Luxman's Best Tapedeck- the K-05

[braxus]

http://audio-database.com/LUXMANALPINE-LUXMAN/player/k-05-e.html

Had a rating of 15hz to 27khz which equated to 20hz to 22khz +-1.5db. Was told it rivalled the Nak Dragon too. Used computer tuning.

This has got to be Luxmans best tape deck. Makes the K-112 I have seem not as good with what they made in the early 80s. Even used the pressure pad lifter and azimuth adjustment that Naks do.

http://www.thevintageknob.org/LUXMAN/K05/K05.html

Another great page.

[Scorpion8]

Sweet, nice looking deck.

[stuwee]

http://audio-database.com/LUXMANALPINE-LUXMAN/player/k-05-e.html

Had a rating of 15hz to 27khz which equated to 20hz to 22khz +-1.5db. Was told it rivalled the Nak Dragon too. Used computer tuning.

This has got to be Luxmans best tape deck. Makes the K-112 I have seem not as good with what they made in the early 80s. Even used the pressure pad lifter and azimuth adjustment that Naks do.

Both my K-112's just ran and hid, now they're cryin';-((;-(( I saw a power amp that might have been used in the system with it :
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=260259809061&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=016

[niklasthedolphin]

Somehow, I find the Luxman K-04 more interesting.

That one has rec level, Eq and bias fine adjustment seperate for each channel.
That is giving better options to pull out the best of a tape.

What I don't know is if it has azimuth adjustment?

http://audio-heritage.jp/LUXMAN/player/k-04.JPG

"dolph"

[MacGyver]

that's very lovely, indeed...


http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll310/shaorin-chan/V%20CASSETE%20DECKS/K-05.jpg

[braxus]

Bump for others to see compared to the Alpine variant.

[stuwee]

Thanx brax! I'm torn between both, one of each please santa *reelspin**reelspin*

[gamve]

Somehow, I find the Luxman K-04 more interesting.

That one has rec level, Eq and bias fine adjustment seperate for each channel.
That is giving better options to pull out the best of a tape.

What I don't know is if it has azimuth adjustment?

http://audio-heritage.jp/LUXMAN/player/k-04.JPG

"dolph"

I had a go at one of these earlier this year on Aus Ebay but it went for big money...It sold for substantially more than I paid for my Aiwa XK-S9000.
Make you wonder just how good these things sound?

[braxus]

I had a go at one of these earlier this year on Aus Ebay but it went for big money...It sold for substantially more than I paid for my Aiwa XK-S9000.
Make you wonder just how good these things sound?

Apparently quite good and some have said it rivals the Dragon. Same era too. Its in the top ten in my book. Not sure how it compares against the Aiwa, but both decks are tops in my book. Luxman always had good high end stuff back in the 80s.

And Dolph- I don't think this Luxman had azimuth adjustment. But it DID have a pressure pad lifter like Naks do.

[niklasthedolphin]

Apparently quite good and some have said it rivals the Dragon. Same era too. Its in the top ten in my book. Not sure how it compares against the Aiwa, but both decks are tops in my book. Luxman always had good high end stuff back in the 80s.

And Dolph- I don't think this Luxman had azimuth adjustment. But it DID have a pressure pad lifter like Naks do.

I don't really see the pressure pad lifter patent as something good for sound.
It might save minimal differences in head wear.
But Nakamichi claims it to stabilize the tape speed over the head.
That's rubbish talk.
Dual capstan close loop technology stabilizes tape speed over the head.

"dolph"

[Marc Hugo]

I don't really see the pressure pad lifter patent as something good for sound.
It might save minimal differences in head wear.
But Nakamichi claims it to stabilize the tape speed over the head.
That's rubbish talk.
Dual capstan close loop technology stabilizes tape speed over the head.

"dolph"

Nope, absolutely don't agree Dolph.

Nakamichi made no claims as to stability of tape speed over the head being a bonus to be gained from a pad lifter. The stability of the tape travel over the head had already been gained by a combination of top class reel tables, very good capstan motors (in particular FG Servos in their top decks), and an assymetrical dual capstan concept which was so steady on its own that it rendered a cassettes own pressure pad redundant as a means to maintain tape to head contact.

The pad lifter was a beneficial consequence of this mechanical precision and not the provider of it. The padlifter's own contribution was to erradicate both scrape flutter and tape skewing which could (and usually did) cause audible aberations, incuding phase wander.

The downchain side-effect of this excellent design was reduced wear on both tape and head.

Cheers - Marc

[Naknut]

I agree with Marc on this and to add another side benefit for the pad lifter. Some old prerecorded cassettes are missing the pad or spring and for the most part will not play in most decks but with the pad lifter used by Nakamichi I have been able to play these without fault.

[niklasthedolphin]

Nope, absolutely don't agree Dolph.

Nakamichi made no claims as to stability of tape speed over the head being a bonus to be gained from a pad lifter. The stability of the tape travel over the head had already been gained by a combination of top class reel tables, very good capstan motors (in particular FG Servos in their top decks), and an assymetrical dual capstan concept which was so steady on its own that it rendered a cassettes own pressure pad redundant as a means to maintain tape to head contact.

The pad lifter was a beneficial consequence of this mechanical precision and not the provider of it. The padlifter's own contribution was to erradicate both scrape flutter and tape skewing which could (and usually did) cause audible aberations, incuding phase wander.

The downchain side-effect of this excellent design was reduced wear on both tape and head.

Cheers - Marc

Well.
You have to admit there is slightly tendensy of self contradiction in this post.

First you correct me that this pad lifter did not have anything to do with tape speed stability.
Then later you tell me that "The padlifter's own contribution was to erradicate both scrape flutter and ....."

Flutter is speed variations of high frequency.
Wow is tape speed variations of low frequency.

Well.
I will still claim that if the close loop dual capstan construction didn't make the tape speed stable over the head, then it was badly designed.

Maybe it's somehow due to all the plastic in the Nakamichi tape drive.
http://www.smilie.dk/humor/c011.gif http://www.smilie.dk/humor/c102.gif

"dolph"

[Marc Hugo]

Hi, Dolph. Sorry for the delay in replying. Now, this is not a matter of semantics nor is there any contradiction.

It is not the padlifter on its own that achieves speed stability - it is the employment of the padlifter along with a good transport. Many things are involved of course. A sorbothane cassette holder is a canny concept. Many would insist on a good independent power supply. Everything helps. As you point out, a dual capstan transport should get this right. Certainly it will do the lion’s share of the work. But by permitting the pad to rub the back of the tape you induce the tape to experience miniscule variations in pressure – on a microscopic level it can bounce across the head, nullifying some of the decks precision with the relative imprecision of the cassette itself. Scrape flutter was one concern; skewing was another. The advantages to be gained from record head azimuth alignment prior to recording would be negated by phase inaccuracy induced by a cassette's pad being unevenly sprung. I admit this should not be common on good cassettes, but the possibility is there.

Since you specifically mention the aberrations of flutter and wow, consider that the only cassette deck family to deliver low bass almost devoid of head bumps are Nakamichi dual cap decks. Clearly, with their battery of interventions, they achieved this goal. There were in fact another couple of machines - these were the Technics RS-AZ6 and 7 which used thin film (flux level responsive) playback heads designed for DCC.

The presence of plastic parts may be preferable to metal parts as they are lighter, less abrasive, more absorbent, have less consistent densities (thus more effective at randomising and self-cancelling resonances) do not conduct electricity or heat and are strong insofar as they only need to be strong enough. Metal parts are not necessarily a mark of quality. Different materials should be used appropriately by the designer to take advantage of their properties.

All the best – Marc

[niklasthedolphin]

Hi, Dolph. Sorry for the delay in replying. Now, this is not a matter of semantics nor is there any contradiction.

It is not the padlifter on its own that achieves speed stability - it is the employment of the padlifter along with a good transport. Many things are involved of course. A sorbothane cassette holder is a canny concept. Many would insist on a good independent power supply. Everything helps. As you point out, a dual capstan transport should get this right. Certainly it will do the lion’s share of the work. But by permitting the pad to rub the back of the tape you induce the tape to experience miniscule variations in pressure – on a microscopic level it can bounce across the head, nullifying some of the decks precision with the relative imprecision of the cassette itself. Scrape flutter was one concern; skewing was another. The advantages to be gained from record head azimuth alignment prior to recording would be negated by phase inaccuracy induced by a cassette's pad being unevenly sprung. I admit this should not be common on good cassettes, but the possibility is there.

Since you specifically mention the aberrations of flutter and wow, consider that the only cassette deck family to deliver low bass almost devoid of head bumps are Nakamichi dual cap decks. Clearly, with their battery of interventions, they achieved this goal. There were in fact another couple of machines - these were the Technics RS-AZ6 and 7 which used thin film (flux level responsive) playback heads designed for DCC.

The presence of plastic parts may be preferable to metal parts as they are lighter, less abrasive, more absorbent, have less consistent densities (thus more effective at randomising and self-cancelling resonances) do not conduct electricity or heat and are strong insofar as they only need to be strong enough. Metal parts are not necessarily a mark of quality. Different materials should be used appropriately by the designer to take advantage of their properties.

All the best – Marc

It's a fine post, Marc Hugo.

I just don't agree in all of it.
However, continuing debate on these issues would be trifle and OT.

Stay Happy.

"dolph"

[draka1032]

Hello All:

I have the Luxman K-03, 2 K-05's and the Alpine AL-85 (their version of the K-04) and Al-90 (their version of the K-05) They really are wonderful well constructed decks and I would rate them as close to my Nak CR-7A and Dragon although not quite as nice as my Tandberg 3014A or Nak 1000ZXL. The construiction quality however is among the best that I have ever seen. None of them has user adjustable azimuth.

Kevin

[stuwee]

Hello All:

I have the Luxman K-03, 2 K-05's and the Alpine AL-85 (their version of the K-04) and Al-90 (their version of the K-05) They really are wonderful well constructed decks and I would rate them as close to my Nak CR-7A and Dragon although not quite as nice as my Tandberg 3014A or Nak 1000ZXL. The construiction quality however is among the best that I have ever seen. None of them has user adjustable azimuth.

Kevin

Welcome Kevin!! What an impressive array of decks you've got! Post some pics if you like *check*.

Craig

[draka1032]

I would love to, but apparently all of the digital pictures that I take are too large to post.

[braxus]

I would love to, but apparently all of the digital pictures that I take are too large to post.

Any photo editting program should be able to scale it down for posting on the net. Just put it at 875 x ??? (smaller #) and that should be good.

Also I'd love to hear your comments on the K-05 and AL 85 vs the Tandberg 3014A. I always wondered why the Luxman variants were taller then the Alpine versions. More circuitry?

[draka1032]

Unfortunately, I have been unable to figure out how to edit the photos to make them smaller. If anyone knows how I can do this in Windows it would be greatly appreciated.

My impression of Alpine v. Luxman is that the Luxmans are more solidly built. Not that the Alpine is poorly or flimsily built. The Luxman equipment always seems to be very solid. I believe that they were referred to as the "Japanese McIntosh".

Between the CT-93 and the XKS-9000, it's really a toss up. They are both lovely decks. However, the Tandberg 3014A is another class altogerher as far as I am concerned. I have 2 and would never give them up. They are, however, sensitive and expensive to repair.

[braxus]

Thanks Draka. I also have the Aiwa 9000 and Tandberg 3014 (non A), so I too will compare them when I get both of them fixed.

[niklasthedolphin]

Thanks Draka. I also have the Aiwa 9000 and Tandberg 3014 (non A), so I too will compare them when I get both of them fixed.

A short info on the difference between the 3014 and the 3014A is among other electronic designs in the small, capasitors were changed with better audio quality ones in the A model.

Just if it have any interest.

"dolph"

[braxus]

A short info on the difference between the 3014 and the 3014A is among other electronic designs in the small, capasitors were changed with better audio quality ones in the A model.

Just if it have any interest.

"dolph"

That's what I heard too- better caps in the A deck. But I talked to the guy who sold me my deck and also had the A deck. When he listenned to them both, he said he didn't notice any real sound difference between the A deck and non A deck. Not enough to make it an issue. Its the only reason I got the non A deck.

[draka1032]

Hi Dolph:

I have been a Tandberg fan for many years. I understood that there were differences in the dolby circuits and in the variable output between the 3014 and the 3014A. I owned a 3014 and sold it to buy the 3014A when it first came out. I immediately noticed that the variable output was much quieter on the 3014A than on the 3014. I loved them both and still do.

[braxus]

Hi Dolph:

I have been a Tandberg fan for many years. I understood that there were differences in the dolby circuits and in the variable output between the 3014 and the 3014A. I owned a 3014 and sold it to buy the 3014A when it first came out. I immediately noticed that the variable output was much quieter on the 3014A than on the 3014. I loved them both and still do.

Is there any difference if you are using the fixed output between the two models? Any other differences you've noticed in the sound between the two?

[niklasthedolphin]

Hi Dolph:

I have been a Tandberg fan for many years. I understood that there were differences in the dolby circuits and in the variable output between the 3014 and the 3014A. I owned a 3014 and sold it to buy the 3014A when it first came out. I immediately noticed that the variable output was much quieter on the 3014A than on the 3014. I loved them both and still do.

But isn't the variable output only connected to the headphone socket?

I only had 3014A and the 910 in that series so I couldn't tell the exact difference between the 3014 and the 3014A.

It was just that I heard that the caps, which can be important soundwise, were different. I also know of some small differences in the a varieties of circuit designs like the dolby thing etc.

But let's not drive this Luxman thread out of line.

Luxman K-0X serie is certainly also worth discussing.
I would love to have the K-04 but should it be before or after I get the Teac Z-6000?

"dolph"

[graffias79]

Unfortunately, I have been unable to figure out how to edit the photos to make them smaller. If anyone knows how I can do this in Windows it would be greatly appreciated...

I use a small free program called "IrfanView". You can download it from Tucows or CNet. It is not one of those spyware ridden programs that looks like it's designed by fisher price, it is actually a very powerful and compact program. I have been using it for almost 5 years now.

[draka1032]

There are two sets of outputs on the back of my 3014A's. One is the variable output control and the other is fixed. I think that other than these differences the 3014 and the 3014A sound very close.

[niklasthedolphin]

There are two sets of outputs on the back of my 3014A's. One is the variable output control and the other is fixed. I think that other than these differences the 3014 and the 3014A sound very close.

I forgot about the variable output on the 3014A.
Be aware though, that the steady output has 600 Ω and the variable one has 100 Ω.
Steady output is 0,7V and the variable has 0-5V.


Is the variable regulated from the same potentiometer as the headphone socket or is there a potentiometer on the back?
Even better: Is it an attenuator on the back?

The steady output has higher quality.
The difference in quality is less if it's attenuator regulated.

I *bang* my head for not remembering this and for never taking any pictures of the back of my 3014A while I had it.

"dolph"

[draka1032]

I'm not sure Dolph. I'll try and get a look at the back of the 3014A that I am currently using. The other is in storage.

[braxus]

Anyone have or heard one of these Luxman decks?

[gamve]

Anyone have or heard one of these Luxman decks?

Yeah Brax I Had a K-05 here for a while. Playback was OK on par (read not quite as good) with the Naks but It did not record on one channel and the auto cal did not work. Sent it back to the seller.
Cheers
G

[Nakdoc]

I don't really see the pressure pad lifter patent as something good for sound.
It might save minimal differences in head wear.
But Nakamichi claims it to stabilize the tape speed over the head.
That's rubbish talk.
Dual capstan close loop technology stabilizes tape speed over the head.

"dolph" Uh oh! Never say "never"
To achieve frequency response above 20kHz, tape skew caused by the pressure pad must be eliminated. Using a scope to look at a good deck like the HK 2000, and the 20kHz play response has no phase stability. It is as much out of phase as in phase. A nakamichi does 20kHz with fairly uniform phase stability. The 1000ZXL looks rock solid at 25kHz R/P!
With no pad, the dual capstan system must be used, but the tape tension also needs to be constant. It turns out the digital system used in the Dragon is not as good as the staggered speed method found in the ZXL, ZX7, etc.

[nakman]

Hi Gang:
What was the MSRP on one? I 've been searching for a TOTL deck for weeks. Do they have any issues? Found this forum, annnnnnnnnd I love it!!

Thanks,
Mike

[draka1032]

They were quite expensive in their day. Check ebay germany for any current prices. I love mine, but I need a Hitchi HA1020 IC to fixit and have not been avle to find one anywhere. How much is the seller asking?

[jdurbin1]

Whoops: didn't notice this thread was brought back from the dead before I responded with an answer on the 3014/3014A output scheme... will leave it posted anyway, for reference.


The variable rear panel output is controlled by the same pot as the headphone output.

I found the higher voltage/lower impedance output superior in sound quality when I was working on a 3014 on my bench recently. However, it means that both the speaker level (driven by power amp) and headphone level are controlled at the same time which might not be convenient. In my case the bench amp had its own output level control so I used it that way and just turned the amp down when I was using headphones to check some more detailed sonics during my post-alignment testing.

Also it would depend what you were connecting to. If you drive the input of a power amp directly (similar to the "CD Direct" concept), the variable output would be preferable. For a preamp with good input level match to the deck fixed output, there would be no benefit from using the variable output.

John

I forgot about the variable output on the 3014A.
Be aware though, that the steady output has 600 Ω and the variable one has 100 Ω.
Steady output is 0,7V and the variable has 0-5V.


Is the variable regulated from the same potentiometer as the headphone socket or is there a potentiometer on the back?
Even better: Is it an attenuator on the back?

The steady output has higher quality.
The difference in quality is less if it's attenuator regulated.

I *bang* my head for not remembering this and for never taking any pictures of the back of my 3014A while I had it.

"dolph"