Metal Type IV Vs Cr02 Type II Vs Normal Type I Cassette Tapes 

The bass on the metal tape was fuller than on any other, but 25 pounds for a single cassette is robbery, in my opinion. I can buy two original cd-s for that money and enjoy music without enduring the well known background noise of the tape. The sound test was instructive, it makes me appreciate the cd format even more than ever before.

Dolby can give variable frequency responses dependant upon the sensitivity of the tape used, so better to compare without using it, which will also demonstrate the comparative hiss levels.

I never got into Metal, Type IV cassettes. It was price prohibitive. Towards the end of the cassette's popularity and the dawn of the CD, some of the premium pre-recorded cassettes were being made with the Type IV tape. This was probably one of first times that pre-recorded tapes of any format came on as good a tape formula you could buy in blank form over the counter. I did buy pre-recorded tapes, so I wasn't interested. My preference was to buy the records and to record them to cassette. I got a better sounding tape recording that way. Working in broadcast radio, I discovered that recording records to tape enhanced the sound. In my tape type journey, I was using Ampex cassettes, which seemed to be the dominant brand for the pre-recorded tapes. I noticed that they left oxide deposits on my tape heads. So, I switched to Scotch, which was much better. In the days before Dolby, my Panasonic deck had generic noise reduction. I did notice tape hiss and I didn't care for it. Then the Maxell Low Noise cassettes came out. They only cost $1 U.S. each and were affordable. Maxell then supposedly came out with a better tape formula they labeled UD, for a little more money, so I tried them. They sounded about the same as my old Low Noise Maxells. They changed the label and re-branded the current entry level tapes "LN". These were actually below the original Low Noise version. Then they introduced the UD-XL. These were definitely an improvement. When they entered the chrome formula, they introduced the UD-XLII. These were better. I had moved up to Sony Cassette decks, which had the FeCr bias position. I bought some Sony FeCr tapes and was happy with them. As they were short-lived, I was looking for another tape type. In the meantime I tried BASF, which were disasterous. I checked with my friends and they were all using TDK-SA. I switched to those and never looked back. Oh, oh! What I noticed was your Type IV tape had better bass response.

I think you should try without Dolby setting putting back the top end,very interesting video many thanks

I still have quite a treasure trove of cassettes since the early 1980s up until the mid 1990s. I used to record my favorite songs from college radio. Most of those tapes still sound better than ones that I record today.

Fascinating video as always, and brought back so many memories!!! Back in the 80s, my friends and I - who were into rock and 'metal' ('metal' music and not metal tapes - too expensive!!!) used to borrow each others vinyl records and tape them onto 'blank' cassette tapes (Sony and TDK were always my favourite manufacturers). One of the terrors/occupational hazards of recording like this was if you left an LP on to record one side to tape - and then went off to do something else for 15mins - the record could sometimes 'skip' and you got 15mins of the same 3 second excerpt repeating itself over and over again on your shiny new blank cassette!!! I used to ruin so many blank cassette tapes in this way (clean your records properly!!!), as I always felt that a blank tape never sounded the same quality if you had to re-record over the top of it. Even the manufacturers eventually (and reluctantly) acknowledged (though not publicly) that the more often you re-recorded onto a cassette tape, there was a reduction in sound quality. Of course, the record companies actively discouraged the public from recording LPs onto blank cassette tapes (they wanted everyone to purchase their own officially-recorded cassette versions of albums) I remember that on the inner (paper) sleeve of many records at the time, the record labels used to have a printed graphic of a cassette tape made into a 'skull and crossbones' design with the warning that "Home Taping is Killing Music"!!!! For me, like yourself, the metal cassettes were very pricey at the time - £5 plus!! - but I did have quite a few Chrome tapes (which were designated Chromium dioxide or CrO2 tapes) and I would have saved up for these - particularly when making my own 'compilation' tapes. Admittingly, I often found that official commercial 'factory' recordings/releases on cassette tapes by the Record Labels always sounded vastly superior to anything you could ever achieve at home. Even with Dolby B,C or HXPro, I always felt that 'hiss' reduction in recordings was always at the expense of high-frequency diminution. Ahhh!!! Those were the days!!!

Still using cassettes. The irony is that a tape made from a digital source is so much better. ...vinyl already has alot of noise and distortion that seems to get magnified on a tape. So much so I almost never tape vinyl if I have access to a good digital sorce. I don't use Dolby either and the noise floor is noticeably lower when the sorce I'd digital . The eighties is the best decade for used decks .I think the technology hit its peak and the CD put the brakes on further development. One of the major improvements was the use of quartz locked direct drive. They generally are right on for speed and very little wow and flutter. I will never go back to belts for a recording. Neither will I record with a two head deck anymore the compromise with a single record/ playback head is too much for me. Especially with the record side , because it will always have that thin quality and no getting around it. The mid priced three head decks are probably the best bet in the long haul. The top end ones come with a lit of mantainence and hard to find parts. But the step up from entry level 3 head is very noticeable and worth it ..the higher level of precision and quality is a good thing in the long run.

Love cracking open a new tape. Peeling away the wrap is still so satisfying. I love collecting and using tapes (I have hundreds) and TDK or Denon hi bias were my tapes of choice back in the day. Now, I'll take any kind and be happy 😅 I like looking in thrift sores. I find type 2 and even metal tapes for a dollar or two.

i used to use normal tape for playing albums in the car and cro2 for recording borrowed or library albums back in the day, the tape times never really matched album times, then nobody was supposed to be recording albums due to pirating laws....but we did (-;

1. C - well balanced across all frequencies 2. D - good, but there is more high frequencies and less mids 3. A - So-so 4. B - not suitable for listening, very blurry sound TDK Ferric (Type I) are very similar to chrome cassettes.

Nice topic. I have been reviving my ole cassette tape collection. Making me wonder what the Nakamichi Zx C-60 reference tape would sound like (they sell for over £100 each). Such a different feel and listening experience listening to analogue. Now has me wanting to listen to my music library recordings that are on media such as MiniDisc, DCC and DAT.

This brings back memories the normal the chrome and the metal selector on my ghetto blaster so like many I couldn’t afford the metal tapes great nostalgic look back Marty god were old 😂

You can get great results from a good type 2

I used That's MRX-PRO back in the late 80's early 90's. My friends could not use them in they'r car/walkman/home stereo, due to the fact i tuned all my players to fit my bias.

they say cassettes are coming back--I 've been using them for years -mostly now in a Tascam 4 track machine

Great video mate, I'm same as you love recording to different formats and come to the conclusion after buying many tapes of eBay is that TDK SA 90's are the best sound/price..😁 Recently got back my Panasonic NV1000 from my mum's I bought in the 90's and recorded to Super VHS hifi stereo from CD and it sounds superb and it's analogue..Give it a go if you haven't tried it..Keep up the good work..👍

Techmoan has a great channel. Love his videos as well.

I used to love the metal tapes, they had way more headroom meaning you could crank up your record levels, made them really dynamic, low noise. As you say very expensive, think I was using a Marantz SD45 MK2 ? (as with all the Marantz tape players, highly under rated) long time ago now, anyway then this rumor started that Metal tapes increased wear(shortened the life) of the playback /record head......to add to the problem, most car audio players could not handle metal tape recordings (wrong bias) and they sounded awful in the car (really bright!!) and lets face it, that's why we were recording our music on tape, so we could play back in the car. Happy Days!

Good vid that one. Yesterday I bought a Sony KB-TS920s QS to replace a dual pot Pioneer W550-r, that is in dire need of a service. I'd say back in the day before digital media etc, I would perhaps have bought metal tapes (never did though), I used Chrome Type II's.. You can certainly tell the difference between them. I love the sound a cassette produces...... and mix tapes, who doesn't love a mix tape!! Not so keen on getting tweezers in the machine to un furl the tape when it decides to wrap itself around everything though. My 19 year old nephew asked me recently what a cassette was... I was a bit dumbstruck, to be honest.... Also, remember in the late 80's - 90's what they said about Vinyl.

Hey Martin - maybe I should clean up all my old metal cassette tapes and put them on eBay! 😂 All joking aside, I still rescue precious guitar parts for my songs that we recorded on cassette tapes (chrome!) on my faithful old Tascam Portastudio 424 that still works a treat. The big breakthrough in the muso world (for me anyway) was the introduction of Digital Audio Tape players in the errr... late 80s early 90s I think. I still have two DAT players and masses of Digital Audio Tapes 🤩- Richard

try recording and playback at 3x the normal speed and you will be surprised how much better they sound. you can get even better highs since the tape won't be running anywhere near its limit. also running faster means that any dust, creases or tape anomolies will take only a third of the recordings length improving reliability's. since this will also boost frequencies above 8 kilohertz your ears will be able to hear those frequencies again.

Excellent video and a good effort comparing the three types of tape. Just a few suggestions, though. 1. Turn Dolby completely off and see what that sounds like. You want to record with a signal that’s unfiddled with. And after 30 years, the Dolby circuits of B,C and even S probably need calibration by a tech with good test equipment. I just bought a Sony K611S deck and tried all the Dolby (including S) and although the hiss was reduced, so were the highs even on other decks with S. I record with Dolby off now. A little bit of hiss doesn’t bother me. 2. You said the deck has adjustable bias (and maybe?) record level calibration? Calibrate both before testing. I’m sure you can choose tape type but manufacturers only used that as a setting for one or two brands of tape. Users of cheap decks didn’t care there was no bias fine tuning but on a good deck like yours, it can make a difference. Some decks have a built in tone generator and a calibration button. Others just a single knob. But take a few minutes before recording each tape to dial it in. Too much bias and you lose your highs, too little and they sound too bright. Compare your source to a bit of what you recorded or let the deck use it’s built in tone generator until you get the sound spot on or close to it. I do this before recording and have gotten a normal bias TDK, Maxell or Sony tape Type I to sound as good as the source. 3. I’m not familiar with your Marantz deck, but a lot of decks from that era were 3 head models. Once you get everything calibrated for your tape and record level, use the Monitor button if there is one to go back and forth between Source and Tape. I’ve done this and had recordings on Type I tape that are nearly indistinguishable between the two. A good deck adjusted correctly can make a Type I sound amazing, but a lousy deck uncalibrated and adjusted wrong will degrade the sound and make even a Type II or Type IV sound bad. The most important part is though is to have fun. I stored all my decks away when CDs came out and just got into them again after finding Tony Villa’s “Cassette Comeback” (now Archived) channel. He has since stopped making new videos but there’s a lot of good info there to go through. Enjoy!

What!? I really thought that D was the original recording because it sounded better than the other ones for sure!

Metal IV number 1 Chrome Cr02 number 2 Normal Type I number 3. Great video!

Me encanta el formato cassette, en los fines de semana grabo ya que tengo muchas cintas vírgenes tuve la suerte de comprar a buen precio .

Morning matey. Do love my mix tapes! Totally agree. TDK SA was about my financial limit. Only once bought a metal tape, maxell if I remember right. Tbh your deck is making some pretty good recordings. I listened through my Nokia 3310 mobile and couldn’t not hear any difference in the four. Lol. Anyways are you able to review MC and MM cartridge one day? Keep the videos coming and cheers. Dave.

I'm with you buddy. I love all types of physical music. But even back in the day when we had nothing but cassette, I used type 1 cassettes. All the others were too expensive for me. Especially when all I did was record crap off the radio! 😆

I think Digital tape, and Mini disk started the dimise of tape, I really liked mini disk I thought it was a great format, then recordable CD's came along and that kind of became the go to format. I have fond memories of tape though, Sunday nights waiting for the UK top 40 with my finger waiting to stab the record button as soon as the DJ had finished talking. They were the days.

One 90 Min Metaltape back then had the same price as a doubble vinyl record.

Being that your Marantz SD-57 deck is only a 2 head with a frequency response 25Hz to 18kHz +/3 dB at -20 dB recording level (Metal tape) you will not get the kind of bass you hope to achieve like on some of the JVC and Pioneer Elite decks that go down to 10 or 15 Hz. Also the 18Khz limit on the high end is a bit low. Also, if you had a 3 head deck with calibration options for EQ and Bias so you can exactly match what the tape needs, I think the Type 1 tape will sound as good if not better than the Metal tapes do on your current deck. Great Review though.

Here in the US metal cassettes back in the 1980's and or 1990's cost about US$8 to US$10 for a package of 2. That would be for the lowest grade metal cassettes.

I have 310 TDK MA 90's in 31 boxes of 10. Bought them to play in my car's cassette player, dubbing albums and CD's simultaneously to my Nak BX 300 & Revox B 77. Anyways the car was totaled while stationary, stopped at a red light. Massachusetts drivers are dangerous. So, the cassettes just sat for the last 30+ years. My BX 300's transport microprocessor died and there is no replacement. I found/purchased a Nak BX 2, cheap. Question; As the tapes have been recorded, then played back maybe twice over the decades, is there any degradation issues I should know about before I play them to transcribe onto CD via a Tascam CD recorder? I lived in a town where there were over 5000 CD's at the Public Library which I transcribed onto Reels of Ampex 456, which are now worthless, due to tape shedding problems. While the TDK MA 90's with music like Frank Zappa's, Make a Jazz Noise Here, and haven't listen to in a long time but I really enjoy. Will there be any problems with the MA 90's due to sitting, unplayed for so long?

Nice video and great idea! But you missing the point with the different types of cassettes. The test is flawed in a major area that is actually what is the MAIN benefits with going up on the range of types! When you stated "I am using the same bias on all of the recordings on all of the types" When just that is the greatest benefit of them. It is like taking a Volvo and a Ferrari and now we will see which one has the best handling around the track circuit. But we use the same speed and they will go around at max 30mph..😂 You make it more difficult for your self by trying to decern witch is sounding better at the same bias and the normal type will look better than it is.. Just like the Volvo will handle and look OK at 30mph on the track.. The correct comparison is to use each type strengths then you will easier hear and get a bigger difference! For example if the Ferrari were driven at its limits that will with the Volvo at the same speed make it to fail! A lot easier to see the differences and the value of the improved handling and so on! For the tape: "Chrome tapes at high bias setting can record a signal +3 db above 0 VU, while metal tapes can peak as high as +6 db resulting in the best signal to noise characteristics." So it is unfortunate that you put into so much work and have this fundamental flaw in your testing method that favor normal and makes metal not to shine that bright as it can..❤😂

I had an Aiwa Adwx808 and it had the bias control. With that, I was able to record the highs you could get from a chromium cassette using a normal, type I cassette. The worse part for me was compatibility: my cassettes recorded with dolby C didn't sound the same on different tape machines, but in my Aiwa they sounded fenomenal. Another thing I hated about cassettes were the dropouts of the signal, this was less evident in metal tapes than in cheaper ones. I still have 10 used metal tapes but nothing to play or record them...

Trying all these tapes, without dolby, but rather only clean, pure dbx. No noise, levels of bass and treble acceptable for any cassette. Make compare this way. I have built my own dbx, back in 1990, still using it, it is unbeatable. Compression do dolby systems, as well....soooo....try it

I Michael Clyde Cope say that Vinyl Records Last Longer Than 8-Track Tapes, Cassettes, Reel To Reel Tapes, and CDs!!!

No Dolby for me back then.. Always Chrome.. Metal sounds detailed but thin to my ears..

I have 800 pieces NOS sealed type II 60 min tapes made in germany in the early 90s that I want to sell :)

Maybe MiniDisc instead?

I actually thought the metal tape had a more pleasing sound than the original, certainly to my ears anyway. The chrome tape was a little too bright for me, but still sounded OK. I think if you can get the metal ones at closer to £20, for me I’d say it was worth it over the price of the chrome at £8. If the metals are up nearer £30 then it’s a tougher choice.

Metal IV number 1 Chrome Cr02 number 2 Normal Type I 3

Not all Type II tapes are Chrome tapes, most of them especially japanese was Ferro-Cobalt, like TDK, Maxell, Sony, Denon, That's.....

Are you kidding me cassette prices have skyrocketed in the past 5 to 10 years. Metal tapes are going for at least US$30+ a piece. The highest grade of metal tapes for well over US$100. Even some normal bias cassettes are going for US$8 to US$10 a piece. And just about all the cassettes being sold on Ebay are new old stock never opened and used. Even used blank cassettes get a a premium price which is insane.

Time to service your cassette deck be it the recordings you made came out slightly wonky.

Who still uses cassette tapes. And why. 😂