Top 10 holy grail cassette decks?
- Thread starter kevinmasters
- Start date
I've just recently (3-4 years ago) gotten back into cassette and I'm like a kid in a candy store. The best deck I own and also one of the holy grail decks is the Dragon by far. Close behind is my CR-7A. But...I have two Onkyo TA-2090's and I'm not sure either of them gives much ground to the Dragon. They're loaded with features including a very accurate "real time" counter and dbx, but I've made all my recordings with dolby C. The recordings made on the Dragon played on the TA-2090, and vice versa, sound almost identical, though the 2090 seems to have a little more bass, which I like.
Stumbled upon this thread by accident. Maybe with good reason so I can correct you all. I went through this thread page by page looking for the answer I already knew. Ladies and gentlemen,most of the music you know and listen to today, was recorded either on Studer Revox or Denon reel to reel !
Studer Revox is mentioned here but not Denon. Besides the amazing Nakamichi DragonC7E, the only other cassette deck that rivaled it was made by DENON !
Enter the Denon DR-M44HX or the Denon DRM 800. It is quiet obvious that most comments here are from USA based forum members through the cassette decks mentioned here as "holy grail". Denon did not really enter the US consumer market with tape decks, as can be seen through the recommendations. Out of all the decks mentioned here,only the Nak (surpasses) and the Tandberg equals the Denon decks. The rest mentioned here are not even remotely on the same level .
My 2 cents worth.
Studer Revox is mentioned here but not Denon. Besides the amazing Nakamichi DragonC7E, the only other cassette deck that rivaled it was made by DENON !
Enter the Denon DR-M44HX or the Denon DRM 800. It is quiet obvious that most comments here are from USA based forum members through the cassette decks mentioned here as "holy grail". Denon did not really enter the US consumer market with tape decks, as can be seen through the recommendations. Out of all the decks mentioned here,only the Nak (surpasses) and the Tandberg equals the Denon decks. The rest mentioned here are not even remotely on the same level .
My 2 cents worth.
phantomrebel
Serial Tapist
Some large generalizations here. Just because a company excelled at reel to reel, it doesn't always translate that they also made the best cassette decks. A few examples: many studio recordings in the 80's were made on Sony equipment (it was either them or Studer for DASH). Back in the early days of recording, Ampex was the shizzle. Nagra made the best portable reel decks, but no cassette. Nakamichi never made a reel deck but most agree they made some of the best cassette decks. The Denon consumer reel decks suck. In cassettes, a Tandberg 3014 and a Denon DRM 800 equal? I think not. I can name a few Nakamichi failures as well. I realize everyone has their own holy grails, but broad generalizations are not always "correct".
Last edited:
unfairlane
Well-Known Member
The best Nakas are in a class of their own when it comes to dynamics in the upper end.
Denon DR-M44HX was one of the wery best in the division under the Nakas. Thr Denon DRM-800 is not worth mentioning in this thread.
Denon DR-M44HX was one of the wery best in the division under the Nakas. Thr Denon DRM-800 is not worth mentioning in this thread.
NH-MAN
Addicted Member
I do not see many Teac decks listed, from what I remember from back in the day,they made some of the best cassette decks. Am I mistaken or does the best only mean expensive. I had a great deck when I was young and I could record an album to a top quality metal tape on my Teac and could barely tell the difference between the two. just my two cents
I've had a few cassette decks and the holy grail should be two decks, any of the 600zx series
and the Dragon. The 600zx allows you to calibrate/align the record heads using a built-in
oscillator and test pots. this yields the best recording. then the Dragon changes the
playback azimuth. if both were combined...
I also have a denon drm800a and it plays some tapes better than my Naks.
it has nice features like playback time and a third head if you're into live monitoring.
and the Dragon. The 600zx allows you to calibrate/align the record heads using a built-in
oscillator and test pots. this yields the best recording. then the Dragon changes the
playback azimuth. if both were combined...
I also have a denon drm800a and it plays some tapes better than my Naks.
it has nice features like playback time and a third head if you're into live monitoring.
Last edited:
steerpike2
Super Member
The B215 comes up a lot, and I do like it a great deal (I have 2, and an H1), but I really love the B710 more. It has an identical mechanism to the B215, but earlier versions have Sony heads, and it lacks HX, but it also lacks any D/A converter level control - which ought to be a bonus.
The real holy grail must therefore be one of the very few B710s made with Hi-com in place of Doby C.
luckyx02
Active Member
You are right the quality of the B215 must be rated seperate in playback and recording abilities. The recording quality is relative poor because the used level stepper IC for internal cal and external recording level. Both huge stepper IC's affecting in a row the quality dramaticly. On the other side will you find not one deck with better playback abilities (no stepper IC used). And this is rootcaused also by his very tricky tape travel guiding. The left guide working like a fork and lifting the tape always on the right track height for the Canon head. So even the common poor shells didn't affect the azimuth. Not many people have noticed this very small, but extreme effective working detail. The drive was built by Papst (inside marked as "Multi Direct Drive" design of Papst), same supplier as for their turntable.
So overall the 710 is simply better. But I like the Canon heads. They sit also in the NAD and are pushed with DynEQ and HX-Pro to the absolute limits of magnetic recording of cassette.
PS: I used one of my NAD6300 with HighCom CN750 (the revisited edition with orange dot on the back) and it makes the most dynamical recordings of all.
So overall the 710 is simply better. But I like the Canon heads. They sit also in the NAD and are pushed with DynEQ and HX-Pro to the absolute limits of magnetic recording of cassette.
PS: I used one of my NAD6300 with HighCom CN750 (the revisited edition with orange dot on the back) and it makes the most dynamical recordings of all.
Last edited:
steerpike2
Super Member
Then the Studer A721 ought to be a machine to have. It is essentially a B215 with manual level controls and balanced I/O.
danj
modern primitive
For me the bestl deck is one that performs well and is reliable, such as the Pioneer CT-S88R that I now own. It's well reviewed upper mid-line deck from the late 80s and hardly state-of-art, even for 1986, but it works great and satisfies me completely. And, no, I am not claiming for it "holy grail" status.
In my day I've owned many decks, including seven middle range Nakamichi models but the only 'holy grail' machine I've owned is a Pioneer CT-F1250, which is incredible, and a Tandberg (I forget the model) which was spectacular but very unreliable. Another friend owned a stunning Revox cassette deck but I never had the opportunity to play with it. It certainly was a attractive machine.
I've known a couple of guys who owned either a Nakamichi 700 or 1000 model and those decks impressed me big time. Not only were they incredible tape decks, they were B E A U T I F U L.
In my day I've owned many decks, including seven middle range Nakamichi models but the only 'holy grail' machine I've owned is a Pioneer CT-F1250, which is incredible, and a Tandberg (I forget the model) which was spectacular but very unreliable. Another friend owned a stunning Revox cassette deck but I never had the opportunity to play with it. It certainly was a attractive machine.
I've known a couple of guys who owned either a Nakamichi 700 or 1000 model and those decks impressed me big time. Not only were they incredible tape decks, they were B E A U T I F U L.
