I am working on a project where I will be taking cassettes and putting them on CDs. This is not a situation where I am too cheap to buy old albums on CD or MP3. These are tapes of songs that never made it anywhere else but cassette.

I was wondering what to look for in regards to the best sound quality possible (without costing me a fortune). I am going to use the RCA out of the deck into my PC to capture the sound, and I can then check out some good programs to fix up the quality a bit. Anyway, I read so much stuff about capscans (sp?) and Dolby HX and other terms I never heard before agreeing to do this. I also can't have this break my bank since I am doing this for free; I need to spend less than $150 or so. I am assuming I will have to go the ebay route, but if I can head to Best Buy or Circuit City that's fine too.

I also heard 3 head players are what to look out for but since I am not using the recording function, just the playback, I'd also like to know how much that means to me.

I really appreciate any input you guys can give me. I considered that Ion Cassette 2 PC thing they make but something tells me the deck is going to be cheaply made and I'd be better off using audio line outs with a quality deck rather than USB with a cheap one.

Also please keep in mind I don't need a dual tape deck since I will not be making copies. I assume this will substantially make my endeavor cheaper.

As some examples, here's two decks I was looking at:

http://cgi.ebay.com/NAD-SINGLE-STEREO-CASS...1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Sony-TC-R302-Single-St...VQQcmdZViewItem

I've never heard of the first brand (Nad? I hear Beavis and Butt-head laughing in the background) and the Sony one may be from around the time their quality plummeted, not to mention it's only a 2-head system (again I think that's only important for recording but some googling told me otherwise).

Thanks to anyone who can help!

Dual capstans generally help with steadier playback and are especially useful with the far too common problem of dead or missing pressure pads on old cassettes.

The cassette well cover should come off so it is easier to adjust azimuth and to clean the tape path, especially the pinch rollers.

3 head won’t mean much for playback only.

Auto reverse is a quality destroyer. Not good even if you can turn it off because the tape head platform is quirky.

All really good decks are single well. The cheapie ones are the dubbing decks.

Just to add to Andy's excellent advice, don't worry about Dolby HX Pro either. It's an effect that's only used during the recording process. It has no effect on playback, so a deck doesn't need any specialist playback hardware to benefit from a Dolby HX Pro recording or to play it back properly.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

I have just one minor quibble here. A 2 head tape deck has to compromise between best design for recording (where a relatively wide head gap is ideal) and playback (where a much narrower gap is appropriate). A 3 head machine doesn't need to make this compromise. So for best possible playback quality, all other things being equal, a 3 head machine really ought to be better.

I remember going through this exercise several years ago and did all my research back then. Read reviews, etc.. I can't remember it all, but based on all that I bought the Denon DRM-740 which was highly praised and is a 3-head deck. The other big name, but was WAAYY more expensive was the Nakamichi Dragon. I'm sure there are others, and everything always comes up on eBay eventually.

A quick word of warning regarding the Nakamichis. I can't remember which models off-hand, but some of them didn't follow the industry-standard EQ-curve for recording or playback and were overly "toppy" on the playback side with a consequently worse S/N ratio compared to many other cheaper decks on the market.

If the recordings aren't too "hot" then I'd recommend something along the lines of the TEAC V-1050 which is basically a Tascam studio deck without the whistles and bells or 19" rack-mount front. The playback electronics are capable of reproducing cassette content up to 21kHz (-3dB point relative to a -20dB reference recording with a Metal tape), assuming it's there in the first place.

I only mention "hot" recordings as being a problem due to a lack of headroom on the playback electronics. Otherwise, it's a mighty fine deck.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

PS I'd recommend NOT sourcing a cassette deck via Ebay. It's a fantastic way for an unscrupulous person to shift a deck with a worn out playback head as the buyer has no way of inspecting it prior to purchase. With the playback head for my TEAC costing in excess of £100, I'd hate to buy a deck for £100 on Ebay only to find that I had to spend another £100 on a new head for it.

Thanks so far for the replies, guys.

AndyH-ha, the NAD and Sony units I linked unfortunately do not have dual capstans. I will not be moving the player while I record. Is there much of a benefit to it? Luckily, neither of them have Auto Reverse.

Valnar, I can't find the Denon DRM-740 to buy anywhere, not even ebay.

Slipstreem, thanks for the advice. Some of these tapes will be high quality studio stuff, some will be less than stellar demo tapes from 1991. I checked out the TEAC V-1050 and it appears to be a UK product, I'm in the USA and was only able to find one for sale on, you guessed it, ebay. However the seller swears it's refurbished and contains a warranty:

http://cgi.ebay.com/TEAC-V-1050-STEREO-CAS...Q2em118Q2el1247

Still scratchin' my head here but you guys have been a giant help so far.

Not entirely true ... on most 3-Head-Decks, the head gaps on PB and REC heads are optimised for their task and show different width values (wider for the rec head, narrower for the PB head).

But since any good deck is a 3-head-deck, this is kinda moot. EDIT: cliveb beat me to it ;-)

If you can get your hands on an older 3-motor dual capstan Nakamichi machine with easy azimuth adjustment, you could save some time and energy, especially when dealing with source material from different recorders.



In my opinion, a dual capstan drive is a must because it is the only way to really ensure proper playback.

Normally, both capstans do have a slight difference in diameter or revs which will cause slight tape tensioning and therefore ensure the best possible tape transport.

An older AKAI GX machine (like GX-95) could be an interesting second-hand offer since these tapedeck's heads (the so-called GX heads) are glass coated and are believed to be extremely resistant against wear and ageing.

Damn, I can't seem to find a deck with 3 heads, dual capstan with easy azimuth adjustment, no autoreverse and single cassette for less than, well, a ridiculous sum of money

While you’ve been given advice about what should be best, there is another view to consider. I used to do a lot of cassette duplication of spoken audio material. Over the years I purchased a number of dual well decks in the price range of $200 to $250. They would wear out in a year or two and I would buy another. These were all single capstan, auto reverse because that is all that existed in my price range.

Using these decks, it was necessary to assure that the cassette pressure pads were always in good shape before starting, and I always avoided the auto reverse feature. The results were adequate for my needs. Since then, I’ve used the last of those dual decks to convert many hundreds of hours of spoken audio to mp3. Everyone has been satisfied with the results.

Once my good Denon deck went south, I also used the dual deck to recorded a number of commercially produced music cassettes, to make CD-Rs. The results were good enough to listen to and enjoy the music. The truth is that the majority of such mass produced cassette album don’t come all that close to matching a one off from a premium deck. If the cassettes were acceptable to begin with, the digitized version recorded from a less than premium deck may be acceptable too.

I recently bought two dual well decks from thrift stores, one for $10, the other for $5 (I more or less regularly purchase old LPs from thrift shops, so I’ve been in such stores quite a bit over the past six years). These two decks appeared to be in better condition than most I’ve looked at over the years, which is why I decided to take a chance on them. Both seem to function well. If there are many such stores in your area, you might consider looking through them. If the price is right, a few minutes of recording from a few cassettes will give you a reasonable idea of what you can expect.

I'm no expert on cassette decks, but just would like to point out that decks, like old turntables, tend to go with somewhat different speed. As long as you record and playback on the same machine it doesn't matter but play the tape on another machine and the pitch and tempo can be noticeably different.

At least that is my personal experience, but maybe I was just unlucky with the couple of decks I was working with. These were not dual capstan, 3-head decks but of good medium quality, no cheap plastic "twin-decks".

The last deck I purchased (I still have it) was a Pioneer CT-S430S. In my subjective opinion it plays my old cassettes with more than sufficient sound quality. It would probably do what you want to do.

/sb

I liked the Yamaha KX 580SE.

It is also a 3 head system and employes Auto Tape tuning. The machine will send signals to the tape and record and sample them then adjust for best recording parameters. also the KX 580Se incorperates the Dolby S type noise reduction which was the last type of tape noise reduction developed for home cassette usage.
http://www.superfi.co.uk/index.cfm/page/mo.../Product_ID/326

Here's another vote for thrift stores (and yard/garage sales, swap meets, car boot sales, pawn shops...). Around here, the thrift stores have heaps of cassette decks, usually for $10 to $25. I looked for one that was reasonably good (not no-name or bottom of the line), and that looked clean and with minimal wear inside and out. (I looked inside the cassette compartment for dust and dirt, and visible wear on the head(s) and pinch roller). I passed up a beat-up Nakamichi, but eventually found a harman/kardon TD262 which looked good, had HX Pro, Dolby B & C, and EQ for metal/chrome/ln. And it was recent enough that h/k had the manual on their website. Price: $14.99 (for the whole deck, not the manual).

For capture, I plug it into a Behringer SRC-2496 as an outboard ADC, with Toslink to an Audigy 2 ZS (set to bit-accurate mode). The SRC-2496 has a bar graph level display and input gain control, which is convenient for setting recording levels, and supports a range of sample rates and bit depths.

I think a brand like Ion is selling a USB cassette deck that you just plug into the computer, but I suspect you could get the same or better quality from a clean used deck and a USB audio interface like the ADSTech "Instant Music" for a fraction of the price.

I had transferred a lot of tapes to computer, and I can suggest some things to watch when getting deck: get as newer deck as possible (not brand new, but the model from 90's will do fine), look out for Dolby B, C HX Pro (because when recorded with HX Pro, it should be played back with it), dual capstan to get steady playback, and auto tape selection. You can do with manual, can be convenient. Why not older decks, well because the rubber transports in the mechanism tend to get worn out and replacement is hard to find. In my life I had various decks, Nakamichi, AKAI, Denon, Tascam, and now I have Yamaha KX580, and it is a good deck - and I think if you get something in that class you will be very satisfied. It shouldn't be too expensive when buying used one.
You didn't said anything about the tapes - are they normal, chrome or metal, which NR was used taping (if any) - and it is a big difference. Normal tapes don't have high dynamic range nor frequency response, but they do have high noise and if there werent any NR used when taping, ANY deck will do. Chrome and metal tapes (type II and IV) are much better, and for them you can go for better deck. Are there any TYPE III tapes (ferrochrome)? Decks with proper biases for them are hard to find. So...?

A nice feature (found on some Yamaha decks) is the ability to tweak the signal before it goes through the Dolby circuit. That circuit assumes a correctly matched reference level, and an old cassette usually has the high frequencies (especially) at a slightly lower level than when first recorded, hence the Dolby circuit doesn't line up properly with the recording, and removes more than it should. Tweaking the signal before the Dolby circuit helps to solve this problem. I think Yamaha called it "play trim" though their implementation wasn't perfect to my ears.

I wish there was a software Dolby B/C decoder, but I've never seen one. That would like you do a non-Dolby transfer, tweak it in Cool Edit, and then hit it with the appropriate Dolby noise reduction.

Cheers,
David.

No. Dolby HX Pro and tape bias apply to the recording side of the process ONLY. Neither have anything to do with tape playback which is the topic of the original post. Ferrichrome (Type III) cassettes use the same 70us EQ setting as Chrome (Type II) cassettes for playback.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

After spending countless hours reading all the suggestions here (I appreciate them all) I have come down to two units:

The TEAC V-1050

http://cgi.ebay.com/TEAC-V-1050-STEREO-CAS...Q2em118Q2el1247

and some Yamaha that fits Nakamichi, whatever the hell that means:

http://cgi.ebay.com/YAMAHA-PROFESSIONAL-CA...Q2em118Q2el1247

I am leaning towards the TEAC simply because it's TEAC recertified and the guy is offering a 90 day warranty; it's also a good amount cheaper than the Yamaha. However, the TEAC I believe is single capstan, the Yamaha is dual. That appears to be the only difference (at a $75 or so premium).

However I did find this at a local rummage store:

http://www.vintagecassette.com/Onkyo/TA-2000

They want $70 for it used naturally, but it isn't 3 heads and I have no idea if it's dual capstan. And I can't tell if ANY of the three I have easy azimuth adjustment.

The Onkyo TA-2000 is a relatively poor performer compared to the TEAC V-1050 I'm afraid.

Onkyo TA-2000 Basic Specs...
Normal - 20Hz to 14kHz
Chrome - 20Hz to 15kHz
Metal - 20Hz to 16kHz (all +/-3dB @ -20dB reference level)
Wow & Flutter - 0.07% (WRMS)
Transport - Belt Drive

TEAC V-1050 Basic Specs...
Normal - 15Hz to 18kHz
Chrome - 15Hz to 20kHz
Metal - 15Hz to 21kHz (all +/-3dB @ -20dB reference level)
Wow & Flutter - 0.045% (WRMS)
Transport - Direct Drive

They're in two totally different leagues really.

The azimuth adjustment can be easily made in seconds on the TEAC with a watchmaker's screwdriver once you've removed the front door. It simply clips on and removes by sliding gently upwards when the door is open. I can't speak for the ease of access on the Onkyo.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

Thanks Slipstreem. I am a bit of a dullard when it comes to the stuff about khz and what-not, would you say the KX-1200U beats even the TEAC? Does it even have any azimuth adjustment? Google ain't helping me there.

I'm not particularly familiar with Yamaha cassette decks, but I've managed to find the following info...

Metal - 20Hz to 22kHz (+/-3dB @ -20dB reference level)
Wow & Flutter - 0.03% (WRMS)
Mechanism - manufactured by Nakamichi (I think)

Even the 0.045% wow & flutter of the TEAC was/is significantly lower that any run-of-the-mill cassette deck, so whether or not the one area in which the Yamaha improves significantly over the TEAC really matters in the real-world is debatable.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

Welp, now I'm back at square one then because the TEAC does not have dual capstan.

/ripping hair out

The only difference the dual-capstan deck makes is to reduce the wow & flutter from inaudible to "more inaudible". I've never noticed the 0.045% wow & flutter on my TEAC V-1050 personally. The 0.045% figure is roughly on a par with a good direct-drive turntable. You don't hear many people complaining about those.

The figure quoted doesn't accurately reflect the figure you'll actually get anyway. There's always going to be some non-linear drag imposed upon the tape itself due to friction inside the cassette shell, the thickness of the tape isn't going to be perfectly uniform, and the unknown deck of unknown quality they were recorded on will have generated its own wow & flutter which will be permanently embedded in the recording. You'll also have wow & flutter on the source material from the original analogue tape recordings made in the studio (assuming it wasn't digital throughout) and more again if these specific cassette tapes were recorded from vinyl or dubbed from other cassette tapes.

It's obviously advantageous to have as low a wow & flutter figure as practically possible on the playback deck, but it very rapidly becomes a case of diminishing returns.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

So simply put, is it safe to say between the TEAC V-1050 and the Yamaha KX-1200U the TEAC has better sound quality? Again this is for a mix of professional studio tapes and old, worn demo tapes.

The only reason I am puzzled is because the Yamaha from what I read using google is very well regarded as an "audiophile's cassette deck" but I did not read such praise about the TEAC.

I've never listened to the Yamaha in question, so it's impossible for me to say. The TEAC in question shares the same mechanism and basic record/playback electronics as some of the 19" rack-mount studio-quality TASCAM cassette decks (the TASCAM 130 springs to mind) that were/are used in professional recording studios and radio stations. TASCAM are the professional audio division of TEAC, by the way.

The only way to find out for sure is to listen to both of them side-by-side in a blind test. As it's not practical for you to do this, I guess it comes down to whether you personally prefer the term "audiophile" or "studio-quality". They're both slightly ambiguous.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

EDIT: I've found the full technical specifications for the TASCAM 130 HERE. It matches the spec in the back of the V-1050 owner's manual to the letter (except that the V-1050 doesn't have the pitch control).

Thanks man. I am still looking though because I'm reading that dual capstans are pretty much necessary for older tapes.

Is the Nakamichi 581 a unit that was their top of the line stuff? Or is it a unit from when they fell off? Someone near me in New York City is offering one for $240. It's been modified with a "tape monitor output" whatever the hell that means.

The 581 is only likely to be of value to a collector rather than anybody who actually intends to use it, to be honest. They built them around 1980 so it's going to be heading on for 30 years old. Nice for sitting on a shelf as an ornament, but I wouldn't choose one over a newer Yamaha or TEAC for quality or reliability.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

EDIT: I've just tracked down the technical specifications for the 581 and if it were still in absolute A1 condition (which is doubtful after nearly 30 years) then it would still be slightly worse than the TEAC V-1050, on paper anyway... LINK

Wow, you're so helpful. Seriously thanks man.

I'm just racking my brain between the TEAC and Yamaha now because there's tons of threads online where people say the Yamaha sounds amazing, plus it's dual capstan, but the specs on paper don't seem as good as the TEAC you quoted. Damn.

No worries. That's what we all come here for.

I'm trying very hard not to affect your judgment, but the V-1050 makes almost perceptually transparent recordings on TDK-SA cassettes when recording direct from the output of a CD player, so I can't imagine it having any trouble recovering anything there is to recover from any cassette tape you put in it.

Having said that, any owner of the Yamaha you're considering would probably say the same thing about the Yamaha. I think that part of the problem is that once you reach the level of quality that either deck offers, it comes down to placebo effect as much as anything else as to which one a person goes for.

It's six of one and half-a-dozen of the other, as we say here in good old Blighty.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

Well thanks again for all the help.

If any one is interested, this project is for the early 90's rap group Onyx. They were pretty popular back then so if anyone here happens to be a fan I'd be happy to let you know how the project goes.

For sure! Keep us updated. There's nothing worse than a thread that dies without an ending, if you know what I mean.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

You know, the dual capstan thing might not be that important any way. Since I plan to do a lot editing/quality enhancing to these tapes, if a part of the song gets loose from the head, I'm sure I can re record that part and splice it in.

As long as the pressure-pad inside the cassette shell is in decent shape, there's no reason for that to happen. One way of improving playback from old tapes if the pressure-pad has become defective is to buy a new expensive cassette with a shell that can be dismantled (ie, remove the screws) and swap the spools and tape across into the new high-quality shell. You can reuse the new shell for every defective tape if you want to.

In the case of tapes that have been visibly creased or stretched and appear to curl up at the edges, a single capstan deck that makes use of the standard pressure-pad as intended may give better results than a dual-capstan deck that deliberately avoids use of the pressure-pad anyway. The cassette tape system was designed from the ground up to use the pressure-pad. I can't believe that deliberately avoiding its use is always better.

I guess it's probably swings-and-roundabouts in reality.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

EDIT: One thing you can do with old tapes to improve play speed stability is to allow them to run through the machine at normal play speed once before attempting to copy them. This allows the tape to gently realign itself on the spools in line with the transport mechanics. Also, tapes can become slightly sticky after extended periods of storage so this process allows them to "unpeel" gently rather than fast-forwarding and rewinding which can rip off strips of oxide in extreme circumstances.

That's really good advice. Thanks man.

Fast forwarding, in both directions, before starting to use an old tape, is pretty much standard procedure with most people who fool with cassettes. I've never run into a problem with destroying the coating, but proceeding slower could be a good precaution for older tapes. There is another problem, generally called shedding I believe, where certain brands of tape coating absorb moisture and come loose from the backing during playback. There is a low temperature "baking" fix for that, which must be used as the very first step.

As long as the spring and pressure pad are ok, the tape will function well enough on a decent single capstan deck. I've replaced the pressure pads in many cassettes. I've usually had an excess of old cassettes with unimportant content from which I could steal (or borrow) the spring and pressure pad. The spring isn't interchangeable between all shells, but if you have very many around, you can probably find one that works.

I've also glued new material to the spring in the case of missing or badly deteriorated pressure pads. It might not stand up to extended use, but that closed cell foam with self stick backing that one finds in craft stores, and sometimes with sewing or stationary supplies, has made quite functional pressure pads for me.

All this somewhat depends on the cassette shell being the older screw together type. Getting the parts out of those glued together shells, is a real pain, and difficult to do without damaging anything inside. The original shell is always totally destroyed in the process (any hints about a good procedure are welcome). However, the self stick foam can be applied without opening the shell where the original pressure pad has just disappeared.

A new, expensive cassette shell might be dandy, but if you primarily intended to just record to computer then store, one useable cassette shell could be used with many different tapes. The cheapest shell made is fine for storage.

Thanks, yeah the purpose of this project is not for archiving; it's for getting the best possible sound from these tapes so we can put them on CD. Like I said some will be demo tapes from 1992 with terrible quality, some will be tapes from 1999 near studio quality. We unfortunately just don't have a bunch of money to spend on the deck; around 150-200 or so USD.

Fast forwarding before playing is mainly to even out tape tension. Playing at normal speed will not accomplish this unless perhaps you can figure out a way to do it with the reels turning freely. Therefore, the fast forwarding process should always be done too (afterwards).

Oh yeah, since two people here just said in lieu of a dual capstan deck to just get a high quality cassette shell and put the spools in that, what's considered a high quality shell? Preferably a cassette I can buy fairly easily!

I don't know what cassette tapes are still available in your area. They're getting pretty scarce over here in the UK so I generally settle for something like a TDK-SA. They've always been my tape of choice anyway so being limited to them is no hardship for me. Recent ones have what's called a "Super Precision Rigid Cassette Mechanism II" shell. It screws together so comes apart very easily with a cross-head watchmaker's screwdriver in a matter of seconds.

It's not exactly the best shell that's ever been available, but I've used TDK-SA tapes almost exclusively for over 20 years now and have never had a problem of any kind with any of them, even when abusing them by making up Frankenstein combinations of guts and shells for recovery purposes. They work flawlessly, both as a medium and as a shell mechanism, in the TEAC I have currently.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

Searching ebay for TDK SA, I found there's like a half dozen types even at the same length. So I just bought one of every single one with a different cover I could find. I just spent $40 on blank cassettes

Mandatory - How to adjust azimuth:

listen to the tape through headphones, while adjusting the screw below the tape heads (you may need to remove the cassette well cover from the deck, or there may be a notch in it to insert the screwdriver). Adjust the screw slightly in both directions until the highs are the clearest. It's easy to tell. You should only need to do this once if all your cassettes were recorded on the same machine. If not, do it for every tape.

After adjusting, use a tape head demagnitizer. Be sure to turn off ALL outputs and disconnect the headphones, as you can blow your speakers and/or your ears.

Cleaning:

Get a good tape head cleaner. Radio shack sells some, or you can just buy the liquid in the bottle. If it's the cassette type, make sure it's a "wet cleaner". If it's the liquid, use a q-tip. Clean the heads, the pinch roller (the round rubber wheel), and the capstan (the metal bar that turns with the PINCH ROLLER). If you use the liquid, you need to fake the cassette recorder by using the fingers on your free hand to push up in the top of the well on the little hanging tabs. You want to clean the capstan and roller while the machine is on, so if it's running then you've found the right tabs. It's easier to do this with the cassette well cover off.

A whole lot of black gunk should come off.

Try a 3-head Sony deck. Get a single deck, not a dual. This would work, but do NOT use the auto reverse.

http://cgi.ebay.com/SONY-CASSETTE-TAPE-DEC...1QQcmdZViewItem

Excellent advice on the cleaning process, but the information given about the Sony cassette deck is incorrect. It's a 2-head machine, not a 3-head. It also has twice the wow & flutter of the TEAC referred to earlier in the thread, a slightly worse S/N ratio, and is likely to be a decade older. If it turns out to need a new R/PB head, you're most likely stuffed.

Brief Technical Spec

It's good advice to never use the auto-reverse feature on a cassette deck, but you don't always have the choice. I remember owning a fairly expensive Technics cassette deck where the R/PB head would automatically flip between reverse and forward modes every time the play button was operated even if forward playback or recording was requested. This lead to constant hammering of the end-stops and meant that the deck needed the azimuth recalibrating at least once a week under heavy usage to compensate for mechanical drift.

Based on the above, and assuming that Technics weren't the only people to do this, I'd advise never buying an auto-reverse machine just to be on the safe side.

Cheers, Slipstreem.

It's best to listen in mono (both channels added together, not just one channel!) when adjusting the azimuth. The correct point will be far more obvious.

Be aware that when poking a screw driver into the adjustment hole, it's easy to catch it on a lead which can cause a loud plop to be recorded onto the tape as it plays.

Cheers,
David.

Listening in stereo with headphones is just as effective as listening in mono.

I've corrected PINCH ROLLER, in caps, in my previous post.

IMO no it isn't. The out of phase signal components from a badly adjusted deck will cancel out when summed to mono. Unless your ears are wired in mono (unlikely!) slightly out of phase component will just sound strange when listening in stereo via headphones - and the region of "correct" azimuth appears far larger than it really is.

Summing to mono make the audibly "correct" region much smaller, helping you hit the actual correct adjustment more easily.

Why does it matter? Well, firstly, I assume you're trying to do the best job possible, which means getting teh azimuth as close to correct for each tape as possible. Secondly, you may intentionally or accidentally convert the signal to mono later - low bitrate coding, joint stereo encoding, FM broadcast with low power or poor reception. Any of these could reveal the shortcomings of the original "not quite right" adjustment.

Cheers,
David.

Hmmm...never thought of it that way. The above sounds right, so I sit corrected!

UPDATE: Just so everyone knows I appreciated all their advice!

I went for the TEAC 3-head deck recommended here, so that should show I take everyone's advice very seriously.

There are some tapes I am trying to convert that sound sort of garbled, but the tapes were never re-used and were stored very properly. Is there anything you guys would recommend I could do to fix this? I already tried placing the reels in brand new TDK SA shells. Basically it sounds like a worn out, garbled old tape than a new, fresh studio cassette you'd buy from the stores, and this is on tapes that should sound like the latter. Any advice?

Thanks!

There is a plugin for Winamp. However (according to the author)

It might be just a preset equalizer without the dynamics expansion, or maybe not?
Another interesting approach here.
I didn't believe that the soft implementation is so difficult.
~

I started a thread discussing the details of Dolby B and the possibility of simulating it here Dolby B simulation.

This Dolby B talk is interesting to me because this tape deck has it, yet I opted not to choose using it. Sounds way better with it off in my opinion.

I think the vast majority of cassette tapes were played with Dolby off because the added boost in treble frequencies sounded much more appealing than the overly reduced treble of poor decoding on most decks. My deck's Dolby gives noticeable breathing and pumping.