Des-Lab
08-02-2008, 07:51 PM
Many of you have been eagerly awaiting a detailed review of the Akai brand cassettes, which are currently a hot item. This is no doubt attributable in part to both their name and heritage as well as their super low cost.
This past week, I went ahead and ordered some from Batteries And Butter.com. And I received the tapes and here is my report:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAPE INFORMATION:
Brand: Akai
Model: SX (Type I/Normal) and GX (Type II/High)
Length: C-90
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Blanks.JPG
TAPE DESCRIPTION:
Both tapes appear to have been made as 'companions' for each other. Both come in a basic, no-frills transparent shell housing that is functional, but not of the highest quality. Both include screwed, as opposed to welded construction. The GX has patterned, semi-precision type hubs while the SX has standard, 'bulk' type hubs.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Cassettes.JPG
Both tapes are leadered. The leader tape does not appear to be of the coated 'head-cleaning' variety. Instead, it is a clear plastic broken by a pattern of diagonally oriented timing marks, printed in orange. Both tapes have a similar pattern, though they do differ slightly: the GX (top) has the stripe pattern in increments of 5 whereas the SX (lower) only has them in two.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Leaders.JPG
The actual physical magnetic surface of both tapes appear to be smooth and sort of polished, though I would not consider them to be mirror smooth. The GX is a dull, dark charcoal gray, almost a milky black in color. And the SX is a rich brown, not unlike the color of a typical milk chocolate candy bar.
Both tapes do have a semi-durable feel to them. There is some rattling and impression of looseness to them, though my initial impression was that I would not consider it to the level of a serious quality defect or shortcoming. However, when I fast-wound both tapes prior to their recording tests, the SX was very smooth and quiet whereas the GX rattled considerably and was noisy and choppy inside the deck well. It was immediately apparent that the tape does suffer from resonant vibration deficiency. So as noted in that review, this COULD be a potential long term liability with this tape. However, at play speed, neither tape appeared to drag, vibrate, or otherwise hesitate to move.
After performing standard cleaning and demagnetizing on my deck that I was to test them on, I began conducting the tests.
TESTING METHODOLOGY
When performing any type of sound based tests, it is important to take two things into account: OBjective and SUBjective. The former includes using straight, neutral test tones at various levels and noting how the test subject responds. In the case of the latter, it is using actual recorded source [musical] material that encompasses a variety of styles and intensities in an effort to mimic how the tapes might be used in the real world. It should also be noted that the differences in mono tone (test signal) versus music (multiple tones and frequencies overlayed with each other) can produce significantly different results even when all other parameters are identical.
So for the OBJECTIVE testing, I brought out the Stereophile Test CD. I used the following tones in my experiments:
Pink Noise
1Khz Warble tone
100 htz tone
50 htz tone
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Stereophile.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Stereophile_Tracks.JPG
For all four tests, I made two test recordings, noting where 1) they would sound as neutral as possible at a given bias setting at 0dB gain input, and 2) at what threhsold would the tape saturate into total harmonic distortion. During the initial recording phase, I would adjust the bias while using the decks live, off-the-tape monitoring function until I arrived at what I thought was the most neutral and natural sound. And during the second phase, I would continue to increase the gain input (again using the monitoring function) until the tape would fail as a result of signal overload.
For the SUBJECTIVE phase of the test, I used three musical recordings that I feel represent a good cross section of most of what I like to listen to.
The choices were:
1. "Renaissance Man" By The Ocean Blue, chosen because of it's emphasis on strong electric guitars, percussion, and bass lines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7xII2JbKys
2. "Fable" by Robert Miles, chosen for its heavy electronic beat, etheral sounding backing synthesizers, upper range keyboard chords, and high pitched female vocals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBnEG0QeQIQ
3. "Learning To Fly", by Tom Petty, chosen for the clarity of its multiple accoustic guitar overdubs and strong midrange vocals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jF7u2glCQw
Again. The recording process here mirrored that of the test tones: two recordings were made. One, to try and establish a neutral bias setting at or close to 0dB gain, and the second to determine the threshold of distortion.
The entire gamut of tests was performed on both model tapes.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Monitor.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Peak.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Progress.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Source.JPG
TEST DECK:
All tests were performed on a Denon DN-790R three-head cassette deck, using Dolby C noise reduction.
FINDINGS: Akai SX
Starting with the Type I, here's what my findings were. Some of it I found to be startling.
The tape had what I thought to be a higher ambient hiss level than would be considered normal. Though the use of the Dolby, maximum input, and correct[ed] bias did mitigate this somewhat.
For the PINK NOISE test, I achieved the closest matching bias playback at -1.5%. Maximum input level before audible distortion was about +3dB.
At 1khz, I could not properly bias the tape at any setting. The DN-790R has a manual adjust of ± 5% and I estimate that I would've needed about a -6 to -7 to get a neutral sound at this tone. Maximun handled input was +1dB, with a near total frequency rolloff occuring any higher. Total distortion occurred at approximately +5.
At 100 htz, again, I could not get this tape to properly bias. Near total frequency rolloff began to occur at just 0dB input. Saturation was evident at +3.
At 50 htz, roloff and failure began to happen at JUST -3. Distortion was evident at +1.
For the test songs, my findings were:
For #1: I was able to get a near bias match with the bias when it was reduced by approximately -2.5%. Distortion however was audible at +1dB.
#2 Also sounded best with the bias set at -2.5. Much to my surprise, the tape held a signal all the way to +4 on the input before saturating.
#3 Sounded best with the bias at -1.5 and also held up to +4 before saturating.
CONCLUSIONS re: SX:
Average at best, even taking into account that it is a Type I tape. Because the tape is probably more than 20 years old and was likely meant for decks that also went out of production at least that long ago, I would not recommend it for any type of high intensity modern deck. I would have to say it would likely be a much better performer on older models. The SX has a rather low headroom and high amount of base noise. As such, I cannot, by any stretch of the imagination call this a wide dynamic range tape. Its best use would probably be limited to speech, airchecks (AM/FM radio broadcasts), mono LPs, and some tape-to-tape dubbing. I would not recommend it for any kind of serious recording-stereo LP, master cut LP, CD, or live recording. In summary, if you want and need a high performance tape that you can 'push to the limit', I would not approve of this tape. Better tapes do exist and if you want the best advice, low cost or not, this SX is NOT the tape to use.
FINDINGS: Akai GX:
Testing/evaluation procedure for this tape was identical as the one used for the SX tapes.
Here are my notes:
Despite being a Type II, this tape has even more ambient hiss/noise than its Type I counterpart. Although the use of Dolby helped reduce the impact, no amount of tone control or signal input was able to mask it as well as a good tape should be masked.
For the Pink noise test, I was able to achieve a near neutral sound at +2% on the bias. However, the high base noise level remained. I was able reach the best compromise between reducing hiss and getting a decent sound by biasing at -.5%.
At 1khtz, the tape biased best at the neutral (0± %) position. Although the his remained, the frequency rolloff didn't occur until about +6 on the input. At this frequency, I was not able to saturate the tape, even with the gain turned to the maximum of +10.
At 100 htz, sound rolloff began after about +1 and saturated at +5.
At 50 htz, it was solid at 0 but then immediately dropped off. Complete distortion at just +3.
For the test songs, all biased best also at the 0/bias-neutral position.
#1 sounded good right with the peaks hovering at the 0 mark. Anything above that and very noticable distortion.
For #2, also solid-especially with the keyboards-up to about +3. However, most of the lower frequencies dropped off and then began to distort at +3.
#3: Pretty much the same results as #2.
CONCLUSIONS re: GX
The unacceptably high hiss level notwithstanding, this tape has some of the highest high-frequency headroom of any tape I've ever tested. However, like its SX companion, suffers from a weak ability to hold lows and mids. So that means that this tape also, is not one that could be said to have a wide dynamic range. Because of that, it can be hard to work with. I could only recommend it where fidelity isn't the most critical of expectations. It will definitely be at its best when most or all of the source programming is in the higher frequency ranges. Also, as noted above, the cassette housing seemed to rattle and shake a lot when in fast mode. This could be indicative of subpar construction and possible future azimuth and/or tape-pack issues that could lead to this tapes one strong point (its tolerance for high frequencies) compromised.
So again, unless this tape is to be used only for casual and non-critical applications, I would stay away from it. As aforementioned, better tapes do exist out there.
Final Thoughts
So why are these tapes so popular right now? I believe quite simply, because they are available at such a low price. This, also in the face of sky high "vintage" NOS and the dearth of any modern day offering of anything that could be said to be high quality. When price-to-obtain goes down, so do expectations.
Were these tapes to be priced at the level of some of their competing bretheren, I truly and honestly believe that overall, we'd be overall a lot more critical of them and much less likely to purchase them.
So to answer the question I know is on some of your minds, where do these tapes rank in comparison to others?
To be frank, I would place both models profiled here somwhere above the so called "name brand" junk (such as Cetron, SKC, and Laser), but below the respective entry level tapes from the majors-such as Maxell UR or TDK SD.
Thanks for reading.
This past week, I went ahead and ordered some from Batteries And Butter.com. And I received the tapes and here is my report:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAPE INFORMATION:
Brand: Akai
Model: SX (Type I/Normal) and GX (Type II/High)
Length: C-90
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Blanks.JPG
TAPE DESCRIPTION:
Both tapes appear to have been made as 'companions' for each other. Both come in a basic, no-frills transparent shell housing that is functional, but not of the highest quality. Both include screwed, as opposed to welded construction. The GX has patterned, semi-precision type hubs while the SX has standard, 'bulk' type hubs.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Cassettes.JPG
Both tapes are leadered. The leader tape does not appear to be of the coated 'head-cleaning' variety. Instead, it is a clear plastic broken by a pattern of diagonally oriented timing marks, printed in orange. Both tapes have a similar pattern, though they do differ slightly: the GX (top) has the stripe pattern in increments of 5 whereas the SX (lower) only has them in two.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Leaders.JPG
The actual physical magnetic surface of both tapes appear to be smooth and sort of polished, though I would not consider them to be mirror smooth. The GX is a dull, dark charcoal gray, almost a milky black in color. And the SX is a rich brown, not unlike the color of a typical milk chocolate candy bar.
Both tapes do have a semi-durable feel to them. There is some rattling and impression of looseness to them, though my initial impression was that I would not consider it to the level of a serious quality defect or shortcoming. However, when I fast-wound both tapes prior to their recording tests, the SX was very smooth and quiet whereas the GX rattled considerably and was noisy and choppy inside the deck well. It was immediately apparent that the tape does suffer from resonant vibration deficiency. So as noted in that review, this COULD be a potential long term liability with this tape. However, at play speed, neither tape appeared to drag, vibrate, or otherwise hesitate to move.
After performing standard cleaning and demagnetizing on my deck that I was to test them on, I began conducting the tests.
TESTING METHODOLOGY
When performing any type of sound based tests, it is important to take two things into account: OBjective and SUBjective. The former includes using straight, neutral test tones at various levels and noting how the test subject responds. In the case of the latter, it is using actual recorded source [musical] material that encompasses a variety of styles and intensities in an effort to mimic how the tapes might be used in the real world. It should also be noted that the differences in mono tone (test signal) versus music (multiple tones and frequencies overlayed with each other) can produce significantly different results even when all other parameters are identical.
So for the OBJECTIVE testing, I brought out the Stereophile Test CD. I used the following tones in my experiments:
Pink Noise
1Khz Warble tone
100 htz tone
50 htz tone
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Stereophile.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Stereophile_Tracks.JPG
For all four tests, I made two test recordings, noting where 1) they would sound as neutral as possible at a given bias setting at 0dB gain input, and 2) at what threhsold would the tape saturate into total harmonic distortion. During the initial recording phase, I would adjust the bias while using the decks live, off-the-tape monitoring function until I arrived at what I thought was the most neutral and natural sound. And during the second phase, I would continue to increase the gain input (again using the monitoring function) until the tape would fail as a result of signal overload.
For the SUBJECTIVE phase of the test, I used three musical recordings that I feel represent a good cross section of most of what I like to listen to.
The choices were:
1. "Renaissance Man" By The Ocean Blue, chosen because of it's emphasis on strong electric guitars, percussion, and bass lines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7xII2JbKys
2. "Fable" by Robert Miles, chosen for its heavy electronic beat, etheral sounding backing synthesizers, upper range keyboard chords, and high pitched female vocals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBnEG0QeQIQ
3. "Learning To Fly", by Tom Petty, chosen for the clarity of its multiple accoustic guitar overdubs and strong midrange vocals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jF7u2glCQw
Again. The recording process here mirrored that of the test tones: two recordings were made. One, to try and establish a neutral bias setting at or close to 0dB gain, and the second to determine the threshold of distortion.
The entire gamut of tests was performed on both model tapes.
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Monitor.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Peak.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Progress.JPG
http://x-2000r.0catch.com/images/tapestuff/Akai_Test_Source.JPG
TEST DECK:
All tests were performed on a Denon DN-790R three-head cassette deck, using Dolby C noise reduction.
FINDINGS: Akai SX
Starting with the Type I, here's what my findings were. Some of it I found to be startling.
The tape had what I thought to be a higher ambient hiss level than would be considered normal. Though the use of the Dolby, maximum input, and correct[ed] bias did mitigate this somewhat.
For the PINK NOISE test, I achieved the closest matching bias playback at -1.5%. Maximum input level before audible distortion was about +3dB.
At 1khz, I could not properly bias the tape at any setting. The DN-790R has a manual adjust of ± 5% and I estimate that I would've needed about a -6 to -7 to get a neutral sound at this tone. Maximun handled input was +1dB, with a near total frequency rolloff occuring any higher. Total distortion occurred at approximately +5.
At 100 htz, again, I could not get this tape to properly bias. Near total frequency rolloff began to occur at just 0dB input. Saturation was evident at +3.
At 50 htz, roloff and failure began to happen at JUST -3. Distortion was evident at +1.
For the test songs, my findings were:
For #1: I was able to get a near bias match with the bias when it was reduced by approximately -2.5%. Distortion however was audible at +1dB.
#2 Also sounded best with the bias set at -2.5. Much to my surprise, the tape held a signal all the way to +4 on the input before saturating.
#3 Sounded best with the bias at -1.5 and also held up to +4 before saturating.
CONCLUSIONS re: SX:
Average at best, even taking into account that it is a Type I tape. Because the tape is probably more than 20 years old and was likely meant for decks that also went out of production at least that long ago, I would not recommend it for any type of high intensity modern deck. I would have to say it would likely be a much better performer on older models. The SX has a rather low headroom and high amount of base noise. As such, I cannot, by any stretch of the imagination call this a wide dynamic range tape. Its best use would probably be limited to speech, airchecks (AM/FM radio broadcasts), mono LPs, and some tape-to-tape dubbing. I would not recommend it for any kind of serious recording-stereo LP, master cut LP, CD, or live recording. In summary, if you want and need a high performance tape that you can 'push to the limit', I would not approve of this tape. Better tapes do exist and if you want the best advice, low cost or not, this SX is NOT the tape to use.
FINDINGS: Akai GX:
Testing/evaluation procedure for this tape was identical as the one used for the SX tapes.
Here are my notes:
Despite being a Type II, this tape has even more ambient hiss/noise than its Type I counterpart. Although the use of Dolby helped reduce the impact, no amount of tone control or signal input was able to mask it as well as a good tape should be masked.
For the Pink noise test, I was able to achieve a near neutral sound at +2% on the bias. However, the high base noise level remained. I was able reach the best compromise between reducing hiss and getting a decent sound by biasing at -.5%.
At 1khtz, the tape biased best at the neutral (0± %) position. Although the his remained, the frequency rolloff didn't occur until about +6 on the input. At this frequency, I was not able to saturate the tape, even with the gain turned to the maximum of +10.
At 100 htz, sound rolloff began after about +1 and saturated at +5.
At 50 htz, it was solid at 0 but then immediately dropped off. Complete distortion at just +3.
For the test songs, all biased best also at the 0/bias-neutral position.
#1 sounded good right with the peaks hovering at the 0 mark. Anything above that and very noticable distortion.
For #2, also solid-especially with the keyboards-up to about +3. However, most of the lower frequencies dropped off and then began to distort at +3.
#3: Pretty much the same results as #2.
CONCLUSIONS re: GX
The unacceptably high hiss level notwithstanding, this tape has some of the highest high-frequency headroom of any tape I've ever tested. However, like its SX companion, suffers from a weak ability to hold lows and mids. So that means that this tape also, is not one that could be said to have a wide dynamic range. Because of that, it can be hard to work with. I could only recommend it where fidelity isn't the most critical of expectations. It will definitely be at its best when most or all of the source programming is in the higher frequency ranges. Also, as noted above, the cassette housing seemed to rattle and shake a lot when in fast mode. This could be indicative of subpar construction and possible future azimuth and/or tape-pack issues that could lead to this tapes one strong point (its tolerance for high frequencies) compromised.
So again, unless this tape is to be used only for casual and non-critical applications, I would stay away from it. As aforementioned, better tapes do exist out there.
Final Thoughts
So why are these tapes so popular right now? I believe quite simply, because they are available at such a low price. This, also in the face of sky high "vintage" NOS and the dearth of any modern day offering of anything that could be said to be high quality. When price-to-obtain goes down, so do expectations.
Were these tapes to be priced at the level of some of their competing bretheren, I truly and honestly believe that overall, we'd be overall a lot more critical of them and much less likely to purchase them.
So to answer the question I know is on some of your minds, where do these tapes rank in comparison to others?
To be frank, I would place both models profiled here somwhere above the so called "name brand" junk (such as Cetron, SKC, and Laser), but below the respective entry level tapes from the majors-such as Maxell UR or TDK SD.
Thanks for reading.