• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

U.S.A.'s last cassette tape manufacturer spews B.S.

tomchris

Active Member
Joined
May 14, 2021
Messages
210
Likes
415
Location
Denmark
Edit: MA-XG tapes are going for $135 each on eBay today. Also if I recall correctly they only came in 60 minute length. The cases were made of multiple parts to reduce vibrations.

TDK MA-XG came in 46, 60 and 90 minute lengths.
s-l640.jpg
550x355.jpg
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,834
Likes
16,496
Location
Monument, CO
Does anyone make brand new tape machines?
Many, albeit mostly portable or "boom box" players. But Tascam, Teac, etc. make a few "real" decks.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,554
Likes
1,701
Location
California
I mean, some of the information is true. Tapes do have more "harmonics" - harmonic DISTORTION.
 

Rip City Dave

Active Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2021
Messages
178
Likes
276
Location
Portland, OR
TDK had 110 minute tapes back in the day!

I still have my mixed tapes from 35 years ago. They were recorded on a Nakamichi BX150 from analog and CD sources. I continue to listen to them, because I have several vehicles with cassette decks in them. The Mark Levinson system in my Lexus GS460 actually sounds pretty good.
 
OP
Xulonn

Xulonn

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
1,828
Likes
6,311
Location
Boquete, Chiriqui, Panama
OP
Xulonn

Xulonn

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
1,828
Likes
6,311
Location
Boquete, Chiriqui, Panama
jimi_hendrix_2.jpg
 

chelgrian

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
333
Likes
363
Does anyone make brand new tape machines?
There are a bunch of Chinese companies making clones of relatively cheap mechanisms manufactured until about 2010 by a Japanese company called Tanashin which was the last mechanism company left standing. Even the Teac decks still available today use these Chinese mechanisms.

There are no high quality mechanisms in manufacture today and the knowledge and upstream parts suppliers required to make them have been lost.
 

srrxr71

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 4, 2020
Messages
1,581
Likes
1,243
There are a bunch of Chinese companies making clones of relatively cheap mechanisms manufactured until about 2010 by a Japanese company called Tanashin which was the last mechanism company left standing. Even the Teac decks still available today use these Chinese mechanisms.

There are no high quality mechanisms in manufacture today and the knowledge and upstream parts suppliers required to make them have been lost.
Wow that’s sad. But par the course I guess.
 

mhardy6647

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
11,211
Likes
24,170
Many, albeit mostly portable or "boom box" players. But Tascam, Teac, etc. make a few "real" decks.
I'd say "Quasi real", at best -- given that most of the tricks ;) that made the cassette medium (at 1-7/8 ips, i.e., 4.76 cm/sec) acceptable for anything close to hifi music reproduction (i.e., Dolby NR and/or HX Pro, or dBx) is OOP and/or otherwise NLA today. There may (???) be some generic DNR (dynamic noise reduction) in some of the current decks, but I'm not even sure of that.

EDIT: E.g., I looked up TASCAM's current offering(s) and found this one. MSRP $599 (USD).

1666656574781.png

(note the "play only" admonition on the "Noise Reduction" switch)
... but, hey, it's got a built-in DAC! :)


1666656360646.png

source:

Bears a slightly more than passing, albeit likely superficial, resemblance to my one surviving functional cassette deck, a dump find, thoroughly pedestrian Radio Shack "Optimus" (rebadged OEM Pioneer) dual cassette deck. It does have Dolby B & C NR, though (and, ostensibly, HX Pro, too)



1666657319538.png

source:
 
Last edited:

mhardy6647

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
11,211
Likes
24,170
I'm not really obsessing about this... only sorta obsessing. ;)

Sweetwater sez it has "Dolby B" -- but it's not clear to me (so far) that TASCAM makes that claim. :rolleyes:

check that. Here's the scoop, from TASCAM.
Noise reduction function to reduce hiss during playback (equivalent to Dolby B NR)

I.e., generic EQ, perhaps treble cut, to lessen the playback FR boost on Dolby B 'encoded' tapes -- I'm guessing.
 

srrxr71

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 4, 2020
Messages
1,581
Likes
1,243
Basically unlicensed Dolby B playback. HX pro is a nice recording technique. Basically adjusting bias during recording. No playback “decoding” needed.
 

chelgrian

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
333
Likes
363
Basically unlicensed Dolby B playback. HX pro is a nice recording technique. Basically adjusting bias during recording. No playback “decoding” needed.
The patents on all the analogue Dolby NR systems must have expired by now so the mechanism itself wouldn't need to be licensed. Using the Dolby name or double D logo would still need it.

I guess whoever made it couldn't replicate the HX Pro or recording side Dolby B/C/S

There are actually quite a few refurbished Dolby S decks on eBay for not silly money the only things that go for utterly stupid money are Nakamichi Dragon.
 

John Dyson

Active Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Messages
172
Likes
90
The patents on all the analogue Dolby NR systems must have expired by now so the mechanism itself wouldn't need to be licensed. Using the Dolby name or double D logo would still need it.

I guess whoever made it couldn't replicate the HX Pro or recording side Dolby B/C/S

There are actually quite a few refurbished Dolby S decks on eBay for not silly money the only things that go for utterly stupid money are Nakamichi Dragon.
On my project, an accurate decoder for DolbyA (amongst other evil denzens of audio processing), we made an equiry with Dolby, and was told that there is no further interest, but must be careful with the Dolby name or officially calling the decoder a 'DolbyA decoder'. I sometimes slip-up, but it is in a technically oriented non commercial environment, so they are unlikely to do any more than to tell me to be more careful. BTW, decoding DolbyA material, even when using diverse true DolbyA units (mix and match) is not for the faint of heart.

DolbyA is NOT like DolbyB, and DolbyA will bite you hard if the calibration isn't correct to at least the 0.01dB level, and I get best results at the 0.001dB level. DolbyB/C are a lot more friendly to deal with. (Much of the problem with DolbyA is the MF (80Hz to 3kHz band.))

John
 

srrxr71

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 4, 2020
Messages
1,581
Likes
1,243
On my project, an accurate decoder for DolbyA (amongst other evil denzens of audio processing), we made an equiry with Dolby, and was told that there is no further interest, but must be careful with the Dolby name or officially calling the decoder a 'DolbyA decoder'. I sometimes slip-up, but it is in a technically oriented non commercial environment, so they are unlikely to do any more than to tell me to be more careful. BTW, decoding DolbyA material, even when using diverse true DolbyA units (mix and match) is not for the faint of heart.

DolbyA is NOT like DolbyB, and DolbyA will bite you hard if the calibration isn't correct to at least the 0.01dB level, and I get best results at the 0.001dB level. DolbyB/C are a lot more friendly to deal with. (Much of the problem with DolbyA is the MF (80Hz to 3kHz band.))

John
I heard things about Dolby A but no experience with it. Truly not for consumers. I suppose Dolby S was the compromise.
 

John Dyson

Active Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Messages
172
Likes
90
I heard things about Dolby A but no experience with it. Truly not for consumers. I suppose Dolby S was the compromise.
DolbyS is the simplified DolbySR. I implemented DolbyA at the limits of doing so without violating patents. DolbySR is evil, and I have studied it carefully -- have the schematics and am a high power analog EE. It is mindnumbingly complex when trying to avoid the patents (easily available.) I took advantage of some tricks for "simple" devices like DolbyA to avoid a lot of things, including feedback in gain control loops. Can you imagine the control systems state information to emulate analog audio feedback? Well, I cheated, so have simpler, but accurate design :).

DolbyS is somewhat simplified, and probably good stuff as long as levels are carefully managed. DolbyA can partiallly decode DolbySR. The big problem of the pro stuff is the sensitivity of hearing in the midrange, and so the consumer versions of stuff tend to avoid messing as much in the midrange area.

Sorry for the erratic thought in this message -- ADD on ADD on ADD with 'brain resets' that sometimes erupt!!!
 

srrxr71

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 4, 2020
Messages
1,581
Likes
1,243
DolbyS is the simplified DolbySR. I implemented DolbyA at the limits of doing so without violating patents. DolbySR is evil, and I have studied it carefully -- have the schematics and am a high power analog EE. It is mindnumbingly complex when trying to avoid the patents (easily available.) I took advantage of some tricks for "simple" devices like DolbyA to avoid a lot of things, including feedback in gain control loops. Can you imagine the control systems state information to emulate analog audio feedback? Well, I cheated, so have simpler, but accurate design :).

DolbyS is somewhat simplified, and probably good stuff as long as levels are carefully managed. DolbyA can partiallly decode DolbySR. The big problem of the pro stuff is the sensitivity of hearing in the midrange, and so the consumer versions of stuff tend to avoid messing as much in the midrange area.

Sorry for the erratic thought in this message -- ADD on ADD on ADD with 'brain resets' that sometimes erupt!!!
Oh no need for apologies. I love learning about this kind of stuff. To me it’s all this stuff I lusted after but could never afford. Now I could if I wanted but it’s more trouble than it’s worth now.
 

John Dyson

Active Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Messages
172
Likes
90
Oh no need for apologies. I love learning about this kind of stuff. To me it’s all this stuff I lusted after but could never afford. Now I could if I wanted but it’s more trouble than it’s worth now.
I know DolbyA decoding, I have developed software that can decode DolbyA pretty well, and it is DEFINITELY BEST TO AVOID!!! I hope no-one ever uses DolbyA to write a tape again. It can be a headache for anyone trying to read it. Note that I didn't write a DolbyA encoder -- actually a little easier?

It was great for its day, esp using the same tape deck/DolbyA unit combination all of the time. Mix and match? not so much.
DolbyA noise reduction IS very good, but does leave some 'fog'. Who really cares anymore?
 
Top Bottom