Top 10 holy grail cassette decks?
- Thread starter kevinmasters
- Start date
Masterdraco
Super Member
Can i put a vote in for the teac model a-450 built like a tank easy to service best of all ac motor also huge vu meters.
captaingamez
Well-Known Member
your putting in a vote for the teac A-450 for the best HOLY GRAIL deck??????
really?
shouldnt the term holy grail at least mean its somewhat rare and maybe have like, idk 3 heads, dual capstans, options.
c3rx is a great deck, doesnt even come close to the term "Holy Grail" though.
kevinmasters
Well-Known Member
This is great and I've learned a lot! In the end this thread will be a great guide for surfing "steals/scores" on auction sites. In retrospect, this thread should have been what's the best "bang for the buck"? Haha! What I find the most interesting is finding out how serviceable the TOTL decks are/practical to work on. like someone said, if it costs $400 to do a restoration on a NAK from perryinva, then on should thoughtfully consider what kind of deck to buy if it needs repair. I guess you always hope it's just belts and lube...
Derek92994
Active Member
Its always a personal choice and many people will think different, but my 2 cents says best "bang for buck" in my 20 years of messing around with 15 different decks, the JVC TD-V661 comes out on top. I have seen people get these for as little as $5 up to $150. I paid $150 for mine 2nd hand and was still blown away by its performance. Didnt mind paying that much at all.
perryinva
IS it vintage????
The second part of this is very true, and, IMHO, the second best feature of the type IV tape, the first being it's high coercivity, so the signal is not susceptible to time erasure or magnetized play head erasure.
The first part is not true for most any metal made after 1983, or so and is an unfortunate legacy that has stuck with them, like the old "metal tapes wear out your heads" myth. The first, and maybe second generation metals, had these issues to an extent, but any 3rd gen and later Type IV has lower distortion than the same gen Type IIs, and about equal S/N for cobalt doped IIs, but not as good as true chromes, which have their own issues.
Top ten decks is fun, but of course, inevitably, people only include decks they own, as of course, those are the ones they've heard, like the JVC TD-V661 or Teac mentioned. I'm sure they are fine decks, but if it is a single capstan, belt drive, it's just not Holy Grail in any sense, unless we are talking Bang for the Buck kind of stuff. Same same with top 10 speakers, only much worse, right? Also, many don't really know the difference between similar model number decks. The Nak 1000 and 1000ZXL are not even remotely the same deck, except that they are both huge. The ZXL is Holy Grail worthy, the 1000, no way, no how. Historically significant, for sure, but performance and reliability, not in the same ballpark. There is no perfect deck, just as Alex pointed out so well, that pleases everyone as far as looks, price, rep, sound, reliability are concerned. Only the OP can list, in what order, things are important to him. Start with price range, and work from there. If you HAVE to have a real brushed metal silver deck, then no top Nak will do, for instance. The OP can PM me if looking for a Nak or Revox that has been fully serviced and doesn't want to go through the uncertainty of "how well does it work". If he is of the camp that belts and lube is all it takes to restore a deck to former glory or original performance, sorry...not gonna happen, cap'n. Those days are long gone. If I found a NIB, anything Holy Grail worthy, it will still need a good infusion of cash to make it tops, in addition to the insane price it would likely go for. It's all up to what you call tops. I can't tell you how many times I hear how great a deck is, just needs new belts please, and when I get it, it's awful. How do you kindly tell someone that what they think sounds great, isn't even close? It's not being snobby or elitist, but if the W&F is 0.2% with a new belt, and FR rolls off -15db at 18kHz, it's just fact.
Last edited:
jammasterj13
Active Member
Teac 8030s
I predicted this scenario of namedropping with a lot of insignificant mediocre tape decks.
Someone named the Tandberg TCD 3034.
That was one of the worst decks ever made by Tandberg.
In fact, it wasn't even made by Tandberg but outsourced to be made in the far east.
Someone, just two posts ago: "if it is a single capstan, belt drive, it's just not Holy Grail in any sense"
I can go with the single capstan not found on the "holy grail" of cassette decks but the thing with belt drive is soooo wrongly stated.
Same goes with people stating that a recording without dolby NR is not high quality.
Soooooooo wrong.
But it just makes me aware that there are a lot of people here that will stay noobs for ever and a lot of people here has the best of experiences to come. And good for them.
Someone named the Tandberg TCD 3034.
That was one of the worst decks ever made by Tandberg.
In fact, it wasn't even made by Tandberg but outsourced to be made in the far east.
Someone, just two posts ago: "if it is a single capstan, belt drive, it's just not Holy Grail in any sense"
I can go with the single capstan not found on the "holy grail" of cassette decks but the thing with belt drive is soooo wrongly stated.
Same goes with people stating that a recording without dolby NR is not high quality.
Soooooooo wrong.
But it just makes me aware that there are a lot of people here that will stay noobs for ever and a lot of people here has the best of experiences to come. And good for them.
goldear
Certifiable Audio Junkie
Very well stated. I've been having to bite my tongue on a number of the suggested machines.
kevinmasters
Well-Known Member
This is wise insight Perry. I agree with your approach to maintenance. I always prefer a full restoration to routine maintenance. It's a great feeling to know that a deck you're putting into service is ready for years of service. I bought an amp last year that went rut on a waiting list when received even though it worked. It took me 6 months to be able to play it from the time I purchased it and it doubled in cost in the process. I'll never regret it. It went form a "cool deck" to "a deck ill never part with".
Honestly, Perry, a "restored from perryinva" deck is on my bucket list. I'm kicking myself that I didn't swoop up Erik's deck when it was on the block. PM incoming. :thmbsp:
grateful
Super Member
The better JVC decks like the V-661 are in fact direct drive dual capstan machines. They have wow and flutter readings that are as good as the best decks I have measured. under .04%. They are dead flat from 30HZ-19KHZ when set up properly. They will make a tape that is identical to the source in tape source comparisons when monitored on a very revealing system. They are much newer than a lot of the more expensive decks mentioned and tend to be in better shape. JVC decks are very popular in recording studios.
Last edited:
Derek92994
Active Member
Agreed, I have put mine through its paces and I give it a 10/10. If I could afford a Nak I would get one, however I know for a fact that tapes recorded in the nak will more than likely sound poor played back in other decks.
When I record a tape in the V-661 and play it back in my old Denon DR-F7 (1982 single capstan/direct drive), it sounds magic. I dont use dolby, and everytime I have used dolby in the past, playback on another deck sounds terrible. Tape hiss does not bother me.
Example of V-661 recording played back in Denon DR-F7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tFsKge-S9Q&list=UUYcS06faN2o3a6fgS5vgCIQ&index=7
The V-661 is Direct drive but has a belt going to the supply capstan.
Attachments
Last edited:
Derek92994
Active Member
Very true, I dont listen to much classical but I got some tapes the other day, and yes tape hiss is an important factor because of the quiet passages in the music. Ok that's an exception, I would use Dolby C in this case, but playback would have to be in the same deck no exceptions.
Why doesnt dolby decode properly between decks? (When recorded in one then played back in another) Its been driving me nuts for years.:bash:
grateful
Super Member
Tapes should be interchangeable if both decks are properly calibrated. I don't experience that problem. I have 2 JVC 541s, several Aiwa 3 headers, A nakamich RX-505 and a RX-202. I can freely play tapes made from any of those to any of those with great results. I always use Dolby C.
Last edited:
Derek92994
Active Member
I am only able to calibrate the V661 properly bias wise (Bias/Level adjust). The Denon DR-F7 and all my other decks are preset (with a bias adjust dial on some). Its no great hassle, all the decks I have recorded my tapes in over the years are still functioning perfectly because I keep them serviced.
Karl vd Berg
Super Member
That's why I quit with bloody Dolby. Take their "S" type (late 80s) and you'll have max. ~ 85dB of N/R...
Take any dbx NR from late 70s and you'll have perhaps > 94dB of NR...
That's why I limit A LOT my deck wish-list... And it's simple: my 5 euros Technics RS-B608R can beat easily any "monster" from the Sky...
captaingamez
Well-Known Member
I agree with you, I just sold mine, it was zero comparison for my Nakamichi 670 zx, which is not a top 10 holy grail deck.
jvcs are nice, but they never made a top 10 holy grail deck.
in fact, Hitachi came closer, and they didnt make a holy grail either.
some of the suggestions in this list are absurd, like the normal nak 1000 like perry said. the 1000ZXL has to go on this listr no matter how you spin it, period, and as far as I am concerned the dragon too, if not even the CR-7.
everything else that anyone has mentioned in this thread is totally up for debate, including all the rexoves, studers, and tandbergs.
Last edited: