Lots of preamps, receivers and integrated amps have Tape Monitor In/Out -1,2, etc. which is a very common feature designed to allow a tape loop for recording while monitoring the sound through your speakers. They may also be used to introduce components such as equalizers and streamers into the signal chain as a specialized loop or switchable gate. "Input" = Tape Monitor In/Play. Recently, after refurbishing an older preamp, I had used up all my regular inputs and still needed to connect a couple more additional sources. All that was left was Tape Monitor 1 & 2 on the preamp. I don't normally use these, but have in the past without paying much attention to them. However, when I connected a high-end CD player to Tape Monitor 1 In, I noticed drastically increased fidelity of this input source compared to what I'd heard from it previously and had come to expect, and also when compared to my other high-end input sources connected through 'Tuner' and 'Aux'. This was not something I was expecting from "confirmation bias" or anything like that. It just hit me out of the blue unexpectedly in this particular instance and sounded more detailed and dynamic.
Some attention or monitoring may be needed to prevent a potentially stronger signal from being overdriven in terms of what you find to be a "safe" SPL for listening. When you connect your main listening source to a Tape Monitor In, the tone controls, balance, and input buffering may be completely removed from the circuit (according to some circuit designs), similar to the effect of a "source direct" or "tone bypass" feature. The signal path often becomes shorter and more direct, and the input impedance may be reduced with less distortion and attenuation. These inputs are often unity gain (higher input voltage passes directly through as a louder output) and allows for a much cleaner, higher-fidelity sound source than other input sources such as 'Tuner' or 'Aux' -while also potentially increasing the SNR compared to using other input sources.
While this is all already "known" and "established", (to an extent) since Tape Monitor has been around forever, the idea that these inputs may be prioritized for higher-fidelity listening seems to have largely passed by the wayside or gone unnoticed without enough focus or attention paid to it. Because of this, these "higher-fidelity" input sources (I'll call them) can be prioritized and used to your advantage when you know how they're often different (and sometimes superior) in certain ways. If you want to hear the best your equipment has to offer, it's likely going to be heard through your Tape Monitor Inputs -if it has them. After realizing this, I went back and prioritized my favorite sources into the Tape Monitor inputs of all my favorite equipment and was pleasantly greeted with better sound heard through all of them compared to before while keeping listening volumes normal and within a reasonable limit. These inputs don't "add" anything magical to the signal, they simply minimize the adverse or detrimental effects of other associated components, signal paths and circuit design that are normally involved when listening through regular input sources.
However, this is just my particular scenario and every circuit design may be different offering a variable amount of improvement, or no improvement at all. For me, the sound became fuller, cleaner, and more detailed than what was heard before. It's a worthwhile experiment if you're able to monitor your levels and are able to proceed with some caution and sensibility. You may find you're now getting the best sound you've ever heard from some of your favorite equipment.
It could be an interesting experiment and a prioritization everyone should at least "try" (which can be easily undone) that has equipment using Tape Monitor In. In many instances, better performance is being needlessly left on the table without anyone acknowledging or even realizing it. This could apply to many, many people. I think the extent to which a difference will be heard is going to be variable depending on the circuit design, quality of the preamp/ receiver, quality of the source component and its supporting system to highlight these differences with some equipment likely showing no difference at all.
Long story short, if you have a device that has Tape Monitor inputs, you may wish to take advantage of them and prioritize them instead of neglecting them by making sure those inputs are prioritized first for your favorite listening sources. However, up until that point which may or may not be reached, the sound may be cleaner and purer (by comparison) from shortening the signal path of these sources and all the circuitry and components they must normally pass through. Also, some tone controls cannot be bypassed in certain equipment, and for this equipment, the increased sound quality effect of using Tape Monitor In may be increased even further for equipment using non-defeatable tone controls. I use a mastering processor that monitors I/O voltage levels which allows a real-time check that I'm not pushing the signal into overdrive or compression when I turn the volume up. For normal listening volumes, I have found that I do not get close to pushing the signal too far to reach this point.
So now, the priority has switched for me. Tape Monitor 1 & 2 now get my best, most used source components that I want to showcase and highlight; while the regular inputs
I'd always been using like "Aux" and "Tuner" have now been downgraded in terms of their utility or priority for sources I don't use as often or care about as much. This is the way it should be, but is backwards or opposite from the status quo or conventional way of thinking.
Here's a video that explains some difference in a Tape circuit in an old Sony receiver which lead to a better sound heard from a CD player which was interesting as it was the first video that popped up when I looked into different sound heard through various inputs on youtube. Fast-forward to around 5:15 or so. It's just an example how the tape input doesn't always follow the same circuit path as other inputs and sometimes bypasses entire circuit sections altogether.
Some attention or monitoring may be needed to prevent a potentially stronger signal from being overdriven in terms of what you find to be a "safe" SPL for listening. When you connect your main listening source to a Tape Monitor In, the tone controls, balance, and input buffering may be completely removed from the circuit (according to some circuit designs), similar to the effect of a "source direct" or "tone bypass" feature. The signal path often becomes shorter and more direct, and the input impedance may be reduced with less distortion and attenuation. These inputs are often unity gain (higher input voltage passes directly through as a louder output) and allows for a much cleaner, higher-fidelity sound source than other input sources such as 'Tuner' or 'Aux' -while also potentially increasing the SNR compared to using other input sources.
While this is all already "known" and "established", (to an extent) since Tape Monitor has been around forever, the idea that these inputs may be prioritized for higher-fidelity listening seems to have largely passed by the wayside or gone unnoticed without enough focus or attention paid to it. Because of this, these "higher-fidelity" input sources (I'll call them) can be prioritized and used to your advantage when you know how they're often different (and sometimes superior) in certain ways. If you want to hear the best your equipment has to offer, it's likely going to be heard through your Tape Monitor Inputs -if it has them. After realizing this, I went back and prioritized my favorite sources into the Tape Monitor inputs of all my favorite equipment and was pleasantly greeted with better sound heard through all of them compared to before while keeping listening volumes normal and within a reasonable limit. These inputs don't "add" anything magical to the signal, they simply minimize the adverse or detrimental effects of other associated components, signal paths and circuit design that are normally involved when listening through regular input sources.
However, this is just my particular scenario and every circuit design may be different offering a variable amount of improvement, or no improvement at all. For me, the sound became fuller, cleaner, and more detailed than what was heard before. It's a worthwhile experiment if you're able to monitor your levels and are able to proceed with some caution and sensibility. You may find you're now getting the best sound you've ever heard from some of your favorite equipment.
It could be an interesting experiment and a prioritization everyone should at least "try" (which can be easily undone) that has equipment using Tape Monitor In. In many instances, better performance is being needlessly left on the table without anyone acknowledging or even realizing it. This could apply to many, many people. I think the extent to which a difference will be heard is going to be variable depending on the circuit design, quality of the preamp/ receiver, quality of the source component and its supporting system to highlight these differences with some equipment likely showing no difference at all.
Long story short, if you have a device that has Tape Monitor inputs, you may wish to take advantage of them and prioritize them instead of neglecting them by making sure those inputs are prioritized first for your favorite listening sources. However, up until that point which may or may not be reached, the sound may be cleaner and purer (by comparison) from shortening the signal path of these sources and all the circuitry and components they must normally pass through. Also, some tone controls cannot be bypassed in certain equipment, and for this equipment, the increased sound quality effect of using Tape Monitor In may be increased even further for equipment using non-defeatable tone controls. I use a mastering processor that monitors I/O voltage levels which allows a real-time check that I'm not pushing the signal into overdrive or compression when I turn the volume up. For normal listening volumes, I have found that I do not get close to pushing the signal too far to reach this point.
So now, the priority has switched for me. Tape Monitor 1 & 2 now get my best, most used source components that I want to showcase and highlight; while the regular inputs
I'd always been using like "Aux" and "Tuner" have now been downgraded in terms of their utility or priority for sources I don't use as often or care about as much. This is the way it should be, but is backwards or opposite from the status quo or conventional way of thinking.
Here's a video that explains some difference in a Tape circuit in an old Sony receiver which lead to a better sound heard from a CD player which was interesting as it was the first video that popped up when I looked into different sound heard through various inputs on youtube. Fast-forward to around 5:15 or so. It's just an example how the tape input doesn't always follow the same circuit path as other inputs and sometimes bypasses entire circuit sections altogether.
Last edited:
