What am I missing?

[dodog]

A short while back someone gave me a Nakamichi CR-1A (2-head) deck, along with a Nakamichi demagnetizer. I cleaned the heads and rollers, demagnetized, then dug around my closets for some old tapes. Sadly, my wife (or me?) threw most of them away. Luckily, people seem to dump these at GW quite often.

I'm really impressed with the deck, it makes some of my CDs sound dull. Question, though, what's the advantage of a 3-head deck? What am I missing? I think this deck is pretty nice, but I'm not really into the tape scene. Should I be searching for something better?

 

[clydeselsor]

A 3-head deck allows you to monitor the actual recording that you are making on the fly.

 

[jan_stevns]

Not to mention : a 3head deck has separate recording and playback heads - optimized for their function. when using the same head for both purposes, it's a compromise

 

[jancumps]

... but you have a great 2 head deck. I 've got the CR-1E(urope), and .
The owner's manual is available at hifiengine (shared manual for CR-1x and CR-2x).

 

[BlazeES]

And don't forget, most quality three-header machines are typically closed loop dual capstan transports which offer up more precise tape handling (acrossing the critical head gaps) and more precise speed control. Take up side (right hand drives) are inherently more sloppy than dual-drives, and you'll see that in the specs.

 

[Oerets]

Tapes played on my BX-1 that where recorded on my Harmon Kardon sound dull and flat . But the tapes sound great on the HK , go figure .




Try recording one and playing it back and see if it improves any .



Barney

 

[fortycoats]

And don't forget, three-header machines are typically closed loop dual capstan transports...

Sorry, that's not the case. The reverse might be true, that most dual-capstan machines have 3 heads but there are way more machines with 3 heads than there are with 2 capstans. Dual capstan is more of a high-end feature while 3 heads are quite common from mid-range on up.

 

[Arkay]

The reasons why 3-heads are generally better than two have been given. The number of heads isn't the only determinant of sound quality, though. Some of the 2-head Naks sound better than some 3-head decks from other brands. Nak engineers knew a lot (arguably more than anyone else, when you consider the innovations in their top-end decks) about how to record and retrieve good sound from tape, and you can hear that with most of their products.

Enjoy the sound of your Nak ... at least until you find a 3-head model!

 

[BlazeES]

Sorry, that's not the case. The reverse might be true, that most dual-capstan machines have 3 heads but there are way more machines with 3 heads than there are with 2 capstans. Dual capstan is more of a high-end feature while 3 heads are quite common from mid-range on up.

You can count em up anyway you see fit. Any MFG that went with a take-up side only drive system coupled with three heads was just cost reducing the design...and it showed up in the specs/end-use performance because precise tape path control was absent. I've modified my original post to say, "most quality" just for you.:thmbsp:

 

[fortycoats]

For what it's worth, I don't agree with modifying original posts after a reply has been placed because it can confuse the rest of the discussion for other readers, especially those who are just picking up the thread. That's just my opinion from experience of being the one just picking up the thread -- nothing personal.

Anyway, OK, point taken -- most quality 3-head decks had dual capstans -- but what was originally said has become a different statement now.

 

[BlazeES]

For what it's worth, I don't agree with modifying original posts after a reply has been placed because it can confuse the rest of the discussion for other readers, especially those who are just picking up the thread. That's just my opinion from experience of being the one just picking up the thread -- nothing personal.

Anyway, OK, point taken -- most quality 3-head decks had dual capstans -- but what was originally said has become a different statement now.

Not so. You quoted me in your response. Hence, you captured the pre-modified version for posterity. I stated what I modified and and is now reflected as such. I highly doubt anyone is going to get confused. And if they do, there's something else going on... I think the bigger issue here is that you felt the need to correct me on the quantitative side of my statement, when the real thrust of what I said was contained later in the sentence, and not modified.

 

[fortycoats]

OK man, there's no "bigger issue." I did feel the need to correct, yes, but only to correct the information that was being presented at the time, not specifically to contradict you. I just didn't want the O/P going out and buying a 3-head deck expecting it to be dual-capstan when it quite likely wasn't. Granted, people shouldn't be buying things without knowing what they are first but they might too.

On the point about editing previous posts, it's just something I wanted to say in general. I've seen other people commenting about it so I know I'm not the only one who feels that way. In this case, true, no big confusion arose. I did add "just my opinion... nothing personal."

 

[dodog]

So.... is my two-head deck OK?:scratch2:

 

[BlazeES]

So.... is my two-head deck OK?:scratch2:

Only you can be the judge of that Bro. If it's meeting your requirements and sounds pleasing to your ears, then you're golden.

Especially if this Nak came to you as a gifty...

 

[dodog]

Only you can be the judge of that Bro. If it's meeting your requirements and sounds pleasing to your ears, then you're golden.

Especially if this Nak came to you as a gifty...

Sounds good to these ears and the price was right, $0.00!