Type 3 FerroChrome Cassettes - You Wanted Them, You Got Them!
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 09. 2024
- Over the past year I've had so many asks to do a video on these, rare, expensive and temperamental cassettes that I don't have a deck for.
Well, here you are. There are some graphic (tape) scenes in this. Be strong!
DECKS USED: Nakamichi ZX-9 & Revox B215
If you like chatting and posting about cassettes, why not join my Facebook group dedicated to it: Blank Cassette Tapes
/ 546989409130819
Or my dedicated deck group: Compact Cassette Decks / 670250433479150
If you'd like to purchase cassettes shown in this video, visit my online store at:
www.cassetteco...
Follow me on Facebook for special offers and new stock alerts:
/ cassettecomeback
I’ve always had a fascination with Type 3. I love weird things that were unpopular in their time, and I love obscure tapes. Then again, I‘m into British Leyland so it’s the perfect match. Perhaps my opinions/tastes should be taken with a grain of salt...
If it makes you happy, sod what others think.
Double-layer FeCr tape was commonly used in the ELCASET system cassettes. It allowed for very, very high quality recording. It was as dynamic as reel to reel. It is a pity that the ELCASET system has died out.
You're doing a great job Tony! Greetings from Poland
Sony was the biggest backer of FeCr tapes in general. Elcaset really didn't see too much improvement with it based on my quick listen with a friend's deck. The wider tape and faster speed made the base Type I sound fantastic already. He had a ton of FeCr tapes with the machine (along with the demo tape) and there really wasn't that much of an improvement. CrO2 showed up on El Caset too, but too late to make much headway.
Regarding the "Security Mechanism", I remember Wilhelm on the tapeheads.net forum (long time top tier BASF employee) telling the story behind the SM. Apparently it was invented by a BASF engineer who stumbled up the career ladder ending up in the board of directors, so even though the BASF people knew of the possible problems with the SM, like causing tape damage when a loop inside the cassette got caught in one of the guides (I've seen this actually happen first hand) it was kept till this guy finally resigned and then it got unceremoniously dropped. I always considered the SM a rather cool feature back then, till I experienced its dark side myself. That was... disappointing.
Good insight. It would explain a lot.
Causing more tape damage when the tape winds up into the SM guide mechanism is logical.
Being the cause of a tape jam seems highly unlikely. Shaving off magnetic layer at normal operation speeds, too.
Doing nothing for the tape's security seems the most likely explanation for dropping SM.
I wonder how they can put inside this strange thing. The simple is the best.
I guess, the described problem may happen either with a bad, not serviced deck or when there is a loop of tape inside the cassette and the user carelessly tries to run it without winding up it first. Apart from that the SM works great.
The Sony FeCr sounded fantastic!
Couldn’t fault it personally. No drop outs at all. Sounded brighter than the BASF too.
The shedding problem of the late '70s and '80s had to do with the banning of whale oil as a component of tape binder (oxide glue). New formulations were being tested and some of them absorbed moisture from the air (hygroscopic) and broke down rather quickly.
Nice info 👍
The cassette manufacturers brought them out thinking they were a good idea but as type I and type II cassettes got better, the popularity of these waned.
It was basically the manufacturers answer to a non existent problem.
It's probably because I'm a 90s kid, but I loved it. The scooped mids sound was everywhere then, so I guess that natural EQ sounds "right" to me. I'd be willing to bet some Nine Inch Nails or Marilyn Manson would sound as good on one of those as it possibly could on a cassette. Your point about it being more of a "universal" tape that would likely sound better to most people on most basic type 1 equipment is also a good point. My dad used to swear by type 3 for the car.
Thanks so much for this! I collect old cassettes I find in Europe at second hand shops. I had no idea that a year ago I had bought a box of Grundig Type III. They don’t look anything special, packaged like standard ferric cassettes, but are clearly labeled FeCr. The tape itself has the bi-layer, dark on one side , rust on the other. They work and sound fine.
You don't want to, I don't know, sell any by chance, do you?
@Cassette Comeback
I have a Sony TC-K 555 bought new in 1983 and it has a dedicated FeCr setting and the owners manual I have even recommends the Sony FeCr tape for best results, I have tried them ( bought one back in 1983 cost USD 11.95! only one in stock) and sure enough the sound is REALLY excellent, at least as good as a good metal tape and for some reason it seemed like the noise level was lower than a typical metal tape! The reason I didn't use them back then was even in 1983-84 on they were ridiculously expensive and hard to find even at the big electronic super stores in NYC!
This older Sony is in like new condition and has had NO service, just basic cleanings and deguassing of the three heads. This model also had three motors and super low wow and flutter of 0.04% and -80db S/N with Dolby C noise reduction....I love this deck old Sony's were built like tanks and sounded amazing. Merry Christmas Tony!
The Sony TC-K555 has a signal to noise ratio of 56dB with type 1, 57dB with type 2, 61dB with type 3 and 60dB with type IV. Even with Dolby C ativated, it does not reach 80dB.
I have the Sony TC-K44, TC-K55, TC-K61, TC-K65 and hope to get the (71, 75 and 81) in the new year. Great decks they are.
My old Sanyo boomboxes (an M9990K and an M9994K) from the late 70's both have a lever to manually select tape type and both have an FeCr position. Interesting, this is position is in the middle, being "CrO2" the upper and "Normal" the lower positions.
@232686434
Actually my original Sony manual does indicate with Dolby C it reaches -80 db S/N. I meant to post it was that low WITH dolby NR.
That's what I meant, a good deck with dedicated type III position makes FeCr tapes sing, as long as the upper Chrome layer has not degraded. Try to get some gently used Sony, Denon or late BASF type III cassettes, record them in the 555 and tell us about the results. Scotch Master III is also said to be good. Agfa and older BASF FeCr are suffering from different kinds of degradation.
I remember testing the settings for III some time ago, I tested Bias and QU as I/I, II/II, I/II and II/I, there is a thread on tapeheads.
Also, there were decks that specifically would indicate such settings for FeCr where you would set Bias to normal position and EQ to chrome position.
There was also a pro-walkman (usually for bootleggers) from Sony that utilized a FeCr settints.
As Type Is got better through the late 70s and early 80s they were able to perform like a Type III. I had a Nakamichi CR-1A in the late 80s and the 90s and I used to do this (record at normal bias but at type II eq) all the time with higher quality type I tapes such as BHF, UD-XLI, XL-IS, AD and AD-X tapes. They essentially all worked well as FeCr equivalent.
This brought back memories! Back in 1979 my local hi-fi store was offloading its stock of Agfa Carat C46 ferrochromes at giveaway prices, so I bought half a dozen. They were awful. The midrange was weak and the overall sound was muffled.
I'm sure that decent cobalts like SA and UDXLII put FeCr in a coffin, but what really nailed down the lid was the arrival of metal tape.
Incidentally, I saw a JVC KD-A8 on eBay recently - the first deck with automatic biasing and EQ, which pretty much doubled the original price compared to the KD-A5 on which it was based, way back in 1979. The KD-A8 may well be the only deck that could automatically set up a Type III!
I got an Aiwa deck when my Sankyo started failing and it was FerroChrome Type 3 ready, before metal came out, and I was totally pumped. I went all in on FerroChrome cassettes, spent a fortune on blanks, only to have metal type IV eclipse them soon after. I got some metal and liked those, but they were expensive and stayed expensive forever, so I ultimately clung to the Maxell UDXLII as my regular cassette of choice.
Edit: I realize I wrote FerroChrome above. I guess it's supposed to be Ferri-Chrome, with an I. I once got a bunch of cassettes from Spain that might have had the spelling with an O. And I'm not the best speller.
I have an 1977 BASF HiFi Setup D-6000 I got from my older brother (who got it from our dad, who in turn got it a present from his brother).
Sturdy as hell those machines. Still running with little maintenance.
The BASF D-6035 tape deck has a switch for Type I, II and III, but not IV.
Searched years to find a Type III, and got one of the shown Sony C-90. Looks exactly the same, just says DUAD instead of FeCr on the bottom right.
They sound great on this deck, but sadly acould not make them sound good played on any other.
Those BASF ferrochrom tapes were bad when new as well, at the time. The Sony FeCr was a great tape though.
That funny whining at unpackaging the SONY FeCr😋👍 - one gotta love our Tony! He's a great, talented, very knowleadgeable and very generous guy!
I have the exact same BASF Ferrochomes, grandpa bought them in the 1970s, they are beautiful...
Merry Christmas, Tony. Thanks for the like.
I've also realized something now - mine are slightly different, the sticker on the cassette shell is blue, not white (perhaps mine are older, year ~1974) and on the J-card, BASF even shows the frequency response graph of ferric, chrome and ferrochrome combined, it's also followed by a lengthy text explaining the new technologies and benefits of the tape.
It's all in German and BASF proclaimed that the quality of the tape is something "people only heard from vinyl".
Very interesting cassettes, I think most people here have an awesome Christmas gift, thanks for doing these videos, even some young people like me love cassettes and old analog technologies.
If I outlast my tapes...
Bury them with me. 😄
Just found an overlooked Sony fecker 90 in my collection, albeit used. Now I know how to record it! Although I have a Marantz 5020 with the Type III bias I'll try it on the Nak. Thanks!
I have a Sony TC-K80II which was designed with these tapes in mind and they sound great, especially the Sony FeCr - BASF is also nice but Sony is almost exactly like source.
It sounds a bit like the vocalist from Mike Oldfield's 'Discovery' album. Nice work.
Roger Chapman?
Finally FeCr! Me too asked you to do a video about them a few months ago. Thank you! I bought 10 pieces of 90 min BASF* FeCr about 3 years ago for less then 10$ total, and they sound fantastic! I don't have a deck with proper FeCr settings, nor separate EQ and bias setting capability, but the recordings they came with sound great, all 10 of them are full with LP recordings. My Sony TCS-430 Walkman likes them a lot (the few ones which not yet started to shed). Unfortunatelly they are shedding, even without the SM.
*: how I got them so cheap? They were made by Polimer, a Hungarian manufacturer from the '70-80s, who used BASF tape stock. Usually discounted BASF tape stock, which either was old, or had some defects. Improper tape width was not uncommon, unfortunatelly. 2 of my 10 probably has too wide tape in them, which casues instant shedding, as the tape crumbles at one edge on the tape guide fork of the head.
Merry Christmas, Tony!
Too wide tape seems unlikely, I don't think any serious tape manufacturer would have sold or even given batches with this fault to any other company. It is more likely that the Polimer shells are the guilty part here; if the azimuth of their tape guides is not correct, or the pressure pad is applying uneven pressure, you get these typical damages on the tape edges. FeCr tapes with their thicker double coating and thinner base films are more sensitive to this than most other tapes: The base film of a FeCr C-90 is almost as thin as the base film of a normal C-110 or C-120.
@@kiirunavaara Thanks, I haven't thought about that, but really, with the thicker coating they had to use thinner base film. I'll measure the tape width with a micrormeter. I'm not sure, but maybe Polimer cut the tape rolls to the final width. I don't know if it can be true that BASF sold the huge, uncut rolls to them. But I've heard about Polimer tapes cut too wide on reel-to-reel as well.
@@mrnmrn1 Ok, with Polimer cutting the Jumbos to cassette tape width themselves, it would make perfect sense... thanks!
For what it's worth, the game Cassette Beasts (a Pokemon-ish game where you "record" monsters using tapes) has "Ferrichrome" (I checked the in-game spelling-they use an i instead of an o) tapes that are better at recording metal-type creatures. Not sure why they didn't just use "metal" tapes.
My pioneer deck has auto tape selector and doesn't recognise those, always wondered what they sounded like. Great vid again tony 😎
Thanks for a great video. I bought my Tandbeeg TCD3014A cassette deck in 1986. It makes flawless recordings. It has settings only for types 1, 2, & 4. Type 3 is not supported. I never missed it. To me a good type 1 beats type 3. Likewise a good type 2 or 4 beats type 3. Type 3 offered nothing that wasn't offered by 1, 2, & 4.
The dual layers was the problem. Type 2 needs much more bias than type 1. No bias setting could minimize distortion on both layers. Any bias setting was a compromise. Types 1, 2, & 4 had homogeneous magnetic particles. This made it feasible to home in on the exact optimum bias setting. Any top end tape in type 1-2-4 can outperform type 3.
Yeah. That's why they disappeared...
A good type I beats type III? That is nonsense. The type I tapes of the late 70's were awful. In that era FeCr ruled by far and even the best type II didn't come close. It is not fair to compare a '79 type III with a '93 type I, as tape technology evolved so much over the years. By the mid 90's the better type I tapes such as Sony hf-es or Maxell XLI-S sounded so good that you could hardly tell them apart from type II or even IV, maybe with a good Nak you could just tell the difference. Who knows how awesome type III would have become if they had been under development for 1 or 2 decades more? Also, the types III still on the market now are more than 40 years old while a lot of the other tapes are just over half that age on average...
Of course you have a point that the dual layer system had its disadvantages. For one they were much more expensive to produce.... And then came type IV, which was even better (slightly) but much easier and cheaper to produce. Plus the recordings could last longer over the years then any of the other tapes. So key deck manufacturers by the 80's started omitting the type III position but they did en masse adopt type IV. That was the main reason for the demise of type III imho.
@@montana01971 of course type 1 tapes improved from the 70s to the 90s. When I said that type 1 surpasses type 3, I was referring to 80s & 90s type 1 tapes. They were spectacular! I had no cassette deck in 1979 when type 3 was in its heyday. In 1986 I got my Tandberg TCD3014A cassette deck, it had adjustable bias & sensitivity for tape types 1, 2, & 4. I could get optimum results with any tape.
The TDK AD-X & Maxell XL1-S were really good. Ran close to type 2 & not far behind type 4.
My car deck only had 120 usec playback EQ. I liked type 1 tapes in my car, 1984 Buick Riviera.
Anyway, I was basing my comparison on 1986 & later type 1 tapes, including Maxell XL1-S, which gave me great results.
As far as 1970s type 2 not coming close to type 3, my ears heard otherwise. In 1976 I auditioned an Advent 201 cassette deck with Dolby B. Using type 2 tapes, it copied LPs with amazing fidelity. Great FR, low noise, no issues at all. In all fairness, type 3 tapes at that time were good, but I did not think they surpassed type 2. I was 21 years old in 1976, so my ears were still good.
When making comparisons, types 1 & 2 must not be driven into the red zone. Recording at or below 0 dB gave me best results. Type 1 did not have the high frequency ability of type 2 or 4.
Type 2 had good hf headroom, but the 70 usec EQ required more treble boost during record mode. The 70 us gives lower noise on playback.
Metal had better hf headroom & overall headroom. With metal, you can record above 0 dB.
Most issues with types 1 or 2 are due to over-recording. My experience.
Best regards.
Merry Christmas Tony. Great video. I liked that song. It's pretty good.
Merry Christmas to you too sir.
@@CassetteComeback Who is singing?What group,write!
@@CassetteComeback If you want to hear how good cassettes can sound try and find pre-recorded tapes from In Sync Laboratories a company that made them the 1980's in NYC. They took 30ips master tapes then made 15ips dubbing tapes & then with high end Nakamichi cassette decks (on TDK SA-X & SA tapes, their earlier ones used BASF Chrome) finally ending up with the best sounding tapes ever, although you need to be a fan of Classical music. I still have about a hundred of them (35 years old) & they still sound fantastic.
Thanks to the video, Tony (and for sacrificing the Sony) - it was really illuminating. Merry Christmas to you and yours and have a happy 2020!
You too sir!
My pioneer CT-F 600 2header can do Type III FeCr, must be a '79 deck, I think Type IV was not available yet at the time.
With FeCr I always think, there was only one generation, there were no improvement on the formulation. If Type IV never would had come to live, we may have seen stuff like cobalt dopped FeCr, an audiophile grade cassette that could sound like no other tape. It was expensive, but not too if you think of it. If you had already ferric and chrome running in your plant, it only took some good development to get both in one cassette, if it would had gone big this could had been the cassette to have.
Anyway, great tune, it sounds 80s, I love it!
The real successors of FeCr were the double coated type II tapes, either with two layers of Chrome or two layers of FeCo. These outperformed FeCr in almost all measurable parameters, and were more compatible with the majority of tape decks.
Lord I have waited for this! Takes me back to that old Panasonic toploader that had the FeCr position:
www.cassettedeck.org/srv/images/402932/unoff_panasonic_rs600us_600px.png
With the Sony Fecker, there was a noticeable lack of midrange. The top and bottom were there, but with a hole in the middle.
For the year or so that I’ve been into cassettes, I’ve seen literally hundreds of blank ferric tapes. Chrome tapes aren’t nearly as common, but I’ve seen a fair share of those as well. I’ve seen a handful of metal tapes, but they were a bit expensive, so I never actually bought one. However, I have only ever seen one ferric-chrome tape and that was at a flea market. It had already been recorded on, the inlay was fairly worn and I can’t even remember what the brand name was, but the fact that it’s a rare type 3 tape was enough for the guy to slap a $30 price tag on it.
Where there's muck, there's brass...UK saying.
Same story. Got my first Sony Duad a few weeks ago, with a Japanese lot. Used, with a recording off Japanese FM radio - and that's technically a superb recording, as good as FM taping goes. Curiously, tape surface is all pitted and mottled, but it still plays fine and apparently needs no Dolby at all. Very quiet and balanced.
Hi Tony and all.. Yep.. The Sony sounds good.. It's all there.. I rebelted.,realigned and recapped a 3 head Aiwa AD-M700K recently which has a Fe-Cr setting . Wide dynamic range that added 'something' to the original source which can be monitored in real-time. Your recording reveals this 'something' feel too. Really enjoy your channel...seasons greetings all.
This is so cool! Merry Xmas and happy 4 new years 😂… I remember that crazy “secure” mechanism… it looked cool in see-through shells, but I never thought it did the tape any good lol, making it shed is really awful, and probably these FeCr tapes were especially susceptible due to their double-layer formulation. I have a Sony deck from 1983 that has a setting for Type III cassettes, I’d love to find one of these Sony FeCr tapes and try it out, I’ll keep my eyes peeled lol. Thank you for the awesome content, keep up the great work 😊 4 and a half years late 😂
I'm on the border of beeing too young to having made mixtapes in my youth and really beeing into cassettes, but your videos make me feel I missed something. Eventually everything on my desk is about capstan motors and belts to get an old deck and a walkman working again. Stole a few tapes from my parents place, from a FE I to a Fuji ZII to see what this is all about. Thank you. I guess ;)
Keep up the good work 😁
@@CassetteComeback You do :D
Great song!
The "graphic scenes" were certainly hard to watch 😨. The Sony sounds great, and New York Night rocks! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Interesting about those SM pieces. I remember buying BASF Type 1's as a kid that claimed to have them but there was no top scraper piece on them, just the two side arms. This was probably late 70's/early 80's. After a while I decided to take a look at them and noticed that they had oxide residue on the parts that touched the tape. At that point, I took apart all the BASF's I had and removed those lever arms for good. Never had any tape issues with them removed after that. I'm getting a feeling that the SM system was a solution in search of a problem that didn't exist.
Yeah, if they were that good, why didn't everyone else copy them and why did BASF stop using them?
@@CassetteComeback Initially with the 'bog standard' BASF LH you did have the option of regular or SM editions but that changed around 1979. I rebelled after a SM snarl up and bought D in my teens as the pocket money tape.
There's a ex-BASF engineer, Wilhelm on Tapeheads, who has talked about the fact that the BASF engineer that came up with SM, became a higher up, and was getting loyaties from the use of SM in BASF and AGFA tapes. So, they couldn't get rid of it until he retired. Revox/Studer reported that the SM did make the tape better at shuttling back and forth, but that's on computer controlled, intelligent decks. Ye average boombox or car stereo isn't that smart!
The third SM part on the top was originally only intended for C-120's, and later even applied to shorter lengths of the top models like ferrochrom for a few years. Its intention was to prevent the tape from unwinding itself and getting trapped between the shell and the tape pack, wich happened easily with thin C-120 tapes and all double layer tapes.
Great info on Fecr’s. But tell us more about the song. That’s you? Such a cool retro vibe to it that evokes the period and exuberance of the 80s when cassettes were popular. The whole thing just works for me even though it wouldn’t typically be my style of rock, as I lean more toward alternative. I especially like the NYC theme and guitar work. I can’t play a note myself, but seems like it needs a guitar solo to fill the hole in the middle and a better ending to wrap things up, but so close to really being a gem.
I'm not the singer or the guitar player. I wrote it, arranged it, did the synths and drums and production. It's still a work in progress, I just used it to gauge a response to see if I'm on the right track with this style.
Such a great 80s vibe, that song really took me back, love it!
When you record with a 70 microseconds EQ settings and play it back at 120, it would sound brighter not duller. You have not switched to 120 EQ playback during your test, what we heard was played at 70 EQ as you cannot record at 70 and listen to at 120 at the same time 😉
Hi Tony. Greetings from Robert. I've found your excellent channel quite late. Regarding the subject in discussion, I will be short : the best cassette-decks for these FeCr cassettes are AKAI CS series from the late 70s. For sound quality I don't recommend GX series ! I had a CS-705 D (still strong regrets for selling it last year) and all I can say, regardless the dedicated Type III button, those decks are strong as a tank, very reliable and easy to maintain. I've tested a type III BASF cassette and a Type II TDK SA90 (Made in Japan - early 90s) with the Type III setting for comparison in recording. Results has been amazing ! Both cassettes sounds excellent ! You should try it. AKAI CS series are quite cheap ( from 25 30 to 100 Euro) and easy to find on internet but first of all you need to fully recap and replace the DC motor because the capacitors and the magnets inside the motor at that time wasn't so good quality to pass the time test. After I've recapped my AKAI, as I said, the difference "before" and "after" was from the ground to the sky. The sound quality for both tapes was amazing ! I hope my suggestion worth a try. Greetings from Mainland Europe.
Love it! Merry christmas Tony! I have found 5 used sony tapes like these 6$ each! They are like new. I record them on a JVC KD-A7 at the FeCro2 position and play them back at the normal position. High-pitched metal music with a lot of hi-hats and cymbals is softened and the sound is very warm dark and fluffy if you play them back on FeCro2. Saturation occurs quickly with little distortion but with pleasant compression. I use them to soften too hard digital sources because they sound super warm. Sometimes, i record them with Dolby B ( JVC ANRS) and play them on Super ANRS position. The Super ANRS boosts high frequency in a more natural tonal balance than playing them back as type one but with a little pumping effect on transients. They are fascinating to use. I feel the two layers are on battle against each other sometimes. To be continued...
They are unique and that adds to their appeal.
@@CassetteComeback After a service on my deck, i tried again and i used to record and play them at FeCro2 position. I prefer type three over type 4 tapes!!!! They have so much character. They just add some fluffy analog feeling. t's a pleasure to use them as a new master for CD recording.
Merry Christmas Tony! Whishing you all the best for the new year! The Sony did sounded great on the Revox, and the song is great (for me it could easily pass as a song from a movie soundtrack, like Beverly Hills Cop or such). Keep enjoying this fun rewarding hobby, Best regards, Moshe.
All the best to your and yours too Moshe.
So I gather these were expensive to produce because of the two layers and therefore quickly replaced by type IV which was better anyway?
Still recall the 85-Sony u x ad with a guy had flock of seagulls hair with writing -stop recording your new wave on punk tape🤣
That's not true, the SM mechanism didn't disappear in the mid 80's. Tapes from 1989 still have them, but you can't see 'SM teeth' because of the small window. BASF didn't use the SM teeth not in all cases, maybe because they would look ugly. An example is the Maxima II with the unprinted transparent window. This cassette has no SM teeth, but the mounting pins for them. I think the last ones which have these mounting pins are the yellow Ferro Standard I.
Great vid Tony. I've just ordered 2 of the BASF - one will be a shelf queen (I'm a big BASF fan) and with the other I'll take the risk with some recording :)
Type III are interesting for many reasons but there is also another reason for the slightly dull and laidback sound.
Ferric has good LF sensitivity and output, Chrome has good HF sensitivity and output - however both have lower sensitivity in the mids, or rather upper mids.
Therefore when you combine these 2 layer types you get a 'smile' contoured frequency response.
One of my decks, a JVC KDA66 has auto cal wich includes EQ inaddition to bias and level, so it lifts the upper mids to match the level of the HF and LF - voila - flat response.
If the recording goes well I'll rip to youtube on my channel and you can take a listen.
Have a wonderful christmas and new year. Rob
That's the thing, they're such hard work that I can't be bothered 😄
It is the mid-range dip which all double layer tapes have, more or less. Decks with a proper type III position should have a pre-set recording EQ which compensates for it. This is why it doesn't really lead to good results to record a FeCr tape in a non-type-III-capable deck, regardless how you set the bias and the EQ. The trick to record it in 70 µs and play back with 120 µs is only a workaround, which nevertheless can sound pleasing. You may wonder how this makes sense, but during recording, you never use 70 or 120 µs as the EQ which is applied to the tape. These figures do only point to the playback EQ, which is standardised. The recording EQ can be very different and depends on bias and tape type, but even on the head properties and on the recording amplifier in your deck, so it is not, and must not be standardised. In each deck, the recording EQ is preset to curves (for each tape type it can handle) making sure that this deck, on the tapes it is aligned to (type I, II, IV and maybe III), will record onto these tapes in a way that it will give you a neutral frequency response when played back on any deck with the standard playback EQ values of 120+3180 µs for type I, and 70+3180 µs for types III, III and IV.
Wow. Finally!!! Love these things
I have three Philips FX Ferro tapes of the 90's. Do you have one video of this model? That foil is red.
Great vid and was looking forward to this. Sony definitely have to be the best in terms of durability, even better than Maxell
I always found Ferrichrome cassettes to sound very muffled with a weird “hole” in the midrange (the crossover where neither the ferric nor chrome layers weren’t being magnetised very well?). I had an Aiwa deck with a specific setting (Aiwa marked the two manually operated switches for FeCr as 110% bias compared to 100% for normal ferric and 150% for hi bias tapes but with a recommended (on the switch) 70 microsecond equalisation for recording AND playback). FeCr tapes were NOT designed to be played back with 120 microsecond EQ as that would make them virtually as noisy as a normal ferric tape; it would though, of course, make it sound less dull...
I listened to Ferrochrome back in early 80s and that was the case -the dynamic range was better .-maybe it was a ageing case as with Metal -ageing meaning they sound the best just after the recording and maybe a week or 2 then later then metal would loose the highest pitch -Muffled but dynamic is Fe Ch tapes or maybe the recorders fault dunno -I had a nachamici their cheapest cassetterecorder with dolby c
You are incorrect regarding playback equalisation. Ferrochrome tapes were originally designed to be played back at 70 microseconds. The cutout on the top of the tape was primarily designed to auto set bias NOT equalisation. Ferrochrome cassettes needed bias closer to normal ferric cassettes but 70 microsecond playback equalisation.
I have three decks old enough to have FE-CR settings. A JVC deck. A sony music system. And a jvc boombox.
AS FAR AS I CAN TELL from the circuit diagrams all three use the standard 70us on playback.
For record;
- The JVC deck uses identical bias to normal, but it applies a unique record eq for fe-cr (ie different to the other three it uses for normal/cr/metal).
- The sony music system also applies a unique record eq for fe-cr.
- The JVC boombox uses normal bias but standard 70us eq to record.
All of which seems to imply that in a perfect world
1) the tapes should be recorded with
- a bias level close to the normal (type-1) setting
- a unique record EQ setting designed specifically for fe-cr tapes
2) played back at 70us.
Thanks for the insight!
I noticed my ancient Hitachi D-E99 records a custom EQ and bias for Type 3 and plays back at a Type 3 EQ and bias. If I play back the Type 3 at Type 1 it sounds overly bright and fuzzy sounding. I've only got a second hand Sony FeCr I got with a pile of old tapes and a 70s Sony deck, it sounds pretty good, probably better than most cassettes of that era. But a 90s super chrome kills it entirely. The SM on the BASF doesn't put a lot of force onto the tape, so if the tape sheds without it, the tape will shed later, the two layers separating from the polyester backing and hopefully flaking off inside the shell and not into the transport...
Merry Christmas, Tony! The ZX-9 and the Revox are heroes to support these archaic tapes! I Hope that the heads are still fine after this! 👍
No residue left on either as I cleaned them both afterwards.
Don't think I've seen any of my rare Type 0, 1 or 2 tape shells yet other than the standard rare grey TDKs the tapes may or may not be good enough to use anymore as lost their cases due to abusing my old tapes as a child but the looks have a lot of nostalga and I even still have the shells even if the tapes are not good can't bare to part from my tapes that may not work. lol
Maybe the Memorex Grey with the crappy pad might be in a video but I haven't got up to it lol.
My guess with those BASF tapes is hardening of the plastic, turned that originally soft springy SM mechanism into a hard scrapper. And I'll twitch onto it only taking a decade or so before BASF started to notice the issue in its infancy, and dropped it as fast as they could to avoid brand suicide.
Supposedly it was something to do with an engineer who did the patent and got a share. When he left, the dumped it.
Wow! I’ve never seen this one before. I used to have the Denon DX5 that has the FeCr “Type 3” and it plays fine on both biases, and it was combination of both normal and high bias in one.
What’s interesting that Sony had the SP Mechanism on all cassettes including the CHF, LNX, EF and Super EF.
The Denon DX 5 is actually not a real FeCr, but rather a double layer, cobalt doped ferric, just as the DX7, only with a different bias point and EQ curve tweaked to fit for type III position. A really good - and rare - tape.
Sony's SP mechanism consisted of the strongly folded slip sheets, combined with hubs that were thicker in the middle than the tape width. That trick ensured quite smooth and centered tape winding, without the need for any additional mechanical parts.
19:45 Słychać utratę wysokich tonów
The Revox is by far the best deck I've ever heard, it sounds always like a 30 000 dollars valve preamp, sounds better in tape position that the Nakamichies in source, maybe electronic components or input and output transformers.
I can't notice differences in tape source with this one, regardless of the tape, but in the others I do.
In this the dinamic and emotional interpretation of the singer was very evident, while in the Nakamichi in source mode was flat and full and sounded like the RCA cables that equipment comes with, the white and red ones, simply not musical just flat and dull.
I have a Revox pr99 but the copies are more expensive than buying the vinyl, I don't record any other things, maybe some vinyl records to 96khz 24bits, that have not been issued in digital format.
Thank for your channel.
Have a nice Christmas.
The audiophiles used say that the best sounding cassette deck was the Tandberg 3014A.
I have the Sony in 45 minutes. Found it in a drawer of my fathers cassettes. He had recorded music off the radio on it but the cassette and j-card are still in near mint condition and even has the small leaflet inside.
What a Christmas gift, thank you. Slightly curious, looked on eBay. If think metal is expensive, it is a fraction of FeCr.
I liked the quality of the Sony when you played it back on 120. A bit of dropout at the start but both tapes were made in Sandpaper Ferric days so that 1 second I'll forgive as that was the Ferric bit. It did have some warmth about it.
I think when you record them in 70ms (and playing at 120ms) there is even more emphasis on highs. I think it should be recorded and played back with the same EQ settings to be closer to source. I normally just have a good autocalibration deck (like Pioneer CT-95) let it calibrate as Type1 and that is sounding just fine...better that e.g. my Pioneer CT-F750 could record them using Type3 selector. However, I just bought Pioneer CT-1A to give'em a try with Type3 native support + automatic calibration. just for fun. becuase recording cassettes is just fun and nothing else nowdays, you know...
I'm sure a dedicated Type 3 setting will give better results. The Sony still sounded pretty good though.
@@CassetteComeback Yeah, Sony FeCr is very consistent and reliable in both Type3 and Type1 position. And I belive it is the second best Type3 after Denon DX5...also because I belive both of them are made using fericobalt for the top layer, while BASF is Crome and suffers from the same degradation issue as other Cr BASFs of the earlier 80s before they quitely switched to cobalt dopped feric formulations. Hence the dropouts and the dull sound. You might have a completely different results with them 30-40 years ago. and their today's market value has nothing to do with their sound quality - the most expensive FeCr is the AGFA's last generation of Carat HDX just because they are rare. at the same time they maybe be the worst FeCr ever for recording
Ferrochome should have become the standard. Metel was good for studio recordings on something compact but for home recording you would have warned the warmph of sound of the Ferric and Chrome combo instead a better as it sounds more like the tapes we are fond of and cheaper way of a balanced all around tape sound for the home market.
The Ferrochome would have been perfect for the Denki mech kit from these days as well so there wouldn't be such thing as a low end tape deck as they would have the right tape released to record on so it would sound worse than audiophile kit but wouldn't be so low end in it's own right.
Chrome 120 worked for pre recorded land they were Chromes where they extended the tabs to Type 1 with plugging the rest of the hole up with toilet paper then they duplicated the master reel on 120db mode normally used on a Ferric but it had the propities of the Chome in the recordings too.
Ferrochome being the format of choice for the Denki's or even just using pure Chomes with the tabs extended used in Denkis to make Chrome 120s would have stopped all this tapes are crap nonsence because of the Denki's becoming a thing made tape sound low end because people think they can only use Type 1 on it when it's strictly untrue they could use anything it could play for recording too in fact by extending the tabs to get Chrome 120.
Knowing the Tenashin Denki's were coming why did they take these off of the market instead of making it the new Type 1 for Denki times is beyond me.
But then I did say so myself in this long sentence as well you can do Chrome 120 so whats the poiny in a mixed compound unless it's Cobolt if you can do Ferrochrome like sound on a pure Chrome tape.
Some tapedecks with a manual cassette type selector had the options: "Type I, Type II/III, Type IV" - so they handled Type II and III the same.
The Sony tape was truly a good tape, and I have several. The BASF tape was a long fall down from what the Sony could do.
I think yo're bit wrong with recording and playing with different EQ. Main problem is different. Tape lost its properties and doesnt record highs above -10db. Easy to test using control sinus wave via computer/generator.
Happy Christmas Tony. I still have the Sony FeCr's I recorded on a Panasonic deck with the FeCr setting before they started this tape class numbering thing and a Sony TC-K-22 around 1981 through 1984 which did sound very good with lower noise than the original TDK SA. I play them back with a Yamaha deck with play trim to whip the top response back to somewhere near where should be. For me they eclipsed by the UD1 and later the TDK AR which I am sure you'd love that were better and easier to use on the increasing number of decks that had auto tape sensing that came out from the mid 1980's.
Merry Christmas to you too. Yeah, I'd take a cobalt doped ferric over most cassette types.
A Happy New Year!!! :D Interesting! :) As far as I remember, I never recorded on Type 3 Tape.. Only on Type 1,2 and 4 Tape, so this was interesting to see.. (and hear).. :D
I waited for this a lot.
Merry Christmas 😄
Subscribed as soon as I heard the techno on the disassembly fast forward.
Apparently they were planning to standardise notches for FeCr like this, which makes sense:
lh5.googleusercontent.com/-zaTh_riY_wY/VPC6v3CBg6I/AAAAAAAAKhU/3F9kyMtrPy0/s800/DUAL.jpg
So it's like a binary code, 2 notches giving 4 possible codings for 4 types. However this never came to be before FeCr disappeared, the ones actually sold had no notches like type I. This is why the only way to use FeCr properly is on decks with manual type selection.
There is a significant source / tape difference. But maybe Pioneer with SuperAutoBLE and HX Pro records better? Just for this cassette you need an automatic equalizer and Doldy HX Pro system.
Good call removing the SM guides from the BASF. I'm going to do that to mine! I have accumulated a few used Sony FeCr and BASF Ferrichrome tapes and have never really messed with them for the same reasons as you, my decks all have auto tape select so they're all but useless to me. Now that I know folks are interested in them and I have seen them in action here I think I'll get them up on the bizay for someone to enjoy.
These audio tape position III have unique great audio output i think a great level sound
Ol on a sec, you're now filming in 50 fps? :P
So it turns out both layers pry off those poor Basfs...
(Side note, keeping fingers crossed everything's gonna be okay with that package... uh oh)
And forgot to say: Merry upcoming Christmas! Peace and best wishes to your home.
All the best to you and yours too Leonid.
at 50 fps works perfectly here, at 60 ... well, it's like a cassette full of dropouts :P
I've been binging Tony's videos and I find it funny that in this one FeCrs are lil fuckers when they shed like that. It seems like a cool concept in theroy but of course, it's not that practical to own it for use; I looked on eBay and they are not cheap indeed but it could be a nice display or addition to your collection!
Merry Christmas to you too. I was always fascinated by type III, I thinnk as a 10yr old, would have been around 1981, you know give or take a few yrs I remember seeing type III in stores and wondered what the frigg do you use these for? But anyway thanks for the great video, and that BASF purple and gold look mighty tempting.
Found one of those BASF ones at a Sally Ann for $0.99 a while back and it did the same thing, shred itself to bits second I rewound it. Real shame
For me it's the other way around, I have a FeCr capable deck (Technics RS-M7) but no FeCr tapes 😅
Nothing sounds better than my AKAI reel to reel after I recapped it. Best spatious sound medium I've heard. Its not a 2" reel like the best ones, but so far better than phono, 8-track, CD or casette. Liquid audio orgasm.
Idk objectively cd is better than narrow format tape, so is dat if you want to get even more eccentric and bizzarre
@sunnohh
Actually even hi bit CD is still missing some of the information from analogue music..So in fact a high end Compact Cassette or reel to reel will actually be more accurate than any CD.
What's the source, usually, for your R2R signal ?
Get yourself a Sony TC-K75 or TC-K81. Types I, II, III and I are playable. Excellent cassette decks from 1979.
Thanks for the video, I thought it was just me with issues with my BASF Ferrochrom III tapes as they hit the end years ago. The tape in them is exactly like yours in the video. Memorex / BASF; they both went into the same garbage din. (the screws were also a pain with the BASF).
I remember always using these particularly...I'm not excited to find out people are hunting them, because I was just starting a high end tape set up for my Solid state Pioneer set up. (Have to have two take decks, it's in the manual you know.)
A friend of mine's dad back in the early '80s was a hifi enthusiast, and had a bunch of the BASF type IIIs (which were not cheap - and now I see this, were they even available in 83?). We nicked one of his blanks to record some Speccy games using a cheapo Dixons shoebox recorder. They were completely incapable of recording enough signal for the games to load, then the recorder ate the tape. His dad went apeshit when he found out.
Ah well, that's the only experience I have of these tapes I'm afraid!
I think many of us have similar stories. All part of the magic nostalgia of cassettes.
I bought my last Sony FeCr in early 1984 from a Hifi store in Chester.
Wow, that's some horrifying tape shed there, never seen a tape shedding complete stripes of the coating like this. But then I never got across a Type III even back then, so that's that. Sounds like I didn't miss much, though.
Don't forget these tapes are like 40 years old...
Hi Tony. 2 Questions.
I've just found one BASF Ferro Chrom. Of course it's not brand New but in a Nice condition. I would like to record on it. What is the best way? Should I take off the SM ( securty mecanism ) or not? I had one BASF Chromdioxid 120minutes with SM also. I only listened it on my Technics M224 deck tape from more than 30 years and avoid to use rew or ffcue fonction on it. But now, when I listen it the quality is not the same. Is it because of SM or because of 120 minutes (maybe not made for listening music)? I dont know. What's your opinion? Thanks a lot.
Goody bugger off gumdrops 👍 👻
Me rry Cr istmas Tony. Have a belting Fe stive period.
Auto thumbnail subtitles:
Hi it's Tony from Cassette Combat...
😄
😄
Usually in most of the BASF SM cassettes they just have the 2 tusks loading the tape on the hubs, never seen that third one on the top. That looks to me like it would be scraping the play side of the cassette.
Yeah. I've other SM in chromes that don't damage it. I think that one as the top is the culprit in the Type 3
Dear Sir, you have an epic intro!
I thought contek audio gold was a type o! I used to have hundreds of them!
They are, they just mimicked the look of the BASF Type 3
I would advice to spend a little money on a different deck that has a full BLE diagnostic of the tape and even sets (Calibrates) the EQ correctly. I noticed that a Pioneer CT-339 or a Pioneer CT-W701R has a perfect calibration system called "Super AUTO BLE" It does 3 things, optimizes BIAS, LEVEL and EQ. The CT-701R even uses auto reverse to play the tape in the opposite direction but measures through the same Side. Genius and wonderful to look at. EQ is excellent set between what this FeCr needs. it won't sound dull.
your sugestion is like swap super sport car with manual gearbox into volkswagen with auto gearbox. ps, it will soud dull, its III type cassette and non of yours pioneer etc has compatibility with type 3 cassettes. ps, get some knowledge.
@@Johny666EU Well, it's not officially mentioned anywhere on the deck because it was long dead, but it would be interesting if the Auto BLE could calibrate to type III.
@@robine5280 nope, it's not design to type 3 and will not calibrate it. Its like to use diesel engine for airplane fuel. It simply doesn't work. Type 3 is only on very old decks where the auto calibration didn't exist so there is not deck to do it.
@@Johny666EU Have you tried? Maybe it calibrates as some strange tape. Tape selection happens mechanically so it would recognize it as type I but I don't know how far it can adjust. Its adjustment range.
I mean, it records different test tones and listens back to them, saving the settings the sound was best with. Tape type shouldn't matter if the calibration range is big enough. I've got an S. A. BLE deck but no type III tapes and I wouldn't consider my ears to be suitable for testing this kind of stuff. Maybe Tony knows something about this but I don't know if he still reads his comments on old videos (or if he even gets a notification).
@@robine5280 nope, it will not as I have described above. Technical differences. Water is not petrol etc.
Hmm the 1st one sounded like the Ferric half of the compound at least to me was that Sandpaper coloured sound.
Off-topic but i watch another youtuber whose a gamer, hes also british, i am british, tonys british, i just love hearing the british voice. Theres something about it, probably the "slagging off voice" if you dont k ow what that is, watch tonys video about cheap cassettes. Specifically the "fag packet" part
Didn't the Sony Elcaset have type III as well? A little surprise that SM was in a Sony tape, though.
the sony tape is actually good
Been enjoying your vids. One thing: The 120/70 microsecond switch only affects playback - it is playback EQ. Has nothing to do with record bias. So if you're using a 3-head deck that setting only comes into play when you're monitoring (or playing back) off of the tape. It would be fun for you to try recording as a Chrome tape and playing back as a ferric. I did it a long time back - very interesting!
Type 3 playback in Revox was full of granulated noise - I didn’t like it. Not sure if if this is a Type 3 trait but it sounded weird to my ear.
Simply said, you can get a good type 4 for the price of a type 3 now
It's a nobrainer.
Exactly why I've no real interest in them...
You can buy a good ssd to record thousands of hours of hirez music for a price of a pack of type3s...but are you a true tape head then???))
Sure the "feel" of having a type 3 and playing with it is fun. But if the price is insane like that, then it's just bad.
Могу сказать, что в 80 процентах использования ленты basf ferrohrome, рабочий слой у них отслаивается, ввиду недостаточного качества связующего вещества между рабочим слоем и лавсаном. У лент 79-84 годов встречается нечасто, но бывает
Аналогичная проблема с Scotch Ferrochrom.
Эталонная кассета - видимо Sony, как прародитель этого типа, вообще японские ленты любых типов очень живучие.
Неплохо себя показала Agfa Carat, у меня кассет таковых штук 15 примерно.
Записать феррохром можно либо на 1й позиции селектора, либо искать Bias по сквозному каналу. У меня правда есть дека made in ussr - mayak 233, которая имеет селектор типа 3 и очень хорошо прописывает феррохром. Но: на ней уже стоит импортная головка и перенастроены усилитель записи и воспроизведения, а также генератор подмагничивания (я взял деку с уже таковыми переделками)
Есть еще Technics m 260, у которого ВСЕ 4 типа ленты на селекторе... но феррохром прописывает ужасно. Или неправильно селектор настроен на этот тип? Остальные типы пишет как надо