Detailed comparison between XLII-S and SA-X?

[valman13440]

Has anyone here ever performed a detailed test comparison between TDK's SA-X tape and Maxell's XLII-S?And if so what were your findings on the two?

[Mr. Lin]

That they're both really good. *Spin*

[Scorpion8]

And if so what were your findings on the two?

Buy/find/acquire as many of each or either as you can and be happy ....

[Marc Hugo]

Hi Valman,

Both are top type IIs. SA-X is dual layer - it is quite obedient when calibrating however as this is not always so with dual layer tapes. It is quieter than XLII-S and less likely to experience print-through. Both have rising sensitivities but the Maxell is markedly steeper which can give it a noticeable sting in its tail if you don't tame it with a bit of bias. Both can be pushed quite hard (having consideration to the fact they are type IIs). Dynamic range on the SA-X goes as high as 63.8 without Dolby; Maxell about .5dB lower. This is due to the lower noise floor of the TDK - both have similar 315hZ MOLs. The Maxell has the edge at 10kHz.

The Maxell has a more animated, vivid sonic signature because is quite tricky to tame that sensitivity altogether (anyway many, like me, like that sound). However, the TDK is also on the slightly more vivacious side of neutral.

Both are truly beautiful tapes, not to be taken lightly or unadvisedly or because you're lusting after great music - although that seems like a pretty good reason. In that case, both these cassettes will reward with music that sounds almost better than it should.

MH

[Nakdoc]

If you recall SA-X was introduced as an adjunct to SA, offering a brighter high end. On the calibration bench, SA-X is slightly underbiased on SA settings, with 400Hz reference levels being about equal. I've never been persuaded that it is any better than SA after resetting the bias, however my opinions do NOT include extended headroom, or overall sonics. I mention this because SA-X is supposed to be used in this underbiased condition and supposed to deviate from flat frequency response.

[Mr. Lin]

Hi Valman,

Both are top type IIs. SA-X is dual layer - it is quite obedient when calibrating however as this is not always so with dual layer tapes. It is quieter than XLII-S and less likely to experience print-through. Both have rising sensitivities but the Maxell is markedly steeper which can give it a noticeable sting in its tail if you don't tame it with a bit of bias. Both can be pushed quite hard (having consideration to the fact they are type IIs). Dynamic range on the SA-X goes as high as 63.8 without Dolby; Maxell about .5dB lower. This is due to the lower noise floor of the TDK - both have similar 315hZ MOLs. The Maxell has the edge at 10kHz.

The Maxell has a more animated, vivid sonic signature because is quite tricky to tame that sensitivity altogether (anyway many, like me, like that sound). However, the TDK is also on the slightly more vivacious side of neutral.

Both are truly beautiful tapes, not to be taken lightly or unadvisedly or because you're lusting after great music - although that seems like a pretty good reason. In that case, both these cassettes will reward with music that sounds almost better than it should.

MH

To my ears all the TDK SA-X tapes I've used so far are very neutral, but in a good way, not boring. This seems to be a characteristic of a lot of TDK tapes. The SA-X remains my standard favorite.

I have very little experience with the XLII-S, but the few of them I have used yielded top-notch results.

[Tapemystic]

But where to find these cool tapes nowadays? *sigh*

Generally somehow prefer the XLII-S somehow, due to that high end...*reelspin*

[Dimitar Georgiev]

On the calibration bench, SA-X is slightly underbiased on SA settings, with 400Hz reference levels being about equal.

I would not use the word 'slightly' in this sentence ...

Dimitar