• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

The Nakamichi difference

Vistance

Vistance

Super Member
Hey guys, I just picked up two Nakamichi tape decks today - a BX-1 and a Cassette Deck 2 (That's the model - I thought it was weird too, clearly a '90s era deck). The BX-1 cosmetically looks like it's seen much better days, covered in scratches and filth even after I cleaned it up as best I can whereas the Cassette Deck 2 looks almost flawless. I tested both and they work great, all functions work wonderfully and they record to tape and playback just fine.

These are the first Nakamichi tape decks I've owned - so my question, what is supposed to make these tape decks so well revered? I know they have a loyal following, just trying to understand what makes them well liked. I have a Denon tape deck which was not a cheapy (Was $300 new around '93 or so) with HX Pro and Dolby B + C also a 2 head, and a Sony ES tape deck (Was $350 or so new around '93-'94) with a laseramorphous head and 3 motor transport mechanism that is also HX Pro and Dolby B + C.

These two tape decks in their respective systems have seemed quite decent, but I've been told Nakamichi is really special - that their quality of design was just some of the best. The thing I've been told is that HX Pro is basically the best of how far cassette decks came, so I've found it peculiar that Nakamichi makes nary a single deck that has HX Pro - and when I asked why was told that it was because Nakamichi didn't feel they needed HX Pro and that their decks sounded better even without it.

So in that regard, how much truth is there? Is HX Pro considered good, bad, or personal preference? I've generally avoided cassette decks that aren't HX Pro up to this point, but the Nakamichis were part of a package deal (and heck, I can't say no to Nakamichi stuff regardless - it looks too cool!).

I'd just appreciate some input from the tape gurus - this is by no means an area I have been around to experience the hayday of as when I was a kid cassette was on the way out for CDs (Though I do still remember playing tapes in the car as a kid - not CDs).
 
Register to hide this ad
I have a TOTL Nakamichi deck, the ZX-9. It's the best deck I've ever had (and will have). That being said, my current JVC TD-V711 isn't that far behind. Although that wasn't cheap either when new, its far more affordable than the Nak. So to answer your question: yes, the TOTL Naks are quite special, although the super Revox, Tandbergs, Teacs etc. might be just as good (and as expensive). But the TOTL decks from Sony, JVC, Pioneer etc. are not close behind, and way cheaper.
 
Well, I know the BX-1 was a much cheaper model at around $300 in '82 and the Cassette Deck 2 was $300 in '92-'94 or so. I'm just curious how Nakamichi's more pedestrian offerings fared compared to similarly priced competitors. I found my Denon DRM-540 mentioned on a list of decent budget tape decks that was compiled around '95. I'm always put off by the cheap plastic back on it, but it works well and sounds quite good as do all these tape decks I own. Without sitting down and doing a comparison with the same tape, I'm just not sure which ones should sound better than another - or if they should at all. I don't hear any hiss on my Sony ES or Denon tape decks, the Nakamichi's seem to need metal tapes to reduce the hiss - I play Type I tapes in the Denon and Sony and they have little hiss if any, none that is easily heard by me anyway.
 
I feel that the cheaper Naks might benefit from the name 'Nakamichi'. I don't think that they are superior per se over their equally priced rivals. Yes, the Naks feature solid engineering, but so did their competitors. And most other brands have more features... So one might say that you pay extra when the name 'Nakamichi' is on the front.
 
Well, there's certain truth to that for a lot of things - Pioneer, Sansui and Marantz gear all seem to see a spike in value just because of their brand name, though that seems especially more pronounced now as opposed to when that equipment was new. Either way, I will say the BX-1 feels like a hefty guy for a simple 2 head cassette deck. Perhaps I'll have to just break them all out for a comparison shoot out. The BX-1 may end up serving as a test tape deck since it's rather banged up but plays perfectly.

There is something magical I'll confess about those red LED meters though. Something about seeing those in a dim room that's just real cool. I haven't had any decks from the '80s, but I'd have to say the BX-1 seems likely a respectable one from that era. I've always had a hankering for an old high end NEC deck - along with a pair of the cool and hard to find NEC M-50 monoblock amps with the cool LED displays on the front. Maybe someday I'll just build a dedicated '80s gear system, lots of stuff from that era looks real cool.
 
I am a Nak noobie and have two the BX-300 and CR-2A...they simply sound really good compared to other more common two head decks I have heard...and much better than a Sony dual well you see at the thrifts all the time. You can tell by just listening that these are high quality decks....they make my cassettes sound really good.
I am sure there are some others but I think it is like getting what you paid for...they cost more probably but were worth it in the long run.
 
I own a Nak 480,sounds very good,a Nak CR3,nice but not special,a Nak 600II,nice and warm,a JVC TD-V662:gorgeous sounding,makes very good recordings,a favorite of mine.
My secret tip:buy a JVC.
 
I recently bought a Willy Herman service Dragon and now I understand why the Dragon has the reputation it does. Although it's not as fun to watch as my RX-202.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom