PDA

View Full Version : Pioneer CT-S740S - A full review!!!


R.Daneel
01-09-2010, 11:54 AM
Hello my friends!

I know it took me a while and I have to admit that I didn't feel like doing this. But not because I was lazy or have given up on analog sound, but because I felt that I wouldn't give you guys a review that you deserve during all that holidays fuss. They do get me a little depressed butthat didn't stop me from spending time with my loved ones! So brace yourselves, here we go!

The review has been done on my own system comprised of:

- Denon DCD1420 cd player (Sony KSS151A fixed pickup mechanism) used as a transport only
- alternatively, I used a stabdard PC via an USB connector into the external DAC
- my own DAC (it is a CS4398 chipset oriented dac which works in a non-upsampling mode, uses a tube output stage with Mundorf prestige caps and Tantal resistors, the tube is anode-connected which lets more music out, separate power transformers for digital and analog sections)
- my own headphone amplifier (OTL tube design with truly best of power transformers - 2x250VA transformers for L/R channels and 28 caps per channel of high-quality electrlytical caps, 1x6H30 and 2xECC88 tubes, ALPS standard volume pot)
- cables were my own silver interconnets for analog transmission and a Furutech wire for a coaxial digital transmission. standard usb cable for PC-DAC connection
- the amplifier, though an OTL design and therefore should not be used with low impedance headphones has been built to match the Ultimate Ears Triple-fi 10 Pro earphones
- additionally, Sennheiser HD650 have been borrowed for this test from a friend of mine.

Comment on the system:
I do realize that my system is not high-end but against some very expensive stuff which, let's be honest here, I'd never spent that kind of money on, it stacked up well. For an example, dac matched a Marantz SA11 cd player which is around 3000EUR here. The earphones are truly superb bettering the Shure SE530 imo in every area! The amplifier is the best one I have ever heard, period. I have compared it to some very expensive stuff from the likes of PS-Audio, Naim, EAR and only the EAR Paravicini could match it. I am deeply fortunate to have met such talented designer that was willing to construct one for me. Also, pc has proven itself to be a worthy sound source and I was really taken aback because it sounded livelier and fresher when compared to denon. I guess when processing power is considered, pc is far more powerful.

On the tapes used:
I regret to inform you that by this time I wasn't able to get some metal tapes. To be honest, they are way too expensive for me to buy a few dozen. 10$ per tape is just not acceptable. So far I have had little experiences with them - I have used only sony metal-xr and maxell metal-cd tapes and to me, sony was a better choice as it was really a good tape with substantial improvement over a good quality high position tape. These are the tapes I have used:
high position
tdk sa-xs, sa-x, sa, cd-ing2
sony ux-s
maxell xlii
normal position
tdk d, ef
sony hf, fe
samsung sqc

After quick testing of each tape, I have decided to use the tdk sa-xs for this review. It is a tape that was marketed as the best high position tape and it does sound really really good. Unfortunately, I have only few of these and no way of buying some more because when I last checked, they were 12$ each! Tdk sa-x is not that far behind and in terms of basic sound parameters, they do share the same sonic signature. For normal position tapes, I have used a samsung sqc tape. I see these tapes for around 4$ on ebay now and I remember buying them at a local supermarket for 50cents each. I always thought of them as a cheap tapes but it is the best normal position tape I have heard! Extremely natural and silent and without any obvious flaws. I'd say, it beats the performance of a tdk sa tape, especially considering the price.

The music:
I have done testing sessions using different tapes and different music genres. I really do like different kinds of music. At heart, I probably enjoy rock the most. This is a list of some of the discs I used for testing:

- dire straits: all 6 studio albums and several live concerts including Alchemy which is my favourite album ever
- bryan adams: several albums including Waking up the neighbours and the latest album Eleven
- Bruce Springsteen: many albums and live recordings
- lots of good new bands including several domestic ones (there is no point is mentioning new Croatian rock&roll bands)
- Norah Jones: all studio albums out of which the 1st one is my favourite
- Dream Theater: Six degrees of inner turbulence, Images and words, Scenes from a memory, some live concerts
- Vangelis: film music
- several cds with classical music from the likes of Handel, Beethoven, Brahms, Mascagni, Bach - all good Deutsche Grammaphon recordings
- country music and american folk music aka Ellis Paul (my favourite)
- Roy Orbison (just love his voice)
- and so many others that it wouldn't make sense to mention them all

Most of this music was from prerecored cds but the rest was from a flac collection on the computer.

A little personal background:
Most interestingly, there is something you should probably know about me and this whole thing. When I was younger, I used to play in an orchestra for 12 years. We were really good and considered one of the best many times on international festivals all around the Europe. But it was no ordinary orchestra. It was an orchestra comprised of tamburica instruments (pronounced tamburitza). It is a string instrument that you play with a pick - similar to mandolin but with more strings, precisely crafted and tuned and that come in different sizes - from the biggest ones - basses (similar to counter-bass in a symphony orchestra) to the smallest ones called pearls. The reason why I am saying this is because we have done several studio recordings out of which I assisted on the post-production of the last album. That means mixing and mastering so I know how they sound in life, in studio and recorded on this cassette deck. Why is this important? Because these instruments produce tremendous harmonics and have dynamic range. They are the most difficult to record as the peaks of sound level can jump by more than 12db. I wasn't the one who mastered the recording of course, the audio engineers did that. All they wanted from me is to say if I think it sounds natural or not. The timbre these instruments produce is a challenge even for the most expensive equipment. That is why I have done several recordings using these albums.

The review:
Frequency response:
First off, I will say the deck sounds pretty balanced to me. On several different recordings I have never noticed that any part of the spectrum draws more attention than the other parts. It is very linear so to speak and I have never felt the urge to raise or lower the volume on the amplifier just to hear a fuller bass. Everything can be heard at the first listen and everything is there. The response itself is truly exceptional. There is no difference between the source and the recording here! Considering the equipment, it is the biggest compliment. The high end sounded limitless and extremely smooth in nature with no sudden peaks or sounds that i would normally draw attention. There are no colourations in the mid range and the low end is clear and tight. It is also very fast though I would not say it is overwhelming in any way. Everything is just right there without any obvious flaws. The best proof of this is listening to different genres of music - from classical to electronica or techno - you never feel there are any deficiencies and I never felt like saying - okay, that could have been done better.

Dynamis in general:
Okay, this is where pioneer shows all it's teeth. The dynamics are genrally excellent by any standards. I will say that they are nearly as good as the source with only a touch of dynamics dampening in the lower range of the spectrum, but dynamics of the high end is just superb. When listening to Private investigations (Dire Straits: Love over gold), which is a very mistic and spooky kind of a song, I could genuinely feel the story and the character in question. I was really taken aback by the performance. On some classical rock from Springsteen which are not so good recordings, I could feel the atmosphere nad could imagine the reflectors coming from on-stage and could sense the changes in the microvolume when the singer steps a little further away from the microphone. Also, I have to mention the other great thing here - the audionce which usually sounds high-pitched sounds very realistic and the clapping of the hands sounds just right. It brings me so much closer to the actual event. Classical music sounds very natural with woodwind instruments being so realistic I could genuinely feel the music inside - clarinets sounds so thrilling because the tiny changes in volume almost make it holographic. The brass section sounded full with the initial metallic sound and a long decay that was perfectly timed from start to finish. Piano sounds natural and I had a feeling it sounded better by the minute. Tamburica sound was done right as well. When recording, I set the level a little lover because I was afraid that sudden peaks might cause distorzion but there was really no reason for panic. Because, just when I thought the things might go wrong, the deck performed admirably calm and without any dynamics dampening or restrictions. The dynamics are sky-high and limitless. Attack and decay were handled really good as you could feel the strength and rise of the orchestra when it was time for the Ode of joy. It is like the orchestra itself is a single instrument with it's own dynamics and at the same time it is comprised of dozens of instruments each having it's own dnamics. But there is one thing I have to say here - I have always considered that a true high-end source is a source that can reproduce the micro-dynamics more naturally than a lesser source. In this context, this deck is definitely a high-end machine.

Detail:
hen talking about detail, it is not just a matter of finding new ones hidden somewhere in the recording but a matter of each instrument having it's own properties and signatures that make it distinctive in the group. I will say that all instruments sound very realistic and each one has a certain dose of personality and character. Saxophone sounds like a saxophone. The insight it gives into a recording is truly astounding. You can hear the saliva in the back of the singer's throat and buzzing of the reflectors and the climatization system in the concert hall. There is nothing more to say here, the detail is excellent and nearly as good as the source. Not to say that some details were not audible because they were, but maybe not so apparent which did not compromise the general performance.

Soundstage and spatial imaging:
For this test I used mostly classical recordongs. Not all recordings are that good mind you because even when different instruments were recorded on individual microphones, that doesn't mean the actual group of the same instruments had a dedicated microphone for each musician. But, soundstage in either case sounded wide in any dimension - that means width, height and depth. Instruments were well placed on the audiotorium and I didn't feel like instruments were more desely packed in the middle. They were equally widely dispersed on the stage. The soundstage has well defined limits and sounds very solid in general. Also, each instrument in the orchestra sounded like one instrument in it's own airspace that surrounds it but also everything seems like one whole at the same time. That is ver important that the sound seems coherent. Imaginig was really good because you can follow any< instrument from the left to right and vice versa. Of course that this is not exactly a characteristic of classical music but some electronica revealed that quite clearly. Also, there is no know center gap here because the instrument doesn't melt into the whole when it reaches the middle so you can really follow it's path. This is not that is always done well on audio components but it looks like they did it this time. All in all, the deck scores very high here. Again, not maybe as good as the source, but very close indeed. Though I will mention that in my experience that amplifiers are the first one to fail this test but source components are not in the least immune to it.

Resolution:
I tend to think of the resolution as a way of tracking a single instrument or a group of instruments in a musical performance. Good soundstage is a must for good resolution although it can be debated on. I used several electronica and classical tracks for this test. Electronica is a good test because there are many instruments that can be tracked but are not always apparent because of the effects used in the recording such as different kinds of modulations, filters, arpeggios and every other kind of effect known to man. Classical is good because there a lot of instruments in the orchestra and it is especially intersting to see how you can resolve a classical piece just when the orchestra rises the volume before the main theme. Regardless of that, the deck again shows it's strength in dynamics because it is what makes resolving an instrument a breeze. That and the soundstage is wide and deep enough for you to do that. In my previous comparison with nak Dragon, I have stated that Dragon does a bit beter job in resolving things but pioneer is not far behind. In fact, it doesn't give nakamichi a little room to breathe. Resolution is therefore excellent.

Musicality and final thoughts:
What is musicality? There are different definitions of course. For me it is how a reproduced sound translates to me - how and what I feel during the listening session. How do all the parameters (frequency response, dynamics etc.) connect and what effect do they produce and is the whole really larger than the sum of it's parts? To give you guys an honest answer, I do not know how it melts in to one whole but I will say that it provoked an emotional response in me. The music I heard was real and my God, when listening to Dire Straits' Tunnel of love from the Alchemy album I could almost taste the burhers on the grill and the smell of fried onions in the air and could see the purple neon lights Mark was talking about. It is a sensational feeling and profoundly emotional. Pioneer CT-S740S scored very high on all testing areas but it is this musicality that goes beyond words that it scores the most. I think it is an outstanding achievement. The source that it is, is a digital source in nature (digital states only 0s and 1s, not any kind of negative connotation) and sounds good by any standards imo and the Pioneer is definitely right there. It is not better, but there was never a moment I wanted to switch back to the source.

As some of you might know, I have had my share of bad experiences with cassette in general and was ready to let go of this whole thing. Some of you guys have given me a valuable advice. I don't want to menzion anyone, but Marc Higo was really good to me and I want to thank him. It has been a while since I felt I belonged to a certain forum but people here went out of their way to help me out in my quest for a good machine.

Comments on the cassettes used:
Though most of the testing was done on a TDK SA-XS cassette tape, I used all the tapes I have mentioned earlier. I especially liked the Samsung SQC normal position tape. Generally, Pioneer sounded great with every single tape and I was astounded by the performance with normal position tapes. The recordings were done using Dolby S and without any kind of NR system. In this area, i am not an expert and there are those of you ere that will describe it better than I will but I have never noticed and kind of supression or dampening of sound when using Doly S. In sudden dynamics changes, everything works just like with no NR. There is no lag in sound parameter. It is simply a matter of noise floor. But, to be honest, i didn't feel the noise was ever a problem because the cassettes used were very silent and imo the electronics in this deck are dead silent. The mechanism is very solid, smooth and silent and works perfectly. No matter how I tried on soft piano passages i couldn't detect any smudging caused by wow.

Aditionally, here is a link to the other thread with the DRAGON comparison:
http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?p=78558#post78558

And a thread with the pictures:
http://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=6846

It is a very striking deck imo, doesn't seem complex at all but is very well equipped and extremely simple to use. As it turned out, it is a deck not just for enthusiasts but for music lovers as well. For me like for probably most of you guys, music is what matters most in the end and wjole set of features in the world wouldn't compensate for bad performance.

Scorpion8
01-09-2010, 02:18 PM
Excellent review. Very well done and well written up. PM me a mailing address and I can send you a variety of metal tapes to re-test with if you'd like.

Dazen1
01-09-2010, 02:45 PM
Not familiar with this deck, but well done for taking the time to write a review.

Don't forget to grab those metals from Scorpion8!

close652
01-09-2010, 05:46 PM
Thanks for the detailed evaluation!

I will be happy to send you the Phoenix metal test tape what I got from Larry (speakerman1). We need your insight on the tape and you can try out a metal before Scorp's stuff arrives. You can keep it since here no one signed up for testing. Please PM your address!

Btw. I have a friend of Croatian origin and she used to play in a tamburica band.

Elite-ist
01-09-2010, 05:56 PM
Hello RD,

You just never know about a person's interests and upbringing until it's revealed. I'm glad you told us about your long involvement in an extrordinary orchestra. Explains your discerning ear! That's an in-depth analysis usng varied tape formulations recorded on your Pioneer CT-S740S. Are you going to take up the generous offers from Scorpion8 and close652?

Nando.

R.Daneel
01-09-2010, 06:00 PM
Guys,

I am really taken aback by all of this and I don't know what to say... I never expected such kindness but i guess i should have known better. THANK YOU all so very much for your kind comments and words. You have made this a wonderful day for me:)

Antun

PS having a friend of Croatian origin and that played in a tamburica orchestra is really funny to me and it does make me happy:) Now you have two!

close652
01-10-2010, 04:28 AM
This is tapeheads.net, this is how we do it :)

R.Daneel
01-10-2010, 04:52 AM
Hi guys!

It seems there is an interest here for tamburica music. I am currently uploading some music I selecten. It's only mp3 but should give you an idea of how it sounds. I have selected various songs including some you will surely recognize. Others you will not I hope you like them!

Will put in a link as soon as it is uploaded to rapidshare.

Edit: Here is the link:

http://rapidshare.com/files/333164979/Some_tamburica_music.zip.html

It can only be downloaded 10 times in total unfortunately because I don't have an account at Rapidshare.

Naknut
01-10-2010, 09:49 AM
I really enjoyed your review and insights. Hope to hear more as you get some more time in with the Pioneer.

R.Daneel
01-10-2010, 10:21 AM
I really enjoyed your review and insights. Hope to hear more as you get some more time in with the Pioneer.

Thank you my friend! I always look forward to your comments! If you'd like, you can download some music you have never heard before on the link in my previous post.

Scorpion8
01-10-2010, 11:03 AM
This is tapeheads.net, this is how we do it :)

Precisely! Well said.

CanJet
01-10-2010, 03:10 PM
I've been following your experiences with this deck and I'm glad you've posted this follow up review. Very well done. Thanks*Hi5*

R.Daneel
01-14-2010, 07:26 AM
Hello guys!

First thing first, I want to thank close652 for sending me the Phoenix test tape and also a Fuji Z-II type-II tape which I really didn't expect! So thank you very much!

According to wishes of close652, I will do the test pf the Phoenix metal tape on it's thread. I really didn't have the time for a real test as it arrived today and I will probably be modifying the system somewhat.

But of course I have put it in the Pioneer and played it. First impressions is that it sound really good. From a fine selection of music I could get a grasp of the sound of the Phoenix tape. Recording and playback test will follow as some modifications must be done to the d/a converter but straight up, this is a fine sounding tape. When the dac is done, hopefully Scorp's tapes will arrive also and will be able to compare the tapes.

I used to use Sony Metal-XR tapes before but they were recorded on a way below average equipment so it is really a not match for the Pioneer/Phoenix combo.

But I will say right away, the dynamics is truly superb - Pioneer generally ranks very high here but this just sounds so good. Stay tuned as I will do the full review in a while!

R.D.

Marc Hugo
01-14-2010, 09:26 AM
Hi RD,

This was a phenomenol read!! I appreciate your choice of music too. Having three decks from this production series, including the -740S, I thought your listening assessments matched precisely with my personal experience. Your summary on the merits of Dolby S are also on the button, so to speak.

It is streets ahead of the other two NRs. Put differently, it has all the virtues of B and C, (and A for that matter...but also a whole lot more, such as deck to deck cross-compatibility, recording overload management, etc) without the drawbacks that have traditionally induced many recordists to doggedly record without Dolby NR altogether.

Great read about a wonderful machine.

That headphone amp sounds a beauty!!

Like our TH colleagues, some tapes on their way to you too. I'll PM you for your address and give you details!!

Cheers - Marc

R.Daneel
03-27-2010, 08:57 AM
Hello guys!

I have finally managed to do some more tests on the Pioneer CT-S74S. I know I haven't been here in a while... it is no wonder since I haven't lost my job like so many other people unfortunately have here. So, let's get the show on the road...

Some new tapes use
Sony EF normal tape
Sony HF normal tape
TDK FE normal tape
TDK D normal tape
TDK MA-X metal tape
Sony Metal Master metal tape
Phoenix metal tape

Using the normal position tapes,,,
To be honest, I never really cared about normal tapes much. They always sounded bright, noisy and generally, low fidelity in rgards of everything! things are about to change.
When I first got this deck, i was bound to use only the best tapes i can find. After realizing that would be difficult, some of ou guys have so generously sent me tapes to test. Thanks to all of you guys! But, inevitable, I eventually started using normal position tapes. I have read a lot of things about them - one of the most notable was the fact about using NR on normal tapes. Apparently, Dolby S doesn't sound so good on normal tapes. Is it true? read ahead:)
Sony EF imo is one of the worst tapes ever produced. At least out of the ones that were sold here. So, regardless of the things I've read, i ran full auto calibration with XD system thus bypassing the HX pro circuitry. Also, used Doly S NR with it. to say that I was impressed by the sound would really be an understatement - I was literally blown away! i heard no hiss at all, the Dolby tracking was perfect - no rounding of edges around sound peaks, no dynamics loss of any sort and most importantly - very musical presentation. i was really taken aback with the performance of pioneer and this cheap tape I once considered the worst of all the tapes. The bass was solid, deep enough and dynamic. Mids were gentle, very liquid and at times, almost matched the source in coherence and full-bodiness of the woodwind instruments. Highs were reasonably extended and not bright at all. They were smoothened to the extremes and didn't seem to draw any attention, not more so than other parts of the spectrum. Just to bring myself around from this shock, I got myself a coffee and did a test on another deck - Technics RS-AZ7 with a TDK SA tape. Can you imagine my surprise when I discovered I like the Pioneer and Sony EF combination better, a lot better. As hard and unbeliveable as it sounds but this Pioneer can make the worst normal tape sound better thansome decks with chrome tapes.
The Sennheiser HD650 and the reference OTL amp along with the tube DAC v1.2 are a respectable source and I could really detect all the nuances of the sound that was being recorded on the tape. Not to sy, tape was better, it was close to the source material. How close? Close enough that in normal conditions - meaning, listening to music casually you wouldn't be able to tell the difference probably.
The Sony HF tape yielded better results of course with more natural soundstage, vocals and instreuments. Everything was still here, just on a higher level of closeness to the source.
TDK FE offered different presentation and slightly deeper bass and more peaky highs. This TDK FE can sound harsh at times with my other decks but not with this one. Pioneer just smoothens everything, not really taming the highs, just filtering out the harshness so to speak.
TDK D is much better than the FE tape - more natural, more quiet and moreresolving in general.

Pioneer and the metals
TDK MA-X metal tape is one awesome tape. The shells are superb and the tapes sound excellent. Very crisp, transparent, deep and extended and most of all - dynamic. Oh and Pioneer loves dynamics! So, I took some CDs out and set the recording up. The sound was incredible - shimmering with detail, full-bodied, bold and confident with excellent bass extension and dynamics. Midrange as coherent, very natural and extremely resolving that made tracking certain silent instruments a breeze. Highs were virtually unlimited and seem to have no limit in their extension. Again, close to the source, but not quite. I'd say it is moe of a opinion on the sound, it isn't as resolved as the source, nor as dynamic but it has qualities to it that make it one respectable source. I would say that this Pioneer is capable of transfering an incredible amount of detail from the source to the tape. Considering the source, I can think of no better argument nor compliment than that. can you imagine how it feels like when you get goosebumps because you are hearing a recording frome the source CD you have heard thousands of times but this time it sounds different and still excellent?
Sony Metal Master tape. What can I say, it is simply the best tape i have ever used and it is sort of a tour-de-force for me since I wasn't even aware tape was capable of this level of performance. It is certainly different than the MA-x. It is not as bass pinding nor it is as cool looking. But man, this is one amazing tape. Same reference recordings and setup and so it behines! The bass is fast, very fast. Almost like the source. Deep?* Abslolutely! Just not as voluminous as the MA-X. Mids are just silky smooth, very transparent, smooth and incredibly detailed and resolved. Resolution on this one was so good I had a sensation of holographic imaging, just like on the source DAC v1.2. Soundstage/imaging was simply breathtaking and all the instruments and vocals were at my fingertips - I could choose which one to track at any time. Highs? Incredibly dynamic (courtesy of the calibration XD system I presume, I wrote about that before), smooth, detailed and extended. This is the best tape I have ever heard and in generally, Pioneer/SMM combo is one of the most musical presentations out of analog sources I have heard. I didn't mention the tape hiss as there is really none.

Comments
I switched several times between Ultimate Ears and Sennheisers and each showed different characters of the Pioneer CT-S740S cassette deck. The ability to literally transform the normal position tape into something astonishing is truly a prime proof of why cassette was the cheap analog format that sounded good. Making a cheap tape sound so good is really something i didn't expect to hear. In terms of sound, I am almost more impressed by the sound on normal tapes than on metals. Not that it is better, but metals tapes are very expensive these days and so i expect such level of performance from them. That especially applies to Sony MM tape - 35$ for a piece is ridiculous but imo, every now and then I must have one:)

Features/Specs
I didn't say about the features or specs much in the past so will do that now. I can say that Pioneer is a complex machine. It has a auto calibration sy<stem. It is nopt only that but as Marc said, it is a super-charged HX-pro circuit that extends dynamics, especially in the highest frequencies. That would explain what i am hearing. Dynamics is definitely one of it's strengths. Moreover, it is pioneer's reference master mechanism. As far as i know, the last Pioneer to use it in it's penultimate edition. 3 heads are a given of course. The display is relatively compact but all the info is there - playback/recording status, tape, calibration, dolby, meters... Meters have 2 levels - one normal showing the whole dynmic range and the other one meant for finetuning the peak levels. FLEX system is sort of a high-frequency continuous adjustment system. On good tapes, the effect is virtually non-existant, while on the lesser tapes or tapes recorded on other machines, the effect can often be revealing and truly natural sounding. I have heard all kinds of re-mastering digital filters but nothing like this. The system works very consistently and you never get the feeling it is tampering with sound in any way. All this is controlled with very few buttons and the machine itself is wonderfully automated and virtually noiseless. The electronics are als0o very quiet. Dolby NR system works flawlessly and the tracking is done perfectly. Dolby S in particular works with no issues and there is no reason at all why you shouldn't use it. It has a very nice and solid aluminium front panel, motorised door with a cassette backlight in yellow/orange colour. Some buttons are lit during operation.
The mechanism is a work of art in itself.Rated at 0.023% w/f, it has the standard digital tension control system, dual capstans in a closed loop and 3 motors. the tape door is very light and opens/closes pretty fast and silent. The plate behind the tape has several sorbothane dampers at several points with which tapes is precisely where it should be. Also, it seems that pioneer in the recent models incorporated a slanted mechanism deck. I wish I could tell you why. I am sure Marc Hugo knows the answer!
it seems sci-fi but the response with metal is rated at 15-25kHz +/-6dB tolerance. It does 15-20kHz with chrome/normal tapes.

Once again, sorry for my absence and Jim - your walkman will be on her way!

Thanks for reading!
RD

Elite-ist
03-27-2010, 09:41 AM
Hello Antun,

Like you, I haven't used Type 1 to regularly record on. But, sometime ago I did dub a few Beatles pre-recorded tapes onto Sony HF tapes supplied to me. This was dubbed from my Nakamichi RX-505(pre-recorded tapes) onto my Pioneer CT-F1250. In order to fill the gap on Side B, I recorded a few tracks from my Beatles Mono CD box set. I didn't use Dolby and the recording sounded better than I expected. What was your experience with the Phoenix Metals?

Thanks for the update on the different types of tape formulations used in recording on your Pioneer CT-S740S! I won't be so shy using Type 1s, again; it just won't be for fellow Thers.

Nando.

Pacific Stereo
03-27-2010, 12:43 PM
Hey, a very nice review and follow-up. Thanks for doing this!

R.Daneel
03-27-2010, 12:53 PM
Hello Nando!

Thank you for your comments - I really forgot to write my opinions on the Phoenix metals:) it wasn't on purpose! Also, I haven't orgotten about our MD trade:)

Phoenix metal - addition
On the Phoenix metal tape, I recorded some Diana Krall from the computer in FLAC and through DAC v1.2. I also recorded some Norah Jones and also some Dream theaterfrom CD. The sound in all cases was very consistent and very bold. I'd say the Phoenix shares some qualities with the MA-X but not to such extent. Phoenix is dynamic, has really good bass with good depth and volume. It is reasonably transparent and the mids are definitively it's strength - it is driving and powerful, great for metal i used, but not so subtle when needed, especially when music such as Norah Jones - Come away with me is considered. Not that it is disappointing but MA-X was much better in that respect. Considering the price, it probably should be. I have also found that the highs are somewhat recessed with this tape, and this is something that happened more severely on my other two decks. Not that it is dull, but the dynamics loss in the highs and lack of detail when compared to the source is obvious. I considered it a good tape when it was 7$ but now it is 9$. It is a good tape for the money and despite the shortcomings in sound, those are really minor flaws. I think the shell is the weakest link in the chain as it feels rather cheap and bends under the slightets pressure.

...
also, I am sure some decks sound great with normal tapes but this is not the case with this deck. It is somehow different, Technics AZ7 is superb for SA tapes as it was calibrated for those and the combination of it's thin-film head and this tape is hardly matched. Hard to believe I know but IU have been convinced into this a couple of times when compared to Nak 680ZX. But regardless of that, when I tell you the Pioneer sounds better in every way with a simple TDK FE tape, you understand my full meaning. It is like I am suddenly dealing with another tape. Why? I have no slightest idea. I'd really like if one of you guys get something similar and see for yourself. This way it is just Marc and I to convince you guys.

I am after another deck now but I might as well just get one more Pioneer:)

scan80269
03-27-2010, 02:42 PM
Hi RD,
Since you use a PC as one of your sound sources, have you considered using WASAPI (Windows Audio Session API) instead of the standard Windows kernel mixer?

An audiophile colleague of mine recently discovered that WASAPI can help a PC to be worthy of being a component in a high fidelity sound system. WASAPI provides a low-latency streaming path for digital audio and bypasses the Windows kernel mixer for sonic purity. WASAPI is supported with Windows Vista and Windows 7, but may work better with Windows 7.

I have a collection of FLAC and WAV files that I play from my Windows 7 PC using Foobar2000 player and its WASAPI plugin. Instead of using the PC sound system or a sound card, I have an RME Fireface 400 connected to the PC via firewire. With Foobar2000 configured to send audio to the FF400 using WASAPI, the sound monitored with headphones plugged into the FF400 is quite excellent. This setup is currently my favorite sound source for testing my cassette decks.

The FF400 serves me as DAC, ADC, headphone amp, and even electronic instruments (oscilloscope, signal generator, spectrum analyzer, distortion analyzer, etc.) in conjunction with AudioTester software. I currently have three 3-head cassette decks connected to the FF400, but I would have connected more decks if there were more analog inputs and outputs!

The jitter specs of the Toslink and RCA S/PDIF outputs of the FF400 are significantly better than almost any PC equipped with a Toslink output from the sound card or the motherboard. My colleague and I also discovered that the Toslink output jitter from a PC is much worse with 44.1KHz content (e.g. CD) vs. 48KHz or 96KHz content. I have upsampled several 44.1KHz WAV files to 48KHz to mitigate this, but these days I don't even use the PC digital audio outputs, and stick to using the FF400.

Cheers!

R.Daneel
03-27-2010, 03:28 PM
Hi scan20869!

I don't wanna go off-topic her but I will say that i use USB interface as the DAC has usb, coaxial and optical inputs. I rarely use PC as a ztansport but may be using it in the futuer more often. I previously used E-MU systems 1820m soundcard with some superb DACs but the the DAC I now have is much superior even to the 1820m. RME 400/800 are great interfaces and on par with the 1820m but with better mic-pres than the 1820s. Enjoy it:)

Regards!
RD

Elite-ist
03-27-2010, 09:06 PM
Hello Antun,

Don't worry about the MD exchange, for now. I'm tied up, as well, with some home renovations. It's nice you detailed your experience using the Phoenix Metal.

You are considering another Pioneer casssette deck? Is there something you have your heart set on?

Nando.

R.Daneel
03-28-2010, 02:58 AM
You are considering another Pioneer casssette deck? Is there something you have your heart set on?

Hey Nando!
it seems to me that very few decks can even approach the level of performance on type-1s as these Pioneer decks. They are certainly great with chrome and metals too. I don't know yet but I might be considering CT-S830S or 640 decks. The 830 has a manual bias control but honestly, I see no practical purpose for this as with all the different tapes i have tried out (a lot of type-1s, 2s and 4s - especially 4s) the calibration was always spot on. One other thing, the recordings made on the 740 sound great on any other deck I have tried - there are no issues whatsoever. Almost like the tape was made on that deck. Tapes made on my Sony deck sound good on other decks but as long as the tapes are Sony. If I use others like Maxell, TDK or Denon, the results are far from ideal. This is not the case with the 740.

I know what ya thinking, and yeah - when I get another of these decks, you can expect a full review:)

Marc Hugo
03-28-2010, 04:11 AM
Hello Nando!

Thank you for your comments - I really forgot to write my opinions on the Phoenix metals:) it wasn't on purpose! Also, I haven't orgotten about our MD trade:)

Phoenix metal - addition
On the Phoenix metal tape, I recorded some Diana Krall from the computer in FLAC and through DAC v1.2. I also recorded some Norah Jones and also some Dream theaterfrom CD. The sound in all cases was very consistent and very bold. I'd say the Phoenix shares some qualities with the MA-X but not to such extent. Phoenix is dynamic, has really good bass with good depth and volume. It is reasonably transparent and the mids are definitively it's strength - it is driving and powerful, great for metal i used, but not so subtle when needed, especially when music such as Norah Jones - Come away with me is considered. Not that it is disappointing but MA-X was much better in that respect. Considering the price, it probably should be. I have also found that the highs are somewhat recessed with this tape, and this is something that happened more severely on my other two decks. Not that it is dull, but the dynamics loss in the highs and lack of detail when compared to the source is obvious. I considered it a good tape when it was 7$ but now it is 9$. It is a good tape for the money and despite the shortcomings in sound, those are really minor flaws. I think the shell is the weakest link in the chain as it feels rather cheap and bends under the slightets pressure.

...
also, I am sure some decks sound great with normal tapes but this is not the case with this deck. It is somehow different, Technics AZ7 is superb for SA tapes as it was calibrated for those and the combination of it's thin-film head and this tape is hardly matched. Hard to believe I know but IU have been convinced into this a couple of times when compared to Nak 680ZX. But regardless of that, when I tell you the Pioneer sounds better in every way with a simple TDK FE tape, you understand my full meaning. It is like I am suddenly dealing with another tape. Why? I have no slightest idea. I'd really like if one of you guys get something similar and see for yourself. This way it is just Marc and I to convince you guys.

I am after another deck now but I might as well just get one more Pioneer:)

On the button RD. I would haved predicted this type of outcome (Phoenix and MA-X) and would venture to say that the heyday TDK metals (MA/MA-X and MA-XG) would sound demonstratively livelier than a more IEC compatible metal, such as Maxell Metal-CD (and thus Phoenix). They not only had a rising sensitivity in the upper band, but also a high SAT 10kHz figure (anything from =4.7-5.0dB) which translates to a keen appetite for white hot treble. For matching to source, rein in that treble by adding a bit of bias. You'd be reducing distortion this way, so live a little and increase recording level if you want. The TDK metals sure are easy to like.

RD, you're right - the later high model Pioneer decks such as yours will produce literally amazing results with ordinary type one tapes. Unless you have tried this, it is hard to appreciate. A combination of heads and electronics are a large part of this, but Pioneer's late versions of Super Auto- BLE-XD really do relegate standard HX-Pro to the rubbish tip. I am not normally so forthright on otherwise subjective matters, but this is one of those "ah-ha" experiences.

MH

R.Daneel
03-28-2010, 05:00 AM
On the button RD. I would haved predicted this type of outcome (Phoenix and MA-X) and would venture to say that the heyday TDK metals (MA/MA-X and MA-XG) would sound demonstratively livelier than a more IEC compatible metal, such as Maxell Metal-CD (and thus Phoenix). They not only had a rising sensitivity in the upper band, but also a high SAT 10kHz figure (anything from =4.7-5.0dB) which translates to a keen appetite for white hot treble. For matching to source, rein in that treble by adding a bit of bias. You'd be reducing distortion this way, so live a little and increase recording level if you want. The TDK metals sure are easy to like.

RD, you're right - the later high model Pioneer decks such as yours will produce literally amazing results with ordinary type one tapes. Unless you have tried this, it is hard to appreciate. A combination of heads and electronics are a large part of this, but Pioneer's late versions of Super Auto- BLE-XD really do relegate standard HX-Pro to the rubbish tip. I am not normally so forthright on otherwise subjective matters, but this is one of those "ah-ha" experiences.

MH

Need I say more? Just recently I was telling Marc what I disovered about the 740 and the cheapest type-1s I could find and to my surprise he knew all about it but wanted to see if I would be able to see that, or rather hear that. Now if we were talking in person, I can imagine he would have that faint mysterious smile on his face. In all seriousness, this is the first time I am truly considering type-1s as a good tape to store my music on. It is like the deck somehow manages to tame the tape from a lion to a kitten but with as much killer instinct as a lion. Cheap type-1s are often overly too bright, but with no real extension in the highs, slow bass with very limited dynamics and harsh midrange that sounds grainy when compared to a tape like a TDK SA. The effect that this deck has on these tapes is literally jaw-dropping.

The deck was made in 1996 (I think) so my guess is what they were after is getting best possible performance with type-1s buthout sacrificing the performancew with chromes/metals. The reason for that would be the slow disappearance of higher end tapes from the market. This is my reasoning and I think it is solid.

I see now that we should have used more tapes in the DRAGON/Pioneer comparison - especially type-1s but I'll correct that when I have the chance. We used only good metals - MA-X and MA tapes, no type-1s unfortunately.

This is by far the most interesting aspect of this deck imo. It really does make your cheap tapes shine.

scan80269
03-28-2010, 05:09 AM
RD and MH, I wonder how the CT-S740S compares with my recently acquired CT-93, which appears to have an issue with the peak meters reading about 3dB low. Playing a TEAC test tape with 400Hz Dolby level signal, the CT-93 meters only show 0dB (+1dB in expanded range), whereas the Dolby mark is positioned between +3dB and +4dB on the meters.

I would like to know where the Dolby mark is positioned on the meters for the CT-S740S. My concern is that following the CT-93 instruction manual in setting the music peaks to +6dB for normal & chrome tapes and +8dB for metal tapes may result in over-hot recordings.

At this point I am only suspecting this to be a meter display calibration issue in my CT-93. The actual levels may be fine, and recordings done after Super AUTO BLE calibration sound very good, as long as I set the peaks to be within +3dB or so on the meters. I'm mainly curious whether my CT-93 has a unique issue or other Pioneer decks in the 90's such as CT-S740S are the same way. Thanks!

Marc Hugo
03-28-2010, 08:17 AM
Hi Scan,

That's interesting. I haven't got a test tape but I'll set to wide-ranging and check the Dolby notch and revert to you.

MH

mfdgame
02-02-2011, 09:09 PM
Sorry to be resurecting an old thread but I figured after all of the work you did on the review you are probably more than happy to keep it going and I just thought you may know the answer. I have a Pioneer T-1000s from Japan which seems to be a cousin of what you reviewed. I originally thought that was the CT-95 but now I'm not so sure. It might be a CT-s920s or even something else. Do you happen to know the answer?

Thanks

R.Daneel
02-08-2011, 09:16 AM
Sorry to be resurecting an old thread but I figured after all of the work you did on the review you are probably more than happy to keep it going and I just thought you may know the answer. I have a Pioneer T-1000s from Japan which seems to be a cousin of what you reviewed. I originally thought that was the CT-95 but now I'm not so sure. It might be a CT-s920s or even something else. Do you happen to know the answer?

Thanks

As far as I can see, it is incredibly close to the S920S deck. It looks like a CT-95 but the -95 has a much wider frequency response. However, Pioneer never made clear what their Wide-Range-Technology actually stands for but the high-end decks with this technology feature an almost unbelievable response (30kHz on the CT-95 and 25kHz on my S740S). In any case, I would hold on to that S920S!

Cheers!

mfdgame
02-08-2011, 03:23 PM
As far as I can see, it is incredibly close to the S920S deck. It looks like a CT-95 but the -95 has a much wider frequency response. However, Pioneer never made clear what their Wide-Range-Technology actually stands for but the high-end decks with this technology feature an almost unbelievable response (30kHz on the CT-95 and 25kHz on my S740S). In any case, I would hold on to that S920S!

Cheers!

Yeah. Its strange because the weight seems to match the CT-95 but the specs are on par with the CT-s920s if you take into consideration that the 920 is rated at +-6db and the T-1000 at +-3db. It might be an early Japanese release and released a couple years later in the USwith a few chip changes for dolby s or somehing. Yours looks like a T-07s in Japan.

danno78
02-09-2011, 12:47 PM
Sorry to be resurecting an old thread but I figured after all of the work you did on the review you are probably more than happy to keep it going and I just thought you may know the answer. I have a Pioneer T-1000s from Japan which seems to be a cousin of what you reviewed. I originally thought that was the CT-95 but now I'm not so sure. It might be a CT-s920s or even something else. Do you happen to know the answer?

Thanks

CT-95 and CT-s920s are far better than CT-s740s. Front side look similar but inside except the mechanism is verry different. Much better quality parts are inside in CT-s920s and CT-95. The recording/playback amp design is also verry different. The japanese versions are even better.
Pioneer T-1000s (1991) have no similar european/american brother.
Pioneer T-1100s (1993) is a CT-95 with remote control.

Warped Bezel
02-24-2011, 09:36 PM
I know I had a dubber (W) around 1994, not an Elite and not fancy, like a CT-Wx03/04R. Does anybody have a catalog scan or link to US models of that period? I would like to find another one someday.

Warped Bezel
02-24-2011, 10:43 PM
I think I found it! CT-W603RS

http://www.managemylife.com/mmh/lis_pdf/OWNM/97110204.pdf

I recall that it also had Super AUTO BLE. I got it on clearance and it was stolen not long after I bought it. THIS is probably the one as the 503 was B/C only.

lucky
04-28-2011, 02:44 PM
Hi,
i own this nice Deck and can follow your Review 100% .It was the last Pioneer with the tremendous Z-Drive Mechanism. Sometimes it can beat my Revox 215-S on playback with his genius FLEX system. My CT-S820S sounds similar, but came just without FLEX*bigthumbdown*for my big Collection of Prerecorded original Cassette Album.