TEAC Monster.....

[overmodulated]

if you mean that the things you do not realize are in my above long post (it might happen) then feel free to ask questions and I will try to give you answers.

and, yes, metal tapes might be a bit difficult to get them right... some of them need a so high bias setting that the deck might not have enough tuning range... who knows if just the maxell metals go a bit out of your tuning range?
Not having any maxell metals, I cannot know how they usually bias.
Among the metals i've tried and measured here, the Sony are maybe the easiest to bias and need some less bias than others, then there are the That's metals which need some more bias and then the TDK (tried the MA from 1990-91 and an Optima IV from late 90's to early 00's) which need even more bias.
What if the maxell metals need even some more bias than the TDK?

You're a pretty modest guy, and yes things in your post that I did not realize

I believe I read somewhere that these were set up for TDK tapes, normal, chrome, and metal. I am going to to be doing a little more experimenting with them. I have a feeling this is going to make a great type 1 tape, and I have several different kinds of them. Thanks again for the post I appreciate it.

 

[vince666]

You're a pretty modest guy, and yes things in your post that I did not realize

I believe I read somewhere that these were set up for TDK tapes, normal, chrome, and metal. I am going to to be doing a little more experimenting with them. I have a feeling this is going to make a great type 1 tape, and I have several different kinds of them. Thanks again for the post I appreciate it.

Actually, I was expecting my post might not be too easy to get at first read (unless such matters aren't just a bit familiar to the reader).
The truth is that my above long post is a true concentrated of informations, which are indeed a bit complex when put all together like that but, really, they do work and happen together while recording tapes.
After all, I spent years to learn all of the above, little by little, and while also experimenting/trying by myself, to really understand what happens while tweaking any of those recording parameters, on how different decks behave with different tapes, etc...
It was a long way to get this level of knowledge and, btw, I am still well into my own learning process because, the more you learn, the more you wish to learn even more.

Anyways, the Z-6000 is a deck from the beginning of the 80's, if I am correct, then, even if you stick to the brand of tapes they suppousedly optimized the deck with, you have to keep into consideration that the tapes from the same era of the deck behave differently than the ones made years later.

But, the point about sticking to a certain brand of tapes (were them TDK for Teac?) is true when you use the "reference" calibration settings (the "fixed" ones which are tuned only from inside the deck) , while a deck like your Z-6000 with such kind of manual calibration where you can manually handle 3 different parameters individually (bias, level, EQ) , does allow you to nicely exploit quite any kinds of tapes out there.
Just, especially on those tapes with the most extreme bias needs (i.e. metal tapes) , it might happen that a typeIV tape with a noticeably more modern formulation than the deck's age might be out of the deck's tuning range.
Maybe, this is what you are experiencing while trying to calibrate that maxell metal tape with not much success.

That said, do consider my above post as a starting point... then, hey, feel free to tell me what you don't find too clear and I will try to elaborate it in greater detail (which usually helps).
After all, I am here and I love to try to explain what I happened to understand myself.
And, no, I am not certainly the super expert you may think about (there are much more expert guys out there) but, hey, a couple friends told me I am a rather good teacher and, after all, I like to believe they are right on this.
So, step by step, let me know what isn't too clear and I will try to make it clearer.
These are not too easy matters but, at least, I guess/hope I should be able to explain the contents of my own posts in a better and more detailed way.

Cheers,

Vince.

 

[overmodulated]

I appreciate the attention to detail, and yes there is a big learning curve to this, and I used to record cassettes years ago. But as time goes by I become more of a perfectionist, so part of being a perfectionist is learning.

You were right about the tapes, and I pretty much use all and I'll Wes cassettes, and there is a plethora of tapes out there, and some of the articles about the different years and types will make your head spin.

Trial and error seems to work pretty well for me, and just a little patience with this deck makes all the difference in the world.

Thanks again.

 

[J!m]

I don't know for this deck specifically, but for many decks, the SA was the type-II standard used for factory calibration. Even when other brands of tape were used for type I and type IV factory calibration.

 

[overmodulated]

That seems to be the norm back in the day, and the more I read the more decks I find that were calibrated with TDK tapes.

not a bad tape to be calibrated to at all.

When I was in junior high school, and high school the Maxell tapes were everywhere, so that's what I used. I still like them.

 

[J!m]

I used them very infrequently, but never had issue with them.

The XL-IIS tape is outstanding. But I never used it until when I got back into serious taping.

 

[vince666]

I appreciate the attention to detail, and yes there is a big learning curve to this, and I used to record cassettes years ago. But as time goes by I become more of a perfectionist, so part of being a perfectionist is learning.

You were right about the tapes, and I pretty much use all and I'll Wes cassettes, and there is a plethora of tapes out there, and some of the articles about the different years and types will make your head spin.

Trial and error seems to work pretty well for me, and just a little patience with this deck makes all the difference in the world.

Thanks again.

I'd say you are just on the right path!
I started my own detailed learning process like about a dozen years ago by also reading all those old HiFi magazines with those test tape reviews, making countless try and error tries, etc... I was also lucky to meet a few experts who turned out to be some generous and excellent teachers, with all those useful hints they shared with people.
And I've got a huge step forward when I managed to learn how to measure frequency responses (with sweep tones) and to measure the MOL by myself, with the help of the computer and a suitable software. It was of great help because I finally could check by myself how each tape behaves on each decks I own here and also at different calibration settings. So, I've put aside one cassette of each brand/model/year I own (like about 150 different cassettes) into a "blank test cassettes" box and started measuring them all in all these different situations.
And the next considerable step forward happened when I finally started to also modify some of my own decks, trying to make them more versatile recorders and/or to improve their performance by fitting different/better heads (with all the needed modifications at the electronics to make the new/different heads work properly).
But I'd say that the most important thing is to just learn how many different tapes behave in different decks and calibration settings and why, because everything starts just from there.

They say they invented the so called official "primary reference IEC tapes" so that all the producers of decks and blank tapes had to stick to these tapes in order to improve the general compatibility (something which would make the user adjustable calibration controls unneded and also making life simplier for the users) but, really, they did never really stick to the official standards then the more our decks can offer us extensive calibration controls, the more we can get a good result on quite any tapes out there.... but the price to pay is that we need to learn how different tapes and decks do actually work.
Otherwise, we should make like we used to do in the old days when most of us simply tried to buy a few different cassettes, try them all and then keeping buying only the few which worked best with out own decks.
But nowadays tapes aren't "currently" available in the shop like in the past then we are forced to use what we happen to own, and a very typical situation is to use tapes of whatever kind and age which might nicely match our deck or not.

I don't know for this deck specifically, but for many decks, the SA was the type-II standard used for factory calibration. Even when other brands of tape were used for type I and type IV factory calibration.

yes, I was also thinking about the SA as the main suspect of a reference used by Teac... but, hey, would it be just that older SA formula which worked at a noticeably lower bias point and which you correctly mentioned at another thread?
By the age of the deck, I'd expect it might just be that older SA from before 1982-83.

PS: Do we know which is the actual age of this Z-6000 model?

 

[overmodulated]

I see the Z6000 was made from 1982 until 1986 according to hi-fi engine. I wish I knew how to read the serial number, and on mine it is 130005 which is surprising. I can't see any way possible that there was 130,000+ of these units made.

 

[vince666]

I see the Z6000 was made from 1982 until 1986 according to hi-fi engine. I wish I knew how to read the serial number, and on mine it is 130005 which is surprising. I can't see any way possible that there was 130,000+ of these units made.

Thanks, I (wrongly) thought it was slightly older, but the actual year when tapes/decks started to heavily change was 1981 because of the international meeting at Prague.
So, a deck made from 1982 to 1986 has to just be considered a "modern" one which sticks to the standards which were substancially the same until the end.

 

[overmodulated]

Thanks, I (wrongly) thought it was slightly older, but the actual year when tapes/decks started to heavily change was 1981 because of the international meeting at Prague.
So, a deck made from 1982 to 1986 has to just be considered a "modern" one which sticks to the standards which were substancially the same until the end.

I was on the fence about the Z6000 and a more modern version with Dolby type S on it. But this was the rarer of the two so I chose it because I thought the seller was an honest guy.

I am having a problem with the counter, and although I am using a 100 V to 230 V converter that also converts the frequency from 60 Hz to 50 Hz it's not working properly. It was suggested to me that it's a problem with the bulb not being bright enough. That's the technician on YouTube that I watch, this guy is a walking cassette deck encyclopedia. The person I bought the deck from ran that idea past his technician and that's what he thinks also.

Not to get off track but the person that I bought it from in Hungary has a Z7000 also, and because the technician can't remember about the bulb he's going to bring his 7000 to the technician and let him check. That's going above and beyond the sale in my book.

 

[vince666]

sorry, who is this guy on youtube who is a walking cassette deck encyclopedia?

on youtube i only saw people who aren't good technicians at all and that, often, show you how NOT to make things. LOL
Don't think youtube is a good school at all.

i met the truly good ones just on the forum.

 

[overmodulated]

sorry, who is this guy on youtube who is a walking cassette deck encyclopedia?

on youtube i only saw people who aren't good technicians at all and that, often, show you how NOT to make things. LOL
Don't think youtube is a good school at all.

i met the truly good ones just on the forum.

I believe he lives in the US, but he is from Russia as far as I know https://youtube.com/@hifirulezzz

I've learned a lot watching him, and he interacts with his followers, answers questions.

I'm not saying that he's the final word in cassette decks but that's all he fixes, and just likes to teach people.

 

[vince666]

never saw any of his videos.
curious to check.
if he is good, it would be the first time i see a good one on cassette decks on youtube.

 

[overmodulated]

never saw any of his videos.
curious to check.
if he is good, it would be the first time i see a good one on cassette decks on youtube.

Yes definitely watch a couple, and see what you think. He really gets into it, and does many posts and walks through his complete process. I enjoy it, he's always posting something and it's relevant in my opinion.

 

[vince666]

was starting with the video where he evaluates/tweaks the PLAYBACK response on a Sony deck.
will watch it carefully after lunch, but i maybe just spotted a substancial mistake.... we'll see.

 

[overmodulated]

Yep like I said he's not the absolute last word on cassette decks, but I think he's way better than average.


By nature I am skeptical of tweaks, and I'd like to see measurements to go along with them, and he sometimes does that. There is an endless barrage of tweaks all over the Internet, and I just don't listen to most.

That being said I've tweaked my Thorens TD-124 table myself, after it was professionally restored. It is an incredibly good sounding TT.

 

[vince666]

still didn't watch that video carefully, but from the few minutes i quickly watched before, it seems the guy tries to evaluate the playback response of that Sony deck by recording a sweep tone (or maybe white noise?).
And then he goes and tries to tweak/modify the playback EQ circuit....

if this is really what he tries to do, this is spreading bad and dangerous misinformation, which brings people learning things the totally wrong way and that he is basicly a clueless guy who feels he can teach to the people.

to be clear, if you evaluate the playback response by recording a sweep tone (or whatever) and then go and modify the PB EQ amp basing your opinion on the recording, you are basicly ruining a deck which was probably OK in the first moment.

buy i will give you more details after watching the video with care and making sure he is really making that rookie/clueless/dangerous mistake.

 

[overmodulated]

I will definitely keep my eye out for that.

What I do know is he brings many a cassette deck back to life, whether it's by orthodox or unorthodox means I'll let others judge. I've learned a lot watching him, and I doubt he's a beginner.

 

[vince666]

I will definitely keep my eye out for that.

What I do know is he brings many a cassette deck back to life, whether it's by orthodox or unorthodox means I'll let others judge. I've learned a lot watching him, and I doubt he's a beginner.

he may not be a beginner, but it seems he is getting everything the wrong way, sorry.

give a watch at this video... you might have the patience of watching it fully, I didn't!
Point is that I watched the first 3-4 minutes and spotted so many wrong information that I stopped because I was literally feeling bad.
then I jumped at random at about 7 minutes and, again, at about 9 minutes and spotted more wrong stuff.
IMO, the guy is totally hopeless but that's not a problem in itself... it becomes a problem when he spreads misinformation around the net, though.

will show you the main mistakes i spotted in the few minutes of this video I watched...

at about 0:47 , he says he lightly lapped the heads which didn't have significant wear... well, even from that low resolution and not too close view of the heads, I can easily spot some wear groove at that piece of metal bar between REC and PB heads and if you're going to lap the heads that bit of groove will go away together with the groove on the heads themselves... then I suspect there is still a wear groove on the heads but the picture is not clear enough to know it.... anyways, my confidence in his expertize is just going to be close to zero.
To get a better idea of what I mean, give a look at this post, where you can see close-up pics of a head before, during and after the lapping process (it was me to explain AlexSE how to do that, btw)...
As you can see, together with the wear groove on both REC and PB heads, also that bit of wear groove at that piece of metal bar in the middle of the two heads has gone away.
https://forums.phxaudiotape.com/threads/head-groove-o-mania.10288/page-3#post-307966

at about 1:14 , he pushes the REC button and the video is talking about tweaking the PLAY response... but, is he joking?
This is a TOTALLY WRONG way of looking at this kind of problem and, then, everything else is influenced by this rookie mistake.
I mean... playback is playback and recording is recording, period.... this is the ABC of decks and magnetic recording in general.
In fact, on any decks, you have to first evaluate and make sure the playback side ALONE is OK and it must be evaluated in itself, without pushing that REC button.
Of course, to evaluate the playback response, you need to own some proper/professional/lab-grade/reliable playback frequency response calibration tape which is a tape with some kind of test tones in it... that tape would be your actual reference and you need to simply PLAY it and then see if the playback side of the deck is OK or not.
After the playback side is OK, you can finally take one or more blank tapes and start recording... but, this time, you will be evaluating only the recording side, not the playback!
The recording side needs to be made after you have just got the PB right, simply because you will still be evaluating the recording through the playback of the same deck which will be the reference to rely on while checking the recording, then if the playback (evaluated alone) isn't just OK, you cannot say anything about the recording.
BUT, what the guy is doing by evaluating the playback while recording onto a tape is just the worst of the worst mistakes I may think about.
That's because he is mixing (well, he is messing really!) playback and recording, judging as a playback problem what it might easily be due to wrong recording calibration or maybe also a tape which is not flat on that deck anyway.
That's just like driving a car while being totally blind: you are still "driving" but you simply don't know where you started from and when you are going to or if you are going off road or crashing against another car, a tree or a wall.
Don't know if you are getting what I mean.... but this is a so bad mistake that, even if the guy isn't a beginner, he would make better to forget everything he think he learnt and restart from scratch the right way... a true beginner is more likely to make a good work than a trained guy who was trained the wrong way.


at about 2 minutes in the video, I can finally see his frequency analyzer... well, the division at the y-axis is 10dB... not that much accurate!
with such a large division, curves will look more flat, then they are more beautiful to see...
while I am evaluating frequency responses, I usually keep the y-axis division to only 1dB or 2dB at max... this magnifies the "errors" so much that also a nice frequency response will not look perfectly flat, but I am not interested in curves which are nice to see... I am interested in seeing things with more accuracy.
if that frequency spectrum analyzer isn't able to zoom-in the y-axis division up to 1dB or 2dB then it means that software is basicly a toy.
(I am using another software, though)

then, after 2 minutes he starts making a few speculations, drawing conclusions, etc... all pointless stuff... so, at about 3:40 i simply stopped because I had just enough of it.

but... jumping directly at about 7 minutes, i see the guy tweaking the response (most likely he is tweaking the REC parameters, since he is still recording) and he does complain about a boost a mid-hi frequencies... well, there are so many tapes which, on most decks, do show some mid-hi boost... so what?

last, I jumped at about 9 to 9:20 in the video, hearing the guy who thinks he can be better than the Sony or Nakamichi engineers, in fact he is going to correct the playback EQ amp (and, don't forget he stated the playback is wrong by RECORDING!) by putting 1000pF capacitor as a load at the playback head or that he did put such a capacitor value on a Dragon deck because, evidently, he thinks the Nakamichi engineers had got it wrong and he can correct them.... but, hey, 1000pF for that kind of purpose is a WHOLE LOT of capacitance, none of the PB heads out there will need that much loading capacitance! Then he is totally ruining some, otherwise good, decks!


Sorry if I am so hard towards that guy.... but I just cannot forgive someone who spreads such bad/dangerous misinformation around the net.
It simply makes all the efforts by the true experts, who spent several years in a forum trying to teach the good stuff, a total waste of time.
People are more likely to enjoy learning on a youtube video than by reading a written post in a specialized forum.
But, hey, till now i've never seen the true experts making videos on youtube and this guy isn't an exception but maybe one of the worst ones I've ever seen.

If you are brave enough to watch the whole video (I wasn't) then, please, draw your own conclusions by simply using some common sense... because it's not simply a matter of having any specific knowledge about cassette decks, those mistakes are so bad that you will simply need to use some common sense to realize it.

On a specialized forum, if someone happens to tell/spread a wrong information, a true expert will likely chime in and correct/explain him.
On youtube, there is no quality control whatsoever on the information spreaded around.

Then, please, do yourself a favour... stop going on youtube while hoping to get any good/proper information about cassette decks... there isn't any or, maybe, there is some good stuff mixed with some bad stuff, all within the same video, and you might not be able to distinguish what is good from what is not.
As for myself, I sometimes watch a youtube video about cassettes to simply have a good laugh on it but, hey, in the end such videos make me really sick, because I just can't do anything to correct or stop the bad misinformation from being spreaded around.


Cheers,

Vince.

 

[overmodulated]

Well that's pretty much picking him apart completely and saying that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

I'll take it under advisement. I've seen him fix dozens of machines and I've seen the frequency responses after he's done, so I take what other people say with a grain of salt. I've also seen him get to the bottom of wow and flutter issues and a plethora of problems that other people would have given up on. Is there someone better? Sure I'm pretty positive there is, but it is what it is.

In other words everybody has an opinion, and I I don't believe much of anything that I hear until it's proven to me.

I don't wish to discuss this any further, I am new here, but I don't like opinions pushed on me too much. Enjoy the rest of your day.