The 1000 II is easily the most expensive model reviewed in this book and incorporates 3-heads, allowing A/B monitoring. 3 pairs of faders are provided for line/DIN input, microphone input and replay gain, and an additional mono fader is provided for a centre-injection microphone input.

Two position lever switches operate bias, equalisation, DNL, Dolby and A/B monitoring functions, and a memory counter and auto-reverse switch are incorporated. A push button opens the damped front-loading cassette holder above which is a hinged door concealing azimuth alignment controls, a Dolby tone alignment switch, and a pitch control.

All the deck functions are controlled by touch sensitive microswitch logic, and these operated smoothly at the slightest touch, although record was sometimes difficult to engage. Excellent peak reading meters are provided and user pre-sets allow adjustment of A/B levels separately for ferric and chrome. The model is encased in a very large wooden cabinet. The back panel includes 5-pole DIN sockets for mike and normal inputs, phono line in/out and remote control sockets, a mpx filter, and a tone level pre-set.

The microphone inputs had adequate sensitivity and a good clipping margin, but slight hum was noted on the right channel. The DIN input did not have the required input sensitivity, but normal DIN source did work very well into it, the clipping margin was also adequate and no noise degradation was noted, which is commendable.

The line inputs had good sensitivity and no clipping or response problems were noted. Distortion measured generally very well on the record electronics.

Replay azimuth was mis-set and replay amplifier hiss was clearly inferior to average because of the replay response being generally well up in HF (+2.25dB at 10kHz) on both ferric and chrome positions; the bass response was excellent however. Dolby reduced the hiss by 9.25dB, which is not enough, and the clipping margin was good but bettered by many cheaper models. Distortion, however, measured very well. Immense volume was available into all types of headphone with an excellent clipping margin.

Maxell UDXLI produced one of the poorest overall noise measurements. Distortion, however, measured very well and thus high levels could be recorded, HF compression also being better than usual because of the (questionable) non-standard equalisation. Recordings sounded very clean but hissy. The response charts were incredibly good, being almost a straight line up to above 25 kHz! UDXLII also produced an excellent pen chart up to 25kHz and distortion measured fairly well, clearly optimised for good HF characteristics; noise was, again, considerably inferior to average. HF stability was very good overall and there is no doubt that the overall sound quality was superb apart from the limited dynamic range.

The wow and flutter was rather average at 0.12% and some was noticed subjectively on occasions. As delivered, speed was very slightly fast (NB adjustable though). Spooling was very fast at 1.10 minutes, but no damage was noted to any leaders, etc. Erasure was excellent and better than average. The peak reading meters under-read transients more than usual but were better than 'VU's.

Economically, we liked the machine, although it was not easy to see the cassette window since it was obscured slightly by the hinged door. Considering the very high price for this model, I feel that the noise performance lets it down badly and Nakamichi have clearly optimised the entire performance for response needlessly sailing up to well beyond audibility!

I must dispute Nakamichi's replay equalisation, and if this was corrected and the record equalisation correspondingly adjusted, the signal-to-noise ratio would have become average. However, on such an expensive model it should be virtually better than any other machine, and I suspect that the replay head gap is so fine that the head output requires excessive amplification, thus increasing hiss. Many prerecorded cassettes will be found exceptionally 'toppy' on replay and old BASF test tapes, which are themselves incorrect, actually played back +5dB at 10kHz!

This model is used by many professionals for making high quality cassette copies of master tapes, but I have received many complaints that the recordings are not compatible with the average replay characteristics of the majority of cassette decks on the market.

The replay quality appears very muffled on other machines, whereas recordings made on other models will tend to be very brittle and hard on the 1000 II. For this reason, it is difficult to recommend this model, although it has so many good things about it, but if you are attracted to it then weigh up its astounding performance in so many parameters against the snags I have outlined. If only Nakamichi would become more compatible with the rest of the world, his machines would undoubtedly become worthwhile standards for the industry, as well as a delight for their owners.
.

NEAL have realised that there are keen cassette recording enthusiasts who like to have not only a very good cassette recorder but one which will allow experimentation with different makes of cassette tape, obtaining optimum results on almost any brand.

The model 103 is very similar to the 102 Mk II, but includes separate mixer controls for mike, DIN and line inputs, each control having two separrate concentric pots for the two channels and, like the 102 Mk II, user preset controls for ferric and chrome bias record equalisation and Dolby calibration levels. A push button permits the bias levels to be monitored, so that when changing a cassette tape type the bias can be reset to a different reading as explained in the extremely comprehensive and useful instruction book.

The general performance was very similar to that of the 102 Mk II but where differences were noted they were usually marginally better on the 103. The distortion levels, however, were very slightly inferior but our measurements show that this is primarily due to the bias settings adjusted by the manufacturer before delivery. Re-adjusting these, produced an improvement in distortion at middle frequencies, but of course deteriorated the very high frequency squash performance. Whilst the ferric replay response was very good, the chrome one had insufficient shelf cut, and a further l34dB cut would have corrected the problem and improved the chrome replay and overall noise levels further. The deck itself was identical, wow and flutter was .09%
and the speed accuracy was 0.45% - good but bettered (though perhaps unnecessarily) by many machines. No crosstalk or output clipping problems were encountered and whilst the DIN and line inputs were excellent the microphone input, although much more sensitive than the 102 Mk II, had unfortunately a rather low clipping level of 15mV. This would definitely prevent users from recording loud pop music live without distortion. Input noise and distortion levels otherwise were excellent.

The 103 incorporates a built in tone oscillator for setting Dolby level on recording very accurately, and this can be switched in by depressing a button on the side panel. The pen charts show the ferric overall response with Dolby to be good, but before the machine was re-biased more precisely a hole of some 3.5dB was noted in the response at 4kHz on chrome tape with a lowering of bias level, and a resetting of Dolby calibration and equalisation on chrome tape. The second pen chart showed a considerable improvement at 4kHz but allowed the treble to rise somewhat at 14kHz, which was not considered serious.

The level meters, surprisingly, were even better than on the 102, having a most remarkable response at 64msec (under-reading only -0.5dB) and at 8msec even more remarkably under-reading only 4dB. This allows very precise setting of peak recording levels, so that if a user knows his favourite cassette tape brand well optimum performance can easily be obtained.

This machine in general performed excellently and reliably, although the tape itself had the same phase jitter, azimuth and slight dropout problem. It can undoubtedly be classed in many ways as one of the leaders and should therefore do very well.

After pointing out the chromium dioxide problem to NEAL they stated that they would redesign the record equaliser to match the new record head type that they are now fitting to this new model. It seems possible that part of the rise at 14kHz could be due to insufficient damping on replay, since test tapes are not available extending further than 12kHz for chromium and 1 OkHz for ferric. It is thus difficult to see whether the error in response at very high frequencies is on record or replay.
.

The Neal 302 is a worthy successor to earlier models, and is usefully, if unusually, styled. The deck can be used vertically or horizontally, with the inputs and outputs mounted on the left side panel, including a 5 pole DIN socket, phono sockets for line in/out, two mono jacks for mic inputs and a stereo headphone jack. The deck employs three motors, and the micros witch-operated logic control is very smooth in operation, the capstan being solenoid engaged.

Remote control is on a front panel socket, while on the back will be found user pre-sets (long spindle screwdriver required) for record Dolby calibration and biasing for ferric and pseudo-chrome tape types. A ganged replay gain control complements a ganged record-level control, a record balance control also being provided (no centre indent, unfortunately). Push buttons select ferric/chrome switching, Dolby noise reduction, stereo/mono recording, mic/DIN/line inputs, Dolby tone and calibration metering. The two peak-reading meters are mounted so that the needles flap up and down towards each other, rather than the more conventional mounting method, and they were found easy to read. However, they were fed with a heavily equalised signal, and did not read transients particularly well, although they were better than' VU' types. The phono sockets were too close together, and thus somewhat fiddly, and some types of screened plug may not fit properly.

The mike inputs were decidedly insensitive, but Neal should be improving these shortly; quality, however, was good, and clipping margins quite reasonable. The 5-pole DIN input worked extremely well with adequate sensitivity, a good clipping margin and less noise than average, which is commendable; distortion and response also measured well. The line inputs were unusually sensitive, but clipped at 4.4V (which should not concern domestic users, though recording studios may find it annoying). These inputs were slightly noisy near maximum gain, but very quiet at more normal input levels. Some form of earth loop existed on the left channel which caused some problems, but was clearly a sample fault.

Replay azimuth was accurate and stable. Some bass loss was noted on replay, but the HF response was flat, and reasonably extended; the chrome equalisation did not show quite enough HF cut. Replay hiss levels measured well, and showed a lOdB improvement with Dolby, but chrome naturally did not show quite enough hiss improvement; replay hum levels presented no problems. Replay clipping margins were extremely good, thus allowing for even the highest level recording capability of iron tapes, and replay distortion figures also measured well. Plenty of volume was available into 8 ohm and 600 ohm headphones, although an earth loop fault produced breakthrough on the headphone left channel with the volume at minimum (sample fault again); 8 ohm headphones, however, had rather a poor clipping margin, though 25 ohms were satisfactory.

The overall results on TDK AD showed a response with some loss below 50Hz and some HF loss above 12kHz, although the response between 80Hz and 10kHz was very flat indeed, which is commendable (Dolby out). Dolby in response gave a general HF shelf 2dB down, and subjectively the sound quality was very slightly muffled, with some HF compression. Distortion averaged 0.55% at Dolby level, rising to just 2% at +4dB, this showing the tape to be slightly overbiased. Other tape types would be severely down at HF, and I suggest that Neal have chosen a very incompatible tape here. Background noise, however, was very low, and showed the usual Dolby improvement. TDK SA although slightly up at HF (+3dB at 14kHz), sounded excellent, and gave a very good open sound quality with almost no HF compression. Distortion averaged 0.7% at Dolby level, rising to 2.5% at +4dB, which shows an excellent bias compromise. Overall noise on SA though was very average, which is most surprising.

Wow and flutter measured very well at 0.1 %, but speed was a little fast. Spooling was too fast at 1 minute each way (a TDK AD tape consumed itself, but this could have been a cassette sample fault.) HF stability was excellent, erasure very good indeed, and crosstalk figures were also good. The DIN socket replay pins were live on record (non-standard).

Whilst this machine is capable of giving some excellent overall results, it seems to be rather overpriced, though it can nevertheless be recommended. The provision of sensible user pre-sets, and the good signal-to-noise ratios and responses on ferric tape types are commendable, but the metering was a little disappointing. I confess to disliking the ganged record with independant balance control personally, but in other ways the machine was well liked economically.
.

One of Philips' first front loaders, the 2538 is neatly encased in a metal cabinet, but incorporates only very basic facilities. Two ordinary slide faders are provided for record level setting, and no input switching is included . A 5 pole DIN socket (replay pins dead when recording) is complemented by phono line in and out sockets, the latter having preset adjustable level controls. Round push buttons select bias and equalisation simultaneously for ferric, ferrichrome and chrome tapes, two additional buttons switching in Dolby and/or DNL - the latter not really being worth bothering about, unless tapes are very hissy.

The deck controls were easy to use, allowing transfer from one function to another, and a memory counter and a switchable multiplex filter were also provided. The record level meters read transients reasonably well, but under-read longer bursts slightly and incorporated some HF lift, which was not liked. A peak-reading light came on at +5dB ref Dolby level. The microphone inputs did not mute the DIN input unfortunately. The record/playback head is made from solid iron silicon aluminium alloy (fsx) which should give long life and good HF performance.

The microphone inputs were very insensitive, but had a good clipping margin, and the sound quality was good. The 5 pole DIN input, as expected, worked well with good sensitivity and an excellent clipping margin, and no noise degradation was noted (the basic overall noise being rather poor anyway). Response and distortion measured very well. The line input was very sensitive, and clipping was noted at around 8 V input (no problem though). The mpx filter gave a 1.75dBcutat 15kHz, which is acceptable.

Replay azimuth was reasonably set, but the replay hiss performance was slightly worse than average, though chrome equalisation showed an average improvement and Dolby worked normally. No replay hum problems were noted subjectively, but some 50Hz hum was measured which should not however be troublesome. The replay clipping margin was adequate for normal cassettes, but totally inadequate for iron types, although the machine has apparently been designed to work eventually with iron tapes (realignment required later). As expected, some second harmonic distortion was noted at +6dB (averaging 0.4%). The replay responses measured extremely well across the audio range on both ferric and chromium equalisation positions. Headphone volume was just adequate into 8 and 600 ohm models.

Philips Hi-Ferro cassette tape penned an excellent chart on the left channel, being virtually flat to 15kHz, but the right channel drooped slowly but continuously from 2kHz upwards (-4dB at 10kHz and -7dB at 15kHz). This response anomaly was not noticed subjectively, and occasionally the pen chart showed a rather better response on this channel, HF stability and head/ tape contact being rather unreliable on the right channel. Distortion measured 0.33% at Dolby level, rising to 2.5% at +4dB. HF compression was noted but the overall quality was reasonably good at best, and overall noise measured quite well. Philips ferrichrome gave a flat right channel chart, but the left channel rose gently to +2.5dB at 15kHz. The sound quality was one of the best for ferrichrome, and HF compression was clearly better than usual, HF stability also.being better than normal ferric. Distortion measured 2.2% at +6dB, but above +7dB it deteriorated rapidly (replay clipping). Philips chrome measured 1.1% at Dolby level, rising to 4% at +4 (surprisingly good for chrome). The response was just 1.5dB down at 15 kHz on the left channel, but -5dB on the right. The sound quality here was better than expected for chrome, but HF compression and LF distortion were noted, and Philips would do better to set up for pseudo-chrome (politics?). Noise was reasonable, but only 8.75dB improvement was noted with Dolby. Wow and flutter measured well, but speech was just over 1% fast. Spooling averaged at 2 minutes, but HF stability was clearly below average; erasure however was amazingly good, and crosstalk better than average.

Early production samples had a design fault in the metering circuit, which severely affected distortion performance, particularly on piano. I informed Philips about this, and it has now been corrected in production. Although clearly the best machine that Philips have made, I am disappointed at the input noise performance and the HF wavering, due presumably to poor head/tape contact, but this may be a sample fault.

The machine is capable of some very good quality at best, but competition is too stiff for it to be given a clear recommendation.

The model 2534 is basically very similar but the record/replay head is just/sjc-coated. It excludes the DNL circuitry (no great loss though), omits the memory function, and has a fixed multiplex filter; the ferrichrome position \9 also omitted. The price is somewhat lower and the electronic circuitry and deck design virtually identical, and thus the same general remarks apply.
.

The model 4040 is the least expensive recorder in the Pioneer range as reviewed, and is a front-loader in a metal cabinet with just basic facilities. A large friction locked concentric record control operated very smoothly, and two front panel levers switch Dolby, and bias and equalisation simultaneously for three tape types.

The deck functions operated smoothly, but the play button was just a little stiff. The cassette compartment door is opened with a press button, and the cassette manually loaded. Phono line in/out sockets and a 5-pole DIN are on the rear panel with a DIN/line input selection switch and two mono mike jacks and a stereo headphone jack are on the front panel.

The microphone input sensitivity was just adequate and the input clipping margin good, microphone recordings being generally of good quality. DIN input sensitivity was more than enough, the clipping margin good, and only very minor noise degradation despite its low input impedance was noted, which is commendable. Distortion and response were satisfactory, although a slight HF boost of 2dB was noted on the DIN input at 11 kHz. The line inputs had average sensitivity, no clipping problem was noted, and noise also measured very well. The mpx filter was permanently in circuit, averaging - 0.6dB at 15kHz. The record level meters had average ballistics, under-reading transients fairly noticeably.

The replay azimuth was satisfactory and replay amplifier noise generally was average, chrome showing 4dB, and Dolby 10.5dB improvement. Low level HF signals expanded down almost ldB too much (11.3dB). Replay clipping was adequate, and replay amplifier distortion measured well. Ferric and chrome equalisations were well optimised on play back, although slight bass loss was noted. Low impedance headphones worked well, but inadequate volume was ^provided for high impedance models.

Maxell UDXLI penned remarkably flat charts from 50Hz to 15kHz, which is most commendable, although a slight presence bump was noted on the Dolby in curve. 333Hz distortion measured .5% at Dolby level, and 2.2% at +4dB, and background noise was better than average, Dolby improvement was 10.75dB which is slightly too much, and shows incompatible tracking. The subjective sound quality was better than average, with less HF compression than usual, although very low frequencies seemed slightly down. The measured presence lift was just evident subjectively, making the program material slightly bright.

Sony FeCr averaged +4dB at 10kHz without Dolby and the overall subjective quality showed clear HF anomalies, with some HF compression and some spitch on speech; 333Hz distortion measured just 1.2% at +4dB, and 3.5% at 7dB, showing the tape to be overbiased and grossly overequalised on record, nevertheless background noise was reasonable. Maxell UDXLII used in the chrome position, gave a chart showing slight HF loss, which subjectively caused the test programme to be very slightly muffled; the quality was nevertheless reasonable, showing less HF compression than usual. Background noise was average, and distortion at H-4dB measured 3.6%, which shows a reasonable biasing compromise. Dolby calibrations were accurately set throughout, but TDK SA tape would give a flatter overall response in the chrome position, at the expense of slightly more distortion.

Wow and flutter measured well at the beginning of a cassette, but fairly poorly towards the end. Speed was only marginally fast, and spooling average. HF stability, crosstalk and erasure were all extremely good.

This machine is a worthy successor to Pioneer's famous 2121, which was one of the best buys in the first Hi Fi Choice. For its price the overall performance is very good, and high quality recordings are possible on this model. I hope that the rather mediocre wow and flutter measurements at the end of a cassette are not typical of all samples. On this assumption, the machine is very clearly one of the best buys, and may therefore be purchased with confidence.
.

The 7070 is being reprinted as representative of three models (the others being the 6060 and 8080) which are being phased out, but may therefore be available at reduced prices. The machines are all very similar, differing slightly in the facilities offered.

It is a metal-encased front-loader incorporating Dolby B, 1/4 inch jack inputs for microphone, 5 pole DIN in/out sockets and phonos for line in/output. A switch on the rear selects DIN or phono input to optimise input noise, although 3dB noise degradation was noted on the DIN input. An IEC mains socket is included with its associated separate mains lead (three core). Mechanically, the machine operated well, giving wow and flutter figures averaging 0.09%, and it is possible to transfer directly from play into rewind and back without depressing stop.

Both play and record buttons however were rather stiff, and a cassette was a little difficult to load as there was no conventional reject control or special loading mechanism; a window flaps down over the cassette when loaded. Friction locked concentric rotary controls are provided for both record and replay, and these were both smooth and fairly large. A stereo headphone jack gives only barely enough volume into 8 ohm headphones, and is insufficient for 600 ohm models. Two average quality record level meters are included, but no peak reading
lights.

The microphone input sensitivity was adequate at 270uV into 20kohms. The DIN sensitivity measured 340uV into 2kohms. The line input sensitivity measured 81mV average into 117kohms, and no problems were experienced on this. Clipping margins were excellent generally. The replay controls affect the replay metering level, and a maximum of IV is given for Dolby level, but if the gain is backed off for this to read + 3VU (Dolby level) the output is 685mV.

As delivered, the replay azimuth was reasonably accurate and the replay response showed a very slight fall off at 10kHz (-2dB). Ferrichrome and chiome responses averaged-3dB at 10kHz.

Slight hum was noticed on the right channel, the 150Hz component measuring -59dB. Replay hiss levels on our sample measured -50.5dB CCIR weighted with Dolby out on ferric equalisation; 9.5dB improvement was noted with Dolby, and an additional 4dB with chrome. The overall sound quality on Maxell UDXL was good, but showed a slight fuzziness. The overall response measured very flat to 12kHz without Dolby, and barely inferior with Dolby in. 333Hz distortion at Dolby level measured only 0.4% .rising to only 2% at +4dB - quite amazing. More bass loss than usual was noted below 40Hz and subjective comments on 'sibilance' were made.
BASF ferrochrom gave a slight top rise at 10kHz with a dip on one channel of 2dB at 2kHz with Dolby in use. Some treble squash was noted subjectively. 333Hz distortion measured 0.9% at Dolby level, rising to 2.2% at +4dB. Possibly Dolby levels had been set slightly inaccurately, and too much record pre-emphasis was present, but potentially this machine seemed very good indeed. Sony chrome again showed a 10kHz rise of about 2dB which increased to +3dB with Dolby in. About 2.2% 3 3 3Hz distortion was present at Dolby level, which is about average for chrome, and so again, we suspect too much record pre-emphasis; distortion rose to 8% at +4dB. Chrome nevertheless sounded better than average overall, but the increase in HF was audible.

The overall noise level on ferric with Dolby in measured -53dB, which was good, the equivalent figures for ferrichrome being-57dB and chrome 56dB, all CCIR weighted ref Dolby level. 3dB noise degradation was noted when the record levels were brought up to transfer our standard DIN source level to read Dolby level on the record meters, and once again it seems that yet another manufacturer does not appreciate the importance of designing the input circuit correctly for complete DIN compatibility. However, only slight hiss was introduced on the line input. Wow and flutter measured an average of 0.08%, which is pretty low, but the speed was a little fast, averaging +0.6%. Erasure was very good, and the crosstalk performance excellent.

All three machines proved capable of giving good performances and the degree to which they can be recommended will depend on the prices at which they are being offered, which may be very variable at the moment.
.

The CTF 9191 can be regarded as a front loader with a difference, in that it has many special features, and is one of the heaviest cassette recorders in the world (12kg).

Although it was conventional for early machines to keep weight and size down, this is to a degree irrelevant since performance and ease of use are far more important.

Separate pairs of concentrically mounted rotat-able gain controls are provided for mike/DIN, line phono and output level (varying replay only and not monitoring levels). The machine has two heads and Dolby B processing, a record limiter, and a peak reading light between the fairly large 'VU' meters. These meters, however, under-read a 64msec burst by some 9dB. The peak reading light operated with peaks exceeding +2dB over Dolby level even on an 8msec transient, and could with advantage have been set to operate at a higher level, since the machine's distortion performance is extremely good and will permit recording of very high levels without distress. The rotary volume controls each have a flange which can be set as a marker for correct record level settings from different sources.

The microphone inputs (1/4 inch jack sockets on the front) were just a little insensitive at 300juV, but the clipping margin was really excellent. A strange anomaly resulted when a stereo microphone having a common earth was plugged*in, since bad hum resulted, which completely disappeared when only one jack was inserted, showing a bad earth loop in the chassis. The input impedance here was also a little high, and thus optimum hiss was not reached for low impedance moving-coil microphones.

The DIN input impedance was much too low at 2.1k ohm, and could tend to introduce noise from low output level DIN tuner amplifiers, although at specified DIN levels almost no noise degradation took place. The line input sensitivity was excellent, and any input level could be accommodated without distress. The record level limiter worked very well with its threshold set at a sensible tape distortion level, so that even when an input programme was driving it very hard, distortion was not apparent, although the recovery time was a little of the fast side, thus causing slight pumping when driven hard.

Pre-recorded cassettes played back extremely well, but on delivery a slight azimuth error was noted (30° at 3kHz). The replay response was good, particularly at the high frequency end, but unfortunately, Pioneer still use the old bass time constant, so some pre-recorded cassettes will play back with slight bass loss.

Despite the bass boost necessary on record, to obtain an overall flat response, bass distortion was not really noticeable at fairly high recording levels on ferric tape, since both biasing and equalisation were exceptionally well adjusted. The ferric overall response with Dolby in was very good indeed, but quite outstanding was the remarkably low distortion on Sony HF and BASF Super LH - below 0.6% rising to only 1.5% at +4dB and 4.5% at 8dB! This gave an extremely clean sound up to very high levels.

Although the chrome sound was good, it was clearly not biased correctly, since the left channel showed a fairly sharp rise at 10kHz and the right channel an equivalent fall off. This produced a rather lop-sided treble response fairly evident on any normal input programme. Whilst the replay noise levels were only average, the overall noise performance, which after all is what really matters, was extremely good, and bear in mind the machine's amazing distortion performance and the very wide dynamic range that could be recorded, even though a very slight hum was audible on replay in very quiet passages. The stability was excellent, and no drop outs were audible at any time. There was no erase problem, and the crosstalk measured well.

The overall sound on ferric was so good that for a moment it was thought that we were listening to the master rather than the cassette. High praise indeed. And, had the chromium biasing been more precisely set, results probably just as good, or even better, might have been noted.

The wow and flutter measured just under .1% and the speed was 0.3% slow, whereas most machines seemed to run a fraction fast. This is perfectly satisfactory for all normal purposes. This machine should do well, since its price seems very fair, and the presentation excellent. The method of loading and unloading the cassette was not liked - but this is a matter for personal preference.
.

The CT-F1000 is Pioneer's first 3-head deck and is a front-loader with a very large metal cabinet. Stepped rotary controls are provided (friction locked L/R) for (1)mic/DIN, (2)line input and (3)replay gains.

Servo-controlled deck functions operate a closed-loop dual-capstan transport, and all controls operated extremely well. A pause control is provided which operates on record to allow undesirable program inserts to be cut out. Small switches operate Dolby with mpx switching, two positions for bias, three positions of equalisation, a test tone oscillator for Dolby cal and Dolby record pre-sets (centre indented), while a large switch selects direct or via tape signals.

The two large meters (poorer than average ballistics) were complemented by one LED coming on at +1.5dB ref Dolby level, functioning only on record. The level meters are controlled on replay by the adjustable line-output level, unfortunately. Two pairs of paralleled line-input sockets and a 5-pole DIN socket are complemented by two pairs of output phonos. Twin mono microphone jacks and a stereo headphone jack are provided on the front panel.

The microphone input sensitivity was somewhat poor for an expensive machine, but the clipping margin and recorded quality excellent, however. The DIN input had an excellent clipping margin but was rather insensitive and showed very bad noise degradation, although distortion and response were excellent.

The line input had adequate sensitivity and no clipping problem but again the input circuitry was rather noisy, which was most disappointing (far too much gain after record level control). The mpx filter was 1.5dB down at 15kHz.

Replay azimuth was reasonably well set and overall azimuth was very consistent. Replay hiss levels were disappointing, but Dolby gave 10dB noise improvement. Replay hum, however, was excellent, and the replay clipping margin was very good indeed - but amplifier distortion (mainly 2nd harmonic) was only fair at high levels.

The Dolby circuits tracked well. Replay response was excellent at the bass end but showed a 2dB shelf across the board at high frequencies on ferric and 3dB on chrome - most unfortunate and obviously contributing to replay noise. Headphones of all impedances worked extremely well with no reservations.

Maxell UDXLI produced a very flat bass response and a good HF response up to 15 kHz, above which the response fell sharply. The Dolby in chart showed a presence valley despite the Dolby level being set carefully, while 333Hz distortion averaged 0.85% at Dolby level, rising to 2.8% at +4dB.

Slight spitch was noted on speech with slight HF compression, but otherwise overall quality was good. Overall noise was slightly inferior to average but with 9.5dB Dolby improvement. Sony FeCr penned excellent charts to 15 kHz and distortion measured only 0.45% at Dolby level, rising to 1.2% at +4dB and 2.2% at +6dB. HF compression was better than expected but the sound quality tended to be somewhat blurred on transients.

Background noise was also below average and showed just 9dB Dolby improvement. Maxell UDXLII penned a very flat chart to 13kHz and 333Hz distortion measured 1% at DL, rising to 2.5% at +4dB. Background noise was, again, slightly worse than average and had only 9dB Dolby improvement. Sound quality here was very good, but background noise was subjectively not quite low enough.

Wow and flutter measured well and speed, as set, was slightly fast, but this could be corrected with a user front panel pitch control (±11%). Spooling was quite fast at 1.5 minutes, and HF stability, although sounding well, showed many 1.5dB variations on the 10kHz pen chart. Erasure and crosstalk were both excellent.

The limiter facility on record had a very fast attack time, occasionally producing slight clicks, but was otherwise satisfactory. The review sample had a faulty tape monitor switching circuit but this was corrected by the importer.

Whilst this machine was very much liked economically and was capable of producing some good overall quality, the input noise problems were sufficiently disturbing to cause a recommendation to be withheld.

Furthermore, the non-standard replay equalisation will produce some very toppy and brittle quality from many pre-recorded cassettes. It would seem that the entire recording performance has been badly compromised to enable a DIN socket to be incorporated, and if this was completely excluded and the circuitry gain parameters re-designed hiss levels could be much better, particularly if the replay equalisation was corrected. Potentially an excellent machine, but spoilt by some design parameter errors.
.

The metal-encased STD 2000 offers very basic facilities including lever switches to control Dolby with mpx, bias and equalisation (3 positions each) and input functions. Friction-locked concentric record level controls are complemented by a stereo ganged replay one (the latter acting on the output circuit).

This front loading machine was found easy to use and the deck controls all worked well, excellent headphone monitoring facilities are available into low and higher impedance types and a memory counter is incorporated. Line in/out phonos and a 5-pole DIN socket are mounted on the back panel while the stereo headphone jack and two mono microphone jacks are on the front.

The two 'VU'-type meters are complemented by a peak reading light, coming on at much too low a level (-0.5dB refDL).

The microphone inputs are a little insensitive, but had an excellent clipping margin; quality was good here although a slight hum was apparent. The 5-pole DIN input was found unnecessarily sensitive, but did have a good clipping margin, but the impedance was as usual a little too low, causing slight noise degradation; response and distortion were both excellent, however. The phono line in sockets were again very sensitive, but no clipping was experienced at high input levels. The outputs incidentally were variable on the phonos but were at a fixed level on the DIN socket.

Whilst the replay amplifier hiss was average, slight hum on the right replay channel was noticed and this did not measure too well. Dolby noise reduction worked correctly, and noise was reduced by 3.5dB on FeCr and Cr02 positions. The clipping margin was very satisfactory and replay amplifier distortion measured better than average, while the replay response showed a slight bass loss and a small shelf boost of about 1.25dB on both channels; overall and replay noise would, of course, improve if the replay response was corrected. Azimuth was set incorrectly, thus showing insufficient quality control.

The results on Maxell UDXL1 produced good overall noise figures, despite the replay HF boost, and noise improved by 9.5dB with Dolby. 333Hz distortion was lower than average, reaching only 1.85% average at +4dB and, as expected, some slight HF compression was noted on our test programme (spitch on speech, etc). The frequency response was extremely good without Dolby, extending to 16kHz, but because of the Dolby record calibration error of 1 dB on the left channel, a boost of 2.5dB was noted at 3kHz with Dolby on the left, while the right was again almost flat. Sony FeCr was again quite good on overall noise, but was rather over-biased, producing very low distortion at low and middle frequencies, but considerable HF compression. FeCr responses-were very good with and without Dolby, but showed - 3dB at 15kHz. TDK SA pseudo-chrome gave similar noise figures to FeCr, but the bias setting was better optimised and thus distortion was reasonable across the audio range.

Unfortunately, a record Dolby error of some 1.5dB produced some Dolby mistracking, and I assume that the factory had unwisely set up the machine for normal chrome. Overall response on SA was very good on the right channel, but slightly up in HF on the left, due to the replay boost. Sound quality was generally good and better than with the other two tape types. The bass response on all tape types was decidedly flatter than average, and thus creditable.

Slight HF output variations were noted on the left channel, but not on the right. Wow and flutter was just a little high (0.16% average) and speed was also running just over 1% fast. Spooling was at an average speed. The subjective performance of the machine was reasonably impressive on ferric, but slightly bright on the left channel, because of the Dolby error.

The basic problem was the overall setting up, and if this had been correct the machine would have been well above average in sound quality. As it stands, the review sample was still reasonably good, although the DIN input gave inferior results to the line input on weighted noise. Simple and effective, but the peak reading light was virtually useless since it would encourage under-recording.
.