Discussion about vintage cassette tape degradation

Joined
Dec 31, 2022
Messages
387
Location
East Coast
#1
Hi everyone, I’ve been doing a lot of cassette recording on my home stereo lately. I usually make recordings from Tidal either CD quality or hi-res, I don’t really buy into the high resolution music thing, I think that CD quality is about as good as I can hear, but I do like the fact that my Topping D50III DAC let me know if it’s high resolution or not. I feed that through an optical cable with the Wiim mini. Going through my Marantz 2385 receiver, or directly into my A&D GX-Z9100 just back from service, speakers are a nice pair of original Klipsch Forte 1’s with Crites Audio crossovers. I’ve had other gear, including lower end Wilson speakers and super high wattage amplifiers, separate everything, but this is where I ended up after downsizing and I’m very happy. With the right cassette it’s pretty indistinguishable between source and tape, except in between songs you can hear the hiss of course. I use Dolby HX PRO for recording, but I do not care for any type of noise reduction, that’s just personal preference.​
So… I was always a big Maxell XL II fan, and when I was younger I pretty much used exclusively those tapes, although I didn’t have the kind of deck that I do now, and mostly played them through a Craig power play cassette deck in my car. Who remembers those? They were a high-powered deck that blinked power-play when you cranked it up lol.​

Recently I acquired a bunch of used mid 80s chrome Maxells, and I’ve just gotten around to putting some recordings on them. Here’s what I want to talk about, the fact that I think them being recorded on once or twice doesn’t really have any effect on sound, but the way they are stored, and how they’ve aged definitely is a factor. These are the crayon smelling chromes, whether they are pure chrome or not I do not know. They don’t seem to age well, I’m having a hard time biasing them, and although they sound good to my ears, it’s always in the back of my head about the tape itself degrading. These are from a couple of different batches, and purchased at different times, but all have been bought within the last three years.​
As far as true chrome tapes go it seems that in my experience, the BASF super chromes seem to age better, I have less trouble biasing them, and they also sound outstanding. The Denon HD8 chrome seems a little harder to bias on my machine, and I’m not so sure that the ones that I have are very stable, although they sound very good. So far the Maxell and BASF chromes sound better, even though as I stated above I think the Maxell tapes are degrading somewhat. There is also a faint crayon smell from a Sony UX tape from the later 90s that I’m using right now and I’ll tell you what, it sounds very very good even after what I read online about the later Sony tapes. It biased perfectly, almost right on the center detents of the bias and level controls.​
I believe the Sony UX which is 12 to 15 years newer than the other tapes I’ve used, sounds so good because it is less degraded because of age. I know some people swear by Sony tapes, and they were just not as plentiful when I was younger, so I always went with what I saw for sale. Maxells where huge in the US from around 1979 on, and TDK the same to some extent.​
What are you all think about my thoughts on cassette tapes degrading, and the later ones sounding better because they have not degraded as much?​
Or;​
Is that Sony UX tape just on par with the other chromes? Like I said it does have a faint crayon smell, so I’m assuming there’s some chrome in there.​
I also have some mid to later 90’s (used and sealed) Maxell XL II tapes that are definitely not pure chrome, and they also sound very good and bias much easier.​
 
Last edited:

J!m

Veteran and General Yakker
Joined
Dec 24, 2019
Messages
11,087
Location
Connecticut
Tagline
BOT
#2
First, I would guess the crayon smell is in the binder and not in the metallic content of any particular tape. I suspect the technology was far and wide early on and as things matured, everyone sort of figured out the best "recipe" for binders. Metals (and oxides) don't really have a smell at room temp.

My experience then, and now, has been with TDK. I recently mentioned a SA tape I recorded in ~1985 or so that still plays well to this day. It has had very dubious storage for a decade or so, but always in my "care". It also was not recorded to the absolute limits of the tape but still sounds good.

I also did a huge spreadsheet at the other site going through a huge lot of used SA tapes I picked up- all generations and totally unknown storage and/or number of recordings per tape. It was focused on how TDK "always" railroad or some nonsense based in fable, not fact. I provided the facts to back up what I knew. (some did show railroading but the percentage was quite low, and I think the fable is based on the sheer number of TDK tapes sold as compared to other brands)

Another thing that came out of that huge lot was the fact that once the SA stabilized (1984 and newer- indicated by the color getting darker), they biased almost identically across the board from 84 to the last welded blue shell nightmares in the 90's (or whenever those came out). That blue shell tape could be transplanted into an early case, and you'd have an early tape. That was an eye opener for me, and totally unexpected. SA was a "lab standard" type-II for many years, and it was incredibly consistent. Maybe not the "best" by whatever measure, but consistent, which is particularly valuable to decks without manual bias adjustments. Important to deck makers for deciding on what to internally bias to as well. Lots of original owner's manuals indicate the particular tapes used for factory calibration...

I will say the Maxell XL-IIs tapes are outstanding performers. Double coated like the SA-X tapes and my preference outside of TDK for type-II tapes. I also used MA tape when I couldn't get SA back in the day, and it was fine but the increased cost back then was not justified by my equipment and skill set in the 80's. I use it sometimes now but still don't really see the benefit. "The juice isn't worth the squeeze"

Like you, I never used noise reduction. I didn't know why I didn't like it then, but calibration variances deck to deck is the reason I didn't like it I now know.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2022
Messages
387
Location
East Coast
#3
First, I would guess the crayon smell is in the binder and not in the metallic content of any particular tape. I suspect the technology was far and wide early on and as things matured, everyone sort of figured out the best "recipe" for binders. Metals (and oxides) don't really have a smell at room temp.

My experience then, and now, has been with TDK. I recently mentioned a SA tape I recorded in ~1985 or so that still plays well to this day. It has had very dubious storage for a decade or so, but always in my "care". It also was not recorded to the absolute limits of the tape but still sounds good.

I also did a huge spreadsheet at the other site going through a huge lot of used SA tapes I picked up- all generations and totally unknown storage and/or number of recordings per tape. It was focused on how TDK "always" railroad or some nonsense based in fable, not fact. I provided the facts to back up what I knew. (some did show railroading but the percentage was quite low, and I think the fable is based on the sheer number of TDK tapes sold as compared to other brands)

Another thing that came out of that huge lot was the fact that once the SA stabilized (1984 and newer- indicated by the color getting darker), they biased almost identically across the board from 84 to the last welded blue shell nightmares in the 90's (or whenever those came out). That blue shell tape could be transplanted into an early case, and you'd have an early tape. That was an eye opener for me, and totally unexpected. SA was a "lab standard" type-II for many years, and it was incredibly consistent. Maybe not the "best" by whatever measure, but consistent, which is particularly valuable to decks without manual bias adjustments. Important to deck makers for deciding on what to internally bias to as well. Lots of original owner's manuals indicate the particular tapes used for factory calibration...

I will say the Maxell XL-IIs tapes are outstanding performers. Double coated like the SA-X tapes and my preference outside of TDK for type-II tapes. I also used MA tape when I couldn't get SA back in the day, and it was fine but the increased cost back then was not justified by my equipment and skill set in the 80's. I use it sometimes now but still don't really see the benefit. "The juice isn't worth the squeeze"

Like you, I never used noise reduction. I didn't know why I didn't like it then, but calibration variances deck to deck is the reason I didn't like it I now know.
Thanks for the history on this that you’ve stated, that’s awesome!

I think that’s what I’m learning about the TDK SA tapes, and I’ve only had a couple variations of them, but they seem to be consistent, even some of the newer ones that don’t have any screws in the case seem very good. I like them so much that after I burned through about 45 of them that I have, I’m gonna see if I can get some more. It seems that the difference between them and even a metal tape is minimal, at least on my deck. Granted I’ve only tried a couple of metal tapes on this deck.

Also glad to hear that you are a fan of the TDK tape.

The Maxell’s we’re always my go to back when I was younger, and I’m surprised that even though I can’t get them to bias perfectly, at least about half of them, they still sound great. That kind of perplexes me, and I don’t think I could tell the difference between a TDK SA and a Maxell XL II on my deck.

I have to askwhat do you mean by railroading?

Edit;

yes I’ve heard it mention that it’s the binder that smells, after it breaks down or something. My six-year-old little girl agreed that they smelled like crayons… she was like you’re right let me smell that again lol.
 

J!m

Veteran and General Yakker
Joined
Dec 24, 2019
Messages
11,087
Location
Connecticut
Tagline
BOT
#4
The tape gets parallel lines down its length, like railroad tracks. More often than not, it's crappy pinch roller(s) and/or capstan, or other mal-adjustment (like tape tension not in spec) to blame, but I have seen it- it DOES happen sometimes but further on tapes with that artifact, I cannot HEAR the problem, only see it on the tape. But it is something that happens. It is also more likely to happen on 100 minute and longer tapes (thinner mylar) or, those are more susceptible to improper mechanical set up than a 60- or 90-minute tape.

Earlier SA tape from the 70's is a lighter brown color and it biases quite differently than the 84+ tape. Nando prefers the earlier tape, and I sent him a bunch I had a while back... The 1985/86 variant is my safe space. Tat's what I used back in the day and what I have hoarded NOS.

If you want some SA tape, I can help... new and used.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2022
Messages
387
Location
East Coast
#5
The tape gets parallel lines down its length, like railroad tracks. More often than not, it's crappy pinch roller(s) and/or capstan, or other mal-adjustment (like tape tension not in spec) to blame, but I have seen it- it DOES happen sometimes but further on tapes with that artifact, I cannot HEAR the problem, only see it on the tape. But it is something that happens. It is also more likely to happen on 100 minute and longer tapes (thinner mylar) or, those are more susceptible to improper mechanical set up than a 60- or 90-minute tape.

Earlier SA tape from the 70's is a lighter brown color and it biases quite differently than the 84+ tape. Nando prefers the earlier tape, and I sent him a bunch I had a while back... The 1985/86 variant is my safe space. Tat's what I used back in the day and what I have hoarded NOS.

If you want some SA tape, I can help... new and used.
thanks for the info, very interesting.

I will definitely let you know when I’m ready on the tape, thank you
 

Elite-ist

Administrator, (and straight-up pimp stick!)
Staff member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
9,954
#6
There are some newer cassettes - Type II - which are hidden gems.

Like the 1995-1997 Fuji Z (U.S. version):

e689c773-47e3-4aac-81d4-3a7423520cff.jpg
824484c8-98cc-4ab2-b272-a2551c9e9dbd.jpg

Another surprise - 1997-2001 TDK CD Power (U.S. version):

eecc7c93-a6a6-42ef-844c-23b0cedf8084.jpg
34e89cfb-a87b-4945-a26a-4bd336897941 (1).jpg

Truly affordable tapes with age on its side, but without the notoriety of the older cassettes.

Nando.
 

Elite-ist

Administrator, (and straight-up pimp stick!)
Staff member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
9,954
#7
Here is a WAV music file captured from a test recording onto an NOS 1979-vintage TDK SA 90 using my Marantz SD-9000. The tape was recorded at 2X-speed - a great feature on the SD-9000 and my first use of 2X-speed recording. No NR was used and the deck has no tape calibration with bias fine tune set in the 0 detent position. There are four tracks with about 22 minutes running time and a few tracks of my latest project.

The TDK SA tape sitting on my Teac C-3X:

6a12a7d6-08b0-4d46-aad8-6f1036c7a002 (1).jpg

Recording from cassette to WAV file:

69a45ddc-41a8-42aa-9adf-1ff679ed680a (2).jpg
ac7abe60-7199-4e6b-9b1c-53aeb8e962f2 (2).jpg

Enjoy:

Marantz SD-9000 2X-Speed TDK SA No NR.wav

Nando.
 
Top