastic cassette cases evolved AND the TAPE formulation itself. Hel-loo! Cassettes are the only Medium that escaped the Loudness Wars. There is no substitute for Dynamic Range. 🤗 |
I was not into High End back then but had good mid-fi gear. Good RR's and early cassette players had Tape Hiss and later came Dolby Noise Reduction. That reduced the hiss but slightly affected the high frequencies. Some older people may have a better take on it, I was in my late teen back then. BTW, I hated Dolby and wouldn't use it. |
All,
I have really enjoyed everyone's posts about their cassette tape experiences. In the pre-CD years, I too used to record most of my albumn purchases on to cassette, and a few times I even used HiFi VHS. HiFi VHS recordings sounded terrific, but they were not very convenient to use.
None of the posts that I saw raised the matter of Dolby cassette noise reduction and its tracking issues. Dolby B was most widely used (including for retail tapes). It worked well across most players, and even operated pretty well on non-Dolby equipped players. Dolby B tapes still had quite a bit of tape hiss. Dolby C had much better noise reduction, but tracked poorly across different Dolby C players. When not tracking well, it exhibited what was called a "pumping sound". It pumped really badly on Dolby B machines, and even a bit on other Dolby C machines.
I always used Dolby C for my own tape recordings, but if I played one of my tapes on someone else's machine (like their car), -- there was that pumping.
About when the cassette tape went into its sunset period, Dolby introduced its Dolby S codec. I never heard it, but it was advertized as having more noise reduction than Dolby B or C, and being well behaved on all other types of machines. But alas, Phillips digital cassette, Sony mini-disc, and soon recordable CD players came on the market, and I do not think that Dolby S decks were ever very common. Tom Ente r your text ... |
Prerecorded tapes usually sound bad , I only used them in my car. If you used quality metal tapes from TDK , BASF ,and Maxell , you could have a quality listening experience. Dolby and DBX noise reduction systems worked , but I think that you lost upper frequencies. Reel to reels were the way to go. |
tomshults, "None of the posts that I saw raised the matter of Dolby cassette noise reduction and its tracking issues." I think a few of us did, albeit by omission. I for one never liked what Dolby B did to the sound. It was a bit like throwing a heavy shirt over your speakers. Dolby C was definitely better, but still you could hear it messing up the timing somewhat. No Dolby and good chrome tape (ferric was worse in every way especially dynamics and hiss) and it was like listening to a junior reel to reel deck. Head alignment was also crucial, particularly for high frequency and separation. I used to wonder how many people might have been listening to tape with misaligned tape heads. Life before the internet would probably seem slow, strange and frustrating to those who never experienced it. We knew of nothing else. |
I hate to judge before all the facts are in but I might be the only one here who thinks that cassettes are great and often sound better than CDs or vinyl in most respects that matter. I’m not talking about the cruddy ones from the 70s but the ones from circa 85 to 95. Even ferrite tapes are good sounding. I have a lot of good cassettes now and it’s rare to hear noise between tracks and I never hear noise whilst the music is playing. I did not fall off the turnip truck yesterday. Perhaps you guys are oblivious to all the overly aggressive compression for CDs and vinyl. I can’t breathe! 😩 Maybe you guys need a good ear candling. 🕯 |
hate to judge before all the facts are in but I might be the only one here who thinks that cassettes are great and often sound better than CDs or vinyl in most respects that matter.Now you know I am VERY pro cassette tape GK with large money invested in a fully restored Nak zx7. But even I might hesitate to go as far as that statement when you included records as well. |
A lot of hiss and tapes being eaten by a car deck. RR was a much better setup, if you could afford one. Me I lived off of .99 8 tracks from the weekend flea market...your deck eats it, no problem, buy another. We from back in the day lived through Vinyl. All the music was through vinyl. There were some decent rigs, even through the disco era of the mid 70's. |
I listened to vinyl LP, shellac 78s and R2R tape. By 21 years old (1977), I had 10,000 LPs, 3,500 78s and 150 R2Rs, mostly self recorded from LPs and FM (Met Opera). My collection doubled by 35 (1991) except for the R2Rs. Then I added CDs, now at 7,000 with over 1,200 in box sets/collections. I kept buying LPs and 78s until today. I sold 18,000 78s and LPs over the years as I have a rule, if I don't potentially want to hear a recording 3 times annually, out it goes. |
uberwaltz, Remember once cassette was the only way to get your music in your car. One big reason for its existence was to play your favourite LPs on the move. At one time companies such as Alpine and Blaupunkt offered seriously decent (and expensive) tape only units. If you wanted you could go even go active with some Rockford Fosgate amps and subs! To think how times have changed. Nowadays they’re not even putting CD players in most cars! Who wants to faff about with streaming or Bluetooth whilst driving? |
At a reminder from a fellow member I dragged out an old tape of Marc Cohn that I must have recorded mid 90,s. It is on TDK SA tape. Even after all this time it still sounds spectacular, hard to imagine the record would sound much better in my system. Exactly my point cd318. I never had a cheap tape deck that would chew up tapes in any of my cars. If it did it would be yanked out and tossed out the window! Maybe I was a spoiled brat but when I went to all the trouble to make a great sounding recording then I darn well wanted to hear a great sounding playback of said recording even in the car. Yes I had amps and subs in a lot of my cars too....... |
My cassette voyage started with a Technics RS 673 which I received as a gift for my high school degree - it still runs flawlessly, sendust heads, direct drive. It was a "high end" 2 head deck, the sound is still vivid and extremely stable. Actually, the deck that replaced it has over the years more problems with W & F. This is an Alpine AL 300, Alps attack on the Nakamichi throne, a three head deck with test tone generator, level and bias adjustment, linearly reaching 20k. 20k was a status symbol for the top cassette decks, but was reached with tuned resonances in the electronics... It sounded superb, it took extremely careful listening with good headphones to detect differences between recorded and replayed music. Tapes used were Maxell & Hitachi EX and XL-II, XL-IIs, some TDKs and many Sonys. My many recorded tapes (with LPs) still transport the quality of my good LP front ends quite spectularly given the limited physics of the medium. Including the colourful sound of my brothers Garrard "tangential" with a Decca London export... A surprisingly transparent medium provided the source and the recording deck were of excellent quality. These days I listen cassettes on a Sony Wd-6 pro portable deck - it's sonically stll extremely satisfying , and the direct drive mechanism (W&F) hasn't suffered a trace over all these years! |
I know what you mean. I have a Sony WM D3. I have discovered a way to make cassettes sound better by damping they case. It’s called the Mystery Tweak. But I don’t reveal what it is because then it wouldn’t be a mystery any more. It’s very hush hush 🤫 And speaking of cassettes I just spent my entire stimulus check on cassettes. Was that wrong? |
Actually the D6 sold for more than 750.– CHF in the early eighties, the D3 maybe slightly below 600.- CHF. They are built to last, except the tape heads, but the latter seem to be of very durable quality though. So, 40 years later in todays value, in legendary Sony quality of then (they don't fabricate quality like that anymore) would cost as much as many of these "audiophile portable players" in the above 2000$ range, but without firmware & interface & standards obsolescence. So 1500$ is a lot indeed, but still considerably less than what a 2020 equivalent pro cassette deck would cost new... |
| Post removed |
Reel-to-reel tapes really took hold in audiophile-land in the mid-late '50's, when stereo was introduced and it took an R2R recorder to buy and play stereo. R2R decks stayed in many audiophile decks right up into the mid-to-late '70's, when stereo cassette decks started to become good enough (with new tape formulations and eq's) to be "acceptable" on a high-fi rig. At all times during these eras there were both "audiophile quality" pre-recorded tapes sold and a lot of convenience copies of discs. Take it from one who was an audiophile through it all. |
harrylavo, "R2R decks stayed in many audiophile decks right up into the mid-to-late '70's, when stereo cassette decks started to become good enough (with new tape formulations and eq's) to be "acceptable" on a high-fi rig." Yes, and I can't shake the feeling that with them also went the chance of attaining Master Tape sound quality at home. https://www.analogplanet.com/content/copies-beatles-master-tapes-played-ces-and-rmaf-2013 |
A NAK cassette deck ,all there decks were great.Hardon Karman made good ones to.Come on you guys ,they were good.I still have alot of cassettes I play.Prerecorded or one i made from albums.Cheap tapes played on a cheap cassettes deck sound like crap. True just like a cheap turntable ,and cheap speakers sound like crap.i recorded back when i was a teenager ,but the funny think was i always read Stereo Review and kept up grading my equipment. I have done alot of side by side comparisons. My first really good turntable was a Technics SL 1350 with a Shure 100 cart I was 22 it cost me $379.i never had the money to buy state of art stuff.Raising a family and never made lots of money to burn.Im 68 now my system costs like $10,000 ,some closeout stuff ,but to me its Great. |
