Cassettes are good bets! I definitely have some TDK SA90s somewhere, but can't find any so far - lots of TDK FE90s and D90s. They're all reliable and good-sounding. So glad you can get them at eBay nowadays, but shops haven't picked up on the resurgence yet. Cheers. 🙂
They were a bit prone to shedding for a chrome tape (though no where near as bad as ferric). They sounded similar to BASF from the same period (tuned BX300, Dolby NR off). I don't like 90's and the thinner tapes personally, you could wind up to 73 ish minutes on the thicker tapes and it's just more durable.
Sounds like there is a difference in Azimuth requirements for this TDK SA. That's why the Nakamichi ZX-9/ZX-7 are such great recording decks, as they allow for user Azimuth adjustments of their recording heads.
Ah, the joys of Azimuth requirements! It's like a never-ending puzzle, but hey, at least the Nakamichi ZX-9/ZX-7 have got your back with those user Azimuth adjustments. No more headaches!
The deck is a standard Teac W-1200 as it came out of the Factory. There is no point calibrating to the tape because that would negate the value of the test. It is the same setup for all my tests so that the results are comparable. That is to say . For the standard signal in and the standard Bias etc this tape produces this result. So if anyone tunes their deck to the tape they can expect better results but tests have shown that even with the best decks ( Dragon) the characteristics and limitations of the tape will still trump the deck. ie a noisy tape will still be noisy and a distorting tape will still distort. You can fine-tune it but rubbish in equals rubbish out. see this video for the Dragon evidence ua-cam.com/video/9Dx3qRdY86o/v-deo.html
@@GaryKeepItSimple It can be a number of reasons for that bump in your plot. Well, a notch if you will. My guess it's a tape properties. I also believe, if adjusted properly, with a little bias correction, this tape can give much more linear result. I have never seen bad tape in my life, especially TDK SA from the peak of it's era (1980's to 90's). Mind you, I am in my 50's and not new to tapes, decks and recording. On the other hand I do believe any tape can go bananas if not stored properly or used properly, if deck(s) not maintained well (mecha and electronics) and such. Why only tht result at -20dB? I would go for tape properties and then bias and rec level not being adjusted for full freq. flat response. Or am I misunderstanding something here? Maybe missing something? I would love if you could try testing that very same tape on deck with adjusted settings for that particular tape.
@@Beexzz The thing is that the individual channels were OK it is only when they are mixed to mono. BUT why did the Sony tape not do it? The top trace and the bottom trace I show are from the same point as the distorted one just not mixed and they are looking Very good.
@@GaryKeepItSimple So let me see did I understand you correctly. You are capturing L & R independently first only to mix them together as a 'stereo' plot that you are showing here? Or am I misunderstanding you? EDIT: sorry, when summing both channels (L & R) to mono?
@@Beexzz Audacity is a good program. So I record the track as a stereo track, but the tones are mono. The music is stereo ( Patric Patricos). I then replay the recorded tape into the computer. Audacity is used to capture . This it does in Stereo. but the Audacity, if you use the Analyse functions, it gives a result of the two tracks summed. ( you can split but normally it is not needed) That is fine mostly. BUT occasionally as in this case it throws up some anomalies. So the individual trace is fine and level BUT the summed trace is distorted. Because I always do the tests the same way it means I can point at the difference and say "That is a Tape issue" even if I do not know exactly what the cause is.
This early 90’s era TDK SA was used in “Home Alone 2: Lost In New York”. Out of all of the TDK SA’s from these time periods, the 1979 SA is the best, so does the 1982 and 1986 SA’s those were better quality chrome tapes.
Never had any problems with SA's in all there versions. But to be fair not had problems with CDings which were the cut offs from the bad bits of the SA rolls.
@@GaryKeepItSimple If your deck doesn't have enough bias level (which is sent to the erase head) it might not have enough power to erase the tape. And the increase at high frequency might be due to low bias aswell.
@@GaryKeepItSimple tricking the deck into thinking a typeII tape is typeI is a way to replicate this. If you get the increase in high frequency like here, that's likely the cause
My Nakamichi BX100 was set up for SA in the type 2 slot and TDK AD in type 1 slot which gives great performances
Sounds a good idea
Cassettes are good bets! I definitely have some TDK SA90s somewhere, but can't find any so far - lots of TDK FE90s and D90s. They're all reliable and good-sounding. So glad you can get them at eBay nowadays, but shops haven't picked up on the resurgence yet. Cheers. 🙂
Thank you, we can but hope
@@GaryKeepItSimple: Poundland and Wilko did stock some, but that's stopped now.
They were a bit prone to shedding for a chrome tape (though no where near as bad as ferric). They sounded similar to BASF from the same period (tuned BX300, Dolby NR off). I don't like 90's and the thinner tapes personally, you could wind up to 73 ish minutes on the thicker tapes and it's just more durable.
Gary did you changed the window of the tape deck? I wish I could see the cassette that clear on my W1200 as seen in this video on 4:54
Sorry, but I enhanced the shot to give something to look at.
Sounds like there is a difference in Azimuth requirements for this TDK SA. That's why the Nakamichi ZX-9/ZX-7 are such great recording decks, as they allow for user Azimuth adjustments of their recording heads.
Ah, the joys of Azimuth requirements! It's like a never-ending puzzle, but hey, at least the Nakamichi ZX-9/ZX-7 have got your back with those user Azimuth adjustments. No more headaches!
Which deck are you using for recording and testing? Have you done calibration of your deck for that specific tape in question?
The deck is a standard Teac W-1200 as it came out of the Factory. There is no point calibrating to the tape because that would negate the value of the test. It is the same setup for all my tests so that the results are comparable. That is to say . For the standard signal in and the standard Bias etc this tape produces this result. So if anyone tunes their deck to the tape they can expect better results but tests have shown that even with the best decks ( Dragon) the characteristics and limitations of the tape will still trump the deck. ie a noisy tape will still be noisy and a distorting tape will still distort. You can fine-tune it but rubbish in equals rubbish out. see this video for the Dragon evidence ua-cam.com/video/9Dx3qRdY86o/v-deo.html
@@GaryKeepItSimple It can be a number of reasons for that bump in your plot. Well, a notch if you will. My guess it's a tape properties. I also believe, if adjusted properly, with a little bias correction, this tape can give much more linear result. I have never seen bad tape in my life, especially TDK SA from the peak of it's era (1980's to 90's). Mind you, I am in my 50's and not new to tapes, decks and recording. On the other hand I do believe any tape can go bananas if not stored properly or used properly, if deck(s) not maintained well (mecha and electronics) and such. Why only tht result at -20dB? I would go for tape properties and then bias and rec level not being adjusted for full freq. flat response. Or am I misunderstanding something here? Maybe missing something? I would love if you could try testing that very same tape on deck with adjusted settings for that particular tape.
@@Beexzz The thing is that the individual channels were OK it is only when they are mixed to mono. BUT why did the Sony tape not do it? The top trace and the bottom trace I show are from the same point as the distorted one just not mixed and they are looking Very good.
@@GaryKeepItSimple So let me see did I understand you correctly. You are capturing L & R independently first only to mix them together as a 'stereo' plot that you are showing here? Or am I misunderstanding you?
EDIT: sorry, when summing both channels (L & R) to mono?
@@Beexzz Audacity is a good program. So I record the track as a stereo track, but the tones are mono. The music is stereo ( Patric Patricos). I then replay the recorded tape into the computer. Audacity is used to capture . This it does in Stereo. but the Audacity, if you use the Analyse functions, it gives a result of the two tracks summed. ( you can split but normally it is not needed) That is fine mostly. BUT occasionally as in this case it throws up some anomalies. So the individual trace is fine and level BUT the summed trace is distorted. Because I always do the tests the same way it means I can point at the difference and say "That is a Tape issue" even if I do not know exactly what the cause is.
This early 90’s era TDK SA was used in “Home Alone 2: Lost In New York”.
Out of all of the TDK SA’s from these time periods, the 1979 SA is the best, so does the 1982 and 1986 SA’s those were better quality chrome tapes.
so they were consistent?
As well as their 1987 TDK SA shells!
Never had any problems with SA's in all there versions. But to be fair not had problems with CDings which were the cut offs from the bad bits of the SA rolls.
Thats good to know.
I am not a big lover of the SONY. SA's are always my prefered ones.
I bought a few of these in my local Cash Converters at the end of last year 3 for a fiver.
That was a good deal
I'd have bought all they had at that price.
Me too
@@stevenvandenbosch5528 I did. They've just got some more back in
They are a great cassette .
yep.
Great tapes but you could not reuse them as there was often residual sound from the previous recording. Used heaps in the 80's.
I wonder why?
@@GaryKeepItSimple If your deck doesn't have enough bias level (which is sent to the erase head) it might not have enough power to erase the tape. And the increase at high frequency might be due to low bias aswell.
@@cuoresportivo155 you are probably correct. If the tape type is selected correctly.
@@GaryKeepItSimple tricking the deck into thinking a typeII tape is typeI is a way to replicate this. If you get the increase in high frequency like here, that's likely the cause