Title of thread refers to Alex Nikitin guru of A.N.T.
http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/index.php?cat=post&qry=ant4066
https://www.tapeheads.net/threads/tascam-122mkii-and-its-little-secrets.33643/
http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/index.php?cat=post&qry=ant4066
https://www.tapeheads.net/threads/tascam-122mkii-and-its-little-secrets.33643/
To be repetitive you have all the alignment and test cassette tapes to work on cassette decks? In any case, it's great to have a West Coast guru like you that cares about cassette decks. Me I don't have the money to fix my cassette decks. Someday...
When you see videos or articles on line where guys compare the Source with Tape input telling they're virtually identical, you should know they're talking complete BS.They'll never be identical or indistinguishable.
If they'd be impossible to distinguish, then tell me the reason to use a cassette player in the loop!
Then changing CD4066 with ANT4066 and claiming better sound shows these guys don't have a clue what they are talking about. None of them!
There's always signal leakage between 4066 channel.It's not just measurable, it's f...audible!
That happens because the channels traces are found within 0 .5...5 mm from each other and the electrical impedances at the inputs and outputs of cd4066 are high enough to have at least 30dB !!! of leakage !
The datasheet of 4066 shows 50db interchannel crosstalk .That is because of the physical pinout arangement of the integrated circuit which you cannot change no matter what circui you're going to use instead!
Modern switchers like ADG ones have better spacing between the input pins of the different channels and achieve 80dB crosstalk.Bear in mind that all the specs are for RS=50Ohms ohms and Rloads of 1Kohm which is highly unrealistic for audio processing usual impedances which are at least 10 x higher!
Then you're using relatively high voltage sources.D Self showed in his Small Signal Design book how to effectively use cd 4066 and make its thd 100 x lower.You need to place it at the input of an inverting op amp.Thus you do two things at once: you lower the input impedance of cd4066 to 0 ohms and get lower crosstalk than cd4066 datasheet provides and also make the input output capacitances of virtually a cmos transistor DS junction equal to 0pF which lowers the THD immensely.After Denon dcd 1560 2550, 3560 cd players dac there's an I/V converter done in this way.With a voltage signal source you're better using two equal input and feedback resistors of an inverted op amp as described by diy audio printscreen.
Truth is that you cannot improve leakage and crosstalk in any nakamichi deck due to physical pcb traces as cassette decks were limited by the tapehead and tape crosstalk itself anyway so their designers didn't make the pcb tracing up to cd standards of minimum 90db crosstalk when the tape itself has lessthan 50db crosstalk.
Now this physical crosstalk will affect any ic you're going to use for replacing cd4066 so the apparently better signal distortions obtained by ant4066 can have completely different explanations than what you'd expect because having signsl leakage between the playback and rec section leads to DELAY-ed signals added OVER the line input signals which actually mske the source material sound apparently better.In cheaper decks therec and playback head are physicslly closer than in Dragon tapedeck so apparently the direct leakage between heads is lower BUT the delay is higher, significantly higher so any electticsl leakage between the rec circuit and play circuit will make the sound to have higher delayed signals added to the signal than cheaper decks.
Now with all the muting circuits this delay is always masked by the microcontroller timely commands .Remove the mute transistors and you'll start hearing the ugly truth no cassette player manufacturer ever told you, like the real signal to noise ratio of their circuits that are barely 3db below the type 1 tape noise,the real interchsnnel crossover that no ANT4066 will ever be able to defeat.
What makes you think that the NAAC azymuth system needed a 4 track playback head and it couldn't work properly with a dual track one?
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/yet-another-mux-4052-4053-or-4066.356962/
A few years ago there was a self made famous modder telling everyone his measurements showed that the top Pioneers ct95 like decks have better SNR than Nakamichi.
I told him only one thing to do before claiming that thing once more: disconnect the muting transistors cause Pioneer decks had the best microcontrolled noise masking system attached to an already better pcb design than Nakamichi due to lower complexity which allowed for the tape SNR to be apparently higher.
In this respect Denon and NAD had even better lower noise and lower distortion circuits and pcb design than both Pioneer and Nakamichi and you can evaluate that easily by disconnecting the Mute transistors!
As for the pro-against dolby use in decks
Nakamichi cr4 and a few late models lowered the impedances around cx20188 which raised the distortions, but lowered the interchannel crosstalk.
NAD had a better approach making a better dolby with the same IC, they lowered the encode-decode distortions by using both sections of same IC on the same channel while keeping the same guaranteed distortions by the manufacturers, yet with much better (lower) crosstalk leakage due to much larger physical distances.They found out how to not use a dolby bypass circuit and take full advantage of cx20188 .
They also implemented both Tandberg's Dyneq and B&O hx pro so they got the best you can get from a tape without necessarily asking people yo buy the most expensive metal tape.
Many people on Tapeheads found Lucky's remarks on NAD6300 vs any Nakamichi insulting or hilarious but he had them all...and he's right: NAD6300 is a superior deck to all Nakamichi decks because of all the right approaches put together in a single deck. .A simple relay or mechanical switch will always beat an electronic switch. As to why NAD used 4052 here and there...read its datasheet and consider its use!
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/yet-another-mux-4052-4053-or-4066.356962/
If they'd be impossible to distinguish, then tell me the reason to use a cassette player in the loop!
Then changing CD4066 with ANT4066 and claiming better sound shows these guys don't have a clue what they are talking about. None of them!
There's always signal leakage between 4066 channel.It's not just measurable, it's f...audible!
That happens because the channels traces are found within 0 .5...5 mm from each other and the electrical impedances at the inputs and outputs of cd4066 are high enough to have at least 30dB !!! of leakage !
The datasheet of 4066 shows 50db interchannel crosstalk .That is because of the physical pinout arangement of the integrated circuit which you cannot change no matter what circui you're going to use instead!
Modern switchers like ADG ones have better spacing between the input pins of the different channels and achieve 80dB crosstalk.Bear in mind that all the specs are for RS=50Ohms ohms and Rloads of 1Kohm which is highly unrealistic for audio processing usual impedances which are at least 10 x higher!
Then you're using relatively high voltage sources.D Self showed in his Small Signal Design book how to effectively use cd 4066 and make its thd 100 x lower.You need to place it at the input of an inverting op amp.Thus you do two things at once: you lower the input impedance of cd4066 to 0 ohms and get lower crosstalk than cd4066 datasheet provides and also make the input output capacitances of virtually a cmos transistor DS junction equal to 0pF which lowers the THD immensely.After Denon dcd 1560 2550, 3560 cd players dac there's an I/V converter done in this way.With a voltage signal source you're better using two equal input and feedback resistors of an inverted op amp as described by diy audio printscreen.
Truth is that you cannot improve leakage and crosstalk in any nakamichi deck due to physical pcb traces as cassette decks were limited by the tapehead and tape crosstalk itself anyway so their designers didn't make the pcb tracing up to cd standards of minimum 90db crosstalk when the tape itself has lessthan 50db crosstalk.
Now this physical crosstalk will affect any ic you're going to use for replacing cd4066 so the apparently better signal distortions obtained by ant4066 can have completely different explanations than what you'd expect because having signsl leakage between the playback and rec section leads to DELAY-ed signals added OVER the line input signals which actually mske the source material sound apparently better.In cheaper decks therec and playback head are physicslly closer than in Dragon tapedeck so apparently the direct leakage between heads is lower BUT the delay is higher, significantly higher so any electticsl leakage between the rec circuit and play circuit will make the sound to have higher delayed signals added to the signal than cheaper decks.
Now with all the muting circuits this delay is always masked by the microcontroller timely commands .Remove the mute transistors and you'll start hearing the ugly truth no cassette player manufacturer ever told you, like the real signal to noise ratio of their circuits that are barely 3db below the type 1 tape noise,the real interchsnnel crossover that no ANT4066 will ever be able to defeat.
What makes you think that the NAAC azymuth system needed a 4 track playback head and it couldn't work properly with a dual track one?
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/yet-another-mux-4052-4053-or-4066.356962/
A few years ago there was a self made famous modder telling everyone his measurements showed that the top Pioneers ct95 like decks have better SNR than Nakamichi.
I told him only one thing to do before claiming that thing once more: disconnect the muting transistors cause Pioneer decks had the best microcontrolled noise masking system attached to an already better pcb design than Nakamichi due to lower complexity which allowed for the tape SNR to be apparently higher.
In this respect Denon and NAD had even better lower noise and lower distortion circuits and pcb design than both Pioneer and Nakamichi and you can evaluate that easily by disconnecting the Mute transistors!
As for the pro-against dolby use in decks
Nakamichi cr4 and a few late models lowered the impedances around cx20188 which raised the distortions, but lowered the interchannel crosstalk.
NAD had a better approach making a better dolby with the same IC, they lowered the encode-decode distortions by using both sections of same IC on the same channel while keeping the same guaranteed distortions by the manufacturers, yet with much better (lower) crosstalk leakage due to much larger physical distances.They found out how to not use a dolby bypass circuit and take full advantage of cx20188 .
They also implemented both Tandberg's Dyneq and B&O hx pro so they got the best you can get from a tape without necessarily asking people yo buy the most expensive metal tape.
Many people on Tapeheads found Lucky's remarks on NAD6300 vs any Nakamichi insulting or hilarious but he had them all...and he's right: NAD6300 is a superior deck to all Nakamichi decks because of all the right approaches put together in a single deck. .A simple relay or mechanical switch will always beat an electronic switch. As to why NAD used 4052 here and there...read its datasheet and consider its use!
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/yet-another-mux-4052-4053-or-4066.356962/
Attachments
Last edited:
@ Dreamth
Perfection is the enemy of progress
There are plenty of decks which have relay switching other than the NAD
As for 4066 upgrades. You don’t realize some people use isolated gold post sockets for some of these upgrades
I will continue to listen to music on cassette as insufferable audiophiles split hairs on what they can’t hear.
Perfection is the enemy of progress
There are plenty of decks which have relay switching other than the NAD
As for 4066 upgrades. You don’t realize some people use isolated gold post sockets for some of these upgrades
I will continue to listen to music on cassette as insufferable audiophiles split hairs on what they can’t hear.
I showed my pioneer ct 777 mods once on tapeheads and seeing that I used anti-miller capacitors from cd players and fkp type capacitors in the dolby filters, and playback, @Lucky told me that cassette players never had cd player like distortions, thus the usual poliester foil caps that even the best Naks used are good enough for any cassette player. Maybe the copper polystirene foil caps loading the tapehead do some good things yet naks don't use them at all cause they didn't need them.That's good enough argument! There are many people annoyed by his remarks, but they made total sense to me...
"Then changing CD4066 with ANT4066 and claiming better sound shows these guys don't have a clue what they are talking about. None of them!"
Thanks..
Thanks..
@ Audiostar
I have all the engineering cassettes from LC Engineering Japan which was the authority on head alignment and calibrations
Many years of experience working with cassette decks. This thread speaks for itself on my abilities.
I have all the engineering cassettes from LC Engineering Japan which was the authority on head alignment and calibrations
Many years of experience working with cassette decks. This thread speaks for itself on my abilities.