What cassette deck ?
- Thread starter Alex SE
- Start date
Beautiful open reel decks there! I would love to own a 1/2" half-track Studer. Totally unnecessary, impractical and just plain foolish. But Sooooooo bad-ass.
I guess I should preface my dislike of Nakamichi decks here:
They (as is well known now) boosted the treble to offset the limitations of the cassette (speed) format, rather than playing by the (EQ) "rules" everyone else followed. And, if you record and playback on the same deck (or at least all Nak decks) then this isn't a problem at all.
My issue is I am a bit of a freak with regards to recording and playback accuracy. I've been playing drums since 1974 or so, and with a lot of other instruments, so I have a pretty good idea of what instruments are supposed to sound like. That's probably a hindrance actually... I want to neither accentuate or dampen any frequency in my recording or playback chain.* And I like to take tapes I made (on Tascam in my case) to any other deck (such as the D5) and hear what was on the original source, even after being through two sets of electronics and a cassette (in this example) in the middle. That's the entire point in my narrow-minded opinion. Yes, enjoyment is important, but enjoyment should never be confused with delusion.
Similarly with my vinyl playback- I am really digging the V-15 III, and hope to soon have a V-15 V, based on my positive experience with the III. Wide, yet flat, frequency response and great tracking ability.
*No, my room is not tuned via EQ/pink noise/other analysis in such a way to have a program in the room identical to the program on the recording (although on the surface it may appear that way). The goal (mine at least) is one where if you are in another room, and a jazz trio record is playing (as an example), you suspend disbelief and think the trio is in that room playing. So, the room "treatments" will alter the output of the speakers in the same way they would alter the sound of the trio in the room. THIS is the goal, for me at least.
I think it is very important to have a target to hit, because without that target defined, you will never hit it.
I guess I should preface my dislike of Nakamichi decks here:
They (as is well known now) boosted the treble to offset the limitations of the cassette (speed) format, rather than playing by the (EQ) "rules" everyone else followed. And, if you record and playback on the same deck (or at least all Nak decks) then this isn't a problem at all.
My issue is I am a bit of a freak with regards to recording and playback accuracy. I've been playing drums since 1974 or so, and with a lot of other instruments, so I have a pretty good idea of what instruments are supposed to sound like. That's probably a hindrance actually... I want to neither accentuate or dampen any frequency in my recording or playback chain.* And I like to take tapes I made (on Tascam in my case) to any other deck (such as the D5) and hear what was on the original source, even after being through two sets of electronics and a cassette (in this example) in the middle. That's the entire point in my narrow-minded opinion. Yes, enjoyment is important, but enjoyment should never be confused with delusion.
Similarly with my vinyl playback- I am really digging the V-15 III, and hope to soon have a V-15 V, based on my positive experience with the III. Wide, yet flat, frequency response and great tracking ability.
*No, my room is not tuned via EQ/pink noise/other analysis in such a way to have a program in the room identical to the program on the recording (although on the surface it may appear that way). The goal (mine at least) is one where if you are in another room, and a jazz trio record is playing (as an example), you suspend disbelief and think the trio is in that room playing. So, the room "treatments" will alter the output of the speakers in the same way they would alter the sound of the trio in the room. THIS is the goal, for me at least.
I think it is very important to have a target to hit, because without that target defined, you will never hit it.
Years ago in a life far away, I recorded the Chattanooga Symphony for a soundtrack for a promotional film I was producing for the local economic development agency. We used a 1/2" 2 track Studer. It was indeed an eye-opening recording, far better than the playing, unfortunately, but that's what the razor blade was for. I kept a 1/4" copy to use when auditioning speakers or amps or whatever. I dragged that A77 Revox I owned everywhere with that tape. The dealers got to hate seeing it coming.
Yep, 1/2" @ 30ips were the defacto standard mixdown format back in the 90's . Most of our customers came in with 1/2" masters for Mastering. The others usually brought DAT's. I used a Studer A 80 1/2" in my Mastering suite. The Otari you see above has the 1/2" conversion kit but I have not used it in years!
Yes, there's a total misconception about Nakamichi and IEC eq standards etc, but part of the fact is that nobody else in the industry could produce their famous heads which were highly responsible for their extra extended FR. There's a well written article about this myth. I'll try to find it. As I said: I like all the decks I have. At this level, differences are not abysmal and it's more up to the end user preference. Regards.
Here is: https://www.richardhess.com/manuals/Nakamichi/nakamichi_Cassette_Equalization-The_Standard_View.pdf
Yes, there's a total misconception about Nakamichi and IEC eq standards etc, but part of the fact is that nobody else in the industry could produce their famous heads which were highly responsible for their extra extended FR. There's a well written article about this myth. I'll try to find it. As I said: I like all the decks I have. At this level, differences are not abysmal and it's more up to the end user preference. Regards.
Here is: https://www.richardhess.com/manuals/Nakamichi/nakamichi_Cassette_Equalization-The_Standard_View.pdf
wanna win the easy way? 
When I bought my first 965, I was completely disappointed. My 606 was sounding way better. You know what I mean...
If I was to buy the Pioneer, it wouldn't be for the sound. I like the looks of the CT-F1250. I think almost nothing can beat an ANT's modified 965 (maybe a heavily modified RS-B100?).
When I bought my first 965, I was completely disappointed. My 606 was sounding way better. You know what I mean...
If I was to buy the Pioneer, it wouldn't be for the sound. I like the looks of the CT-F1250. I think almost nothing can beat an ANT's modified 965 (maybe a heavily modified RS-B100?).
Also, I preferred to the original B965 quite any other decks I had here at that time... but the modifies did totally reverse the situation.
About the modified RS-B100... I think that if it might be as good or better than the modified B965, then Alex would choose the B100 and not the B965 as the deck to improve.... this is my own guess, though.
The problem with the CT-F1250 is that, most of the times, those ferrite heads (even if they look like new at naked eyes) show microfractures at the gaps then they would have horrible frequency response which would make the deck a door stop (totally unuseable).
And, I seem to remember (from Alex, again) that those heads are nothing special even when in perfectly good shape.
So, it's just a deck to look at, not to listen to.... and, hey, I also love the look of that deck but, now that I know about its problems, Iam happy that I don't have it.... I could never tolerate to own a deck which I cannot use at all.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2010
- Messages
- 9,921
Pioneer CT-F1250
I owned two Pioneer CT-F1250s at one time. Once I got the one I wanted to keep (purchased from original owner for $250 CAD in 2021) I sold the other. It had served me well for thirteen years. In an unusual turn of proprietorship, my old CT-F1250 was sold to an enthusiast in Japan.
I didn't have issues with either deck with loss of high frequency due to head wear. This is a copy of the technician's message to me when I had him service the deck I kept:
"Hi Nando,
No problem at all my tape afficionado friend. The other change I had to make to the Ct f1250 was a smidgen of eq adjustment to compensate for extremely minor head wear for 5khz and up. Other than that, you have an extremely nice specimen of a 1250, I've not seen one in as good of shape yet, and this is number 6!.
Colin"
This was the work done by Colin on my current CT-F1250. Keep in mind, this was an original-owner deck and it had never been serviced before:
Pioneer CT-F1250
- replaced reel drive belt
- resurfaced and deep cleaned idler, pinch rollers
-lubed transport, capastan spindles
-fine calibrated playback eq at 1k, 10k, 15k.
-replaced loose inter capstan belt
-checked all calibrations, all tapes will calibrate for 0db level except some later formulation Maxell type ii which is common to many decks.
This was a short video right after I got it back from Colin and before I placed it in the stereo system:
Nando.
I owned two Pioneer CT-F1250s at one time. Once I got the one I wanted to keep (purchased from original owner for $250 CAD in 2021) I sold the other. It had served me well for thirteen years. In an unusual turn of proprietorship, my old CT-F1250 was sold to an enthusiast in Japan.
I didn't have issues with either deck with loss of high frequency due to head wear. This is a copy of the technician's message to me when I had him service the deck I kept:
"Hi Nando,
No problem at all my tape afficionado friend. The other change I had to make to the Ct f1250 was a smidgen of eq adjustment to compensate for extremely minor head wear for 5khz and up. Other than that, you have an extremely nice specimen of a 1250, I've not seen one in as good of shape yet, and this is number 6!.
Colin"
This was the work done by Colin on my current CT-F1250. Keep in mind, this was an original-owner deck and it had never been serviced before:
Pioneer CT-F1250
- replaced reel drive belt
- resurfaced and deep cleaned idler, pinch rollers
-lubed transport, capastan spindles
-fine calibrated playback eq at 1k, 10k, 15k.
-replaced loose inter capstan belt
-checked all calibrations, all tapes will calibrate for 0db level except some later formulation Maxell type ii which is common to many decks.
This was a short video right after I got it back from Colin and before I placed it in the stereo system:
Nando.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2011
- Messages
- 858
- Location
- Absurdy, new name of France
- Tagline
- You never have too much tapedecks ^^
It's clear you were lucky with your decks and the heads of your CT-F1250 were not used enough to get that problem.
but, the majority of such heads are totally shot (there are so many people who reported that), then it's just risky to get such a deck without being able to properly test the heads... also because, when someone is getting rid of that deck (of course, not your case, Nando) the suspect there is the problem in the heads would arise.
Go figure... when I was about to buy one myself, I had found it on ebay but the seller was here in my town then I contacted him directly and asked him if I could go and personally see the deck, give him the money and bring it at home without the need to pack and ship it.
If anything, it looked like a good deal also for him to avoid to pack and ship and all the fuss related to ebay sales...
But, somehow, he might have realized I'd also try and test the deck carefully and then he didn't allow me to go there at him to see the deck, then I didn't buy it... and he sold it on ebay to someone else... of course, my suspect those heads were shot is just high, as soon as I discovered about this kind of problem.
but, the majority of such heads are totally shot (there are so many people who reported that), then it's just risky to get such a deck without being able to properly test the heads... also because, when someone is getting rid of that deck (of course, not your case, Nando) the suspect there is the problem in the heads would arise.
Go figure... when I was about to buy one myself, I had found it on ebay but the seller was here in my town then I contacted him directly and asked him if I could go and personally see the deck, give him the money and bring it at home without the need to pack and ship it.
If anything, it looked like a good deal also for him to avoid to pack and ship and all the fuss related to ebay sales...
But, somehow, he might have realized I'd also try and test the deck carefully and then he didn't allow me to go there at him to see the deck, then I didn't buy it... and he sold it on ebay to someone else... of course, my suspect those heads were shot is just high, as soon as I discovered about this kind of problem.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2010
- Messages
- 9,921
As always, having the foreknowledge of a head-wear issue or even the clutch issue with the Pioneer CT-F1250/CT-F1000 warrants a demo session or proof of frequency response before handing over any money. Back in 2006, when I bought my first CT-F1250, those issues weren't known by me. I did, however, buy the first one in-person and I used a tape, I had recorded, to test it. But, I put a lot of hours in playback and recording on my first CT-F1250. And my first one was sold on consignment sale, with a warranty, through Innovative Audio.
Nando
Nando
exactly.... but there are a couple issues, if you aren't Alex...
the heads might need some work to be mechanically compatible and, for sure, there are electronics modifies involved to make those (excellent) Alps ferrite heads work properly on that deck (as just mentioned by Nando).
I also remember Alex made some kind of pressure pad lifters on the ALPS heads there in the CT-F1250 to make them work properly... while, on other decks which are based on those heads, they are not needed.
Point is that, if you look carefully at the original heads of those Pioneer decks, the actual shape of the heads is a bit unusual and, surely, very different than the shape of those ALPS ferrite heads. (i mean just about the shape/curves of the head surfaces, at their top faces where they need to stay in contact with the tape).
So, it's a doable work only if someone like Alex is going to make it, I'd say.
In general, I'd say that fixing the mechanical compatibility between the deck and the heads can be a more difficult work than dealing with the electronics... I just experience this while putting on my AIWA (shown above in this sane thread) some heads which, even if they have the same contour/shape, they were designed with guides at the opposite side (which I have to put at the other side) and then the mounting plate needed to be modified to really fit (otherwise the whole heads were skewed sideways to a totally wrong place!).
the heads might need some work to be mechanically compatible and, for sure, there are electronics modifies involved to make those (excellent) Alps ferrite heads work properly on that deck (as just mentioned by Nando).
I also remember Alex made some kind of pressure pad lifters on the ALPS heads there in the CT-F1250 to make them work properly... while, on other decks which are based on those heads, they are not needed.
Point is that, if you look carefully at the original heads of those Pioneer decks, the actual shape of the heads is a bit unusual and, surely, very different than the shape of those ALPS ferrite heads. (i mean just about the shape/curves of the head surfaces, at their top faces where they need to stay in contact with the tape).
So, it's a doable work only if someone like Alex is going to make it, I'd say.
In general, I'd say that fixing the mechanical compatibility between the deck and the heads can be a more difficult work than dealing with the electronics... I just experience this while putting on my AIWA (shown above in this sane thread) some heads which, even if they have the same contour/shape, they were designed with guides at the opposite side (which I have to put at the other side) and then the mounting plate needed to be modified to really fit (otherwise the whole heads were skewed sideways to a totally wrong place!).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2011
- Messages
- 858
- Location
- Absurdy, new name of France
- Tagline
- You never have too much tapedecks ^^
if you replace heads with other heads of same kind of material, you might solve it with few modifications (or none, in certain cases) and the rest with deck's internal tunings.
but, if you replace heads with different material ones (especially if materials with considerable different properties!) , it might easily happen that you find just everything way off and without enough range on the trimpots to get at least a few things right with the internal tunings.
till now, I've performed myself replacements from sendust to amorphous (on my Technics RS-M260) and from permalloy to amorphous (on my AIWA AD-F880).... in both cases, since amorphous heads have considerably different properties than both sendust and permalloy, I had to apply modifies on quite anything related to PB and REC sides!
to make you a quick list of what I had to modify in both cases... and I found the PB side to be the easier to do...
PB EQ amp side:
input loading resistance
input loading capacitance
PB EQ time constants
REC side:
rec gain
rec EQ filters (all of them, for all tape types)
boosting bias current (but, on the AIWA, I still didn't figure out how to actually do it! The RS-M260 doesn't have HX-PRO then the whole bias handling circuit is simplier)
but, if you replace heads with different material ones (especially if materials with considerable different properties!) , it might easily happen that you find just everything way off and without enough range on the trimpots to get at least a few things right with the internal tunings.
till now, I've performed myself replacements from sendust to amorphous (on my Technics RS-M260) and from permalloy to amorphous (on my AIWA AD-F880).... in both cases, since amorphous heads have considerably different properties than both sendust and permalloy, I had to apply modifies on quite anything related to PB and REC sides!
to make you a quick list of what I had to modify in both cases... and I found the PB side to be the easier to do...
PB EQ amp side:
input loading resistance
input loading capacitance
PB EQ time constants
REC side:
rec gain
rec EQ filters (all of them, for all tape types)
boosting bias current (but, on the AIWA, I still didn't figure out how to actually do it! The RS-M260 doesn't have HX-PRO then the whole bias handling circuit is simplier)
Last edited: