TDK SA vs Maxell XLII

[braxus]

For years Maxell was my main brand of tape, while others like Fuji-TDK-Triad-Sony-JVC-Denon-BASF were secondaries for me. XLII-S and XLII were the tapes I used the most. Then I got my Tandberg and had it aligned to Maxell tapes. Then I found out some other brands (like Sony) did a better job then Maxell on that deck. The XLII tape sounds okay, but doesn't have the sharpness of a Sony UX-Pro. Same story with the XLII-S. My tech seems to support TDK more due to the fact those tapes don't leave residue all over the heads like Maxell does- according to him. So I've been shifting my focus more on to Sony tapes since then.

Then I got a free tape from a member on another forum which was an early 90s TDK SA. I already have some of these tapes, but was in the process of getting rid of all my mid grade chromes which included this tape. Im trying to thin down my collection of over 800 NOS blanks. I'll never use them all. So basically keeping the best of the best and getting rid of the rest. Back to the free tape.

I made a recording on it for a member since he was interested in hearing some Art of Noise and Enigma. I put that music on the TDK SA. While listening through headphones, I noticed these SA tapes have that nice sharp treble that I was getting from my UX-Pro tapes. Im like- how could this be? The deck was calibrated to XLII tapes, and TDK SA is very close to XLII in terms of how its dialled in. Yet the TDK was doing something the Maxell's didn't. Maybe I'll have to try XLII tapes again to make sure they don't sound different then from before (my deck has been to the tech twice). But this little SA tape sounds pretty darn good for a mid grade tape. I wonder how the SA-X tapes will fare?

Anyone else notice this?

 

[terra1]

I had the same impression with TDK SA 90s in the 70s?/80s. They seemed to have a brighter sound. I was really into cymbals then. Just the same I preferred the Maxell II and IIS. I liked what I would call their smoother sound. And they had excellent shells and looked classy. Plus they were always on sale and came with free cassette boxes. I didn't like BASF, they sounded dull.

 

[Hendrix416]

BASF is hard to bias with japanese decks. They're more suitable for the European decks. Ironically, my NOS BASF LP-35 reel tapes sound amazing on my Teac rtr. Anyways, I do like the sound of TDK SA tapes. I happened to score some free tapes from another website for answering some questions correctly and did some vinyl recordings today and was very impressed. Ditto on the NOS SA-60 I found last year NOS at a GoodWill when I taped some digital files on it.

As for Maxell, I love XLII tapes as well. I find lots of those here and there, but once in a while, I'll score some TDKs. I absolutely love the XLIIS tapes I scored at a GW this past summer though.

 

[Wilhem]

Your comparison of tapes is likely based on differences in bias requirements and the differences in sensitivity that affect Dolby B NR tracking. A tape that is more sensitive in the low frequencies, such as TDK SA, can have a slight boost in high frequencies when Dolby decoding if the sensitivity setting is slightly below the optimium for TDK SA. The reverse is true for a tape with a low sensitivity setting, such as an early true chrome tape manufactured by BASF. (Sensitivity is a compatibility parameter, not a quality parameter, contrary to what TDK advertisements always claimed.)

Slight differences in bias requirement also have an affect on frequency response. If a recorder were set up for the optimum settings for TDK SA, for Maxell UDXL-II, and BASF Pro II, the frequency response for each tape would be identical. There would be an almost indistinguishable difference between TDK and Maxell. The BASF would be slightly less noisy with Dolby B NR and much less hissy with no noise reduction at all.

 

[Bigerik]

Wilhem, you are letting the cat out of the bag about how good the BASF's actually are!

 

[Wilhem]

I remember seeing tape clinics conducted by Memorex, Maxell, and TDK in which sales guys from each brand used high-end cassette recorders to prove that their tape had the flattest and most extended frequency response. It was very impressive. When BASF asked me to do the same--following years behind the other brands--I knew it wasn't going to be easy. Every stereo sales person knew that whatever brand someone was hawking would be the best. So I modified a Nakamichi Tri-Tracer to allow quick and easy adjustment of the bias levels and went into stores asking stereo people which one they wanted to "win." Sometimes I had TDK win first. Sometimes I had Maxell win first. Then I had BASF win. They were caught completely off guard.

Then they began to ask how it worked, and I started a slide show explaining how tape was made, how bias and EQ worked, and how a tape is judged for quality. This was a lot more effective than claiming one brand was far superior to all the others.

 

[SaSi]

I had a bad experience with a bunch of Maxel XL-II cassettes during the late '70s. They suffered a syndrom of swollen tape to the point I could not rewind the tape to a single spool. It simply didn't fit the case.

This made me focus on TDK and my excellent experience with SA and AR made me exclusively use these.

Lately I got hold of batches of newer (mid-late '80s or newer) XL-II and XL-IIs and my experience with them is that they are pretty good.

I'm not sure if it's my hearing going south (I'm 48) but can't seem to find any difference between them in the highs. But I also don't get all that annoyed with tape hiss any longer, even without NR. That used to annoy me a lot when I was younger.