Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site vice.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!tekcrl!vice!shauns From: shauns@vice.UUCP (Shaun Simpkins) Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: Wanted: Cassette Deck advice Message-ID: <88@vice.UUCP> Date: Tue, 5-Mar-85 12:50:35 EST Article-I.D.: vice.88 Posted: Tue Mar 5 12:50:35 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 8-Mar-85 03:48:17 EST References: <3753@umcp-cs.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR Lines: 46 > > <> > > From Shaun Simpkins: > > > >I would suggest looking at the Nak BX-300 before you run out and purchase > >the LX-3 - I think the BX-300 gives more value for the same list price. > >It is a 2-capstan design, hence low flutter, hence much better reproduction of > >things like piano, oboe, massed strings, etc. The LX-3 is a single capstan > >design 3 to 4 years old and I suspect Nak is clearing them out. To my tastes > >the BX-300 is less gaudy than the LX-3. B&O does a better job at high sex > >design than Nak (High Sex Design = faceless aluminum sheet with wood trim that > >does something audioish). > > Wrong. The Nakamichi LX-3 is a dual-capstan machine with two heads. > > Dennis > Oops. My mistake. I examined the LX-3 3 years ago when it was new and haven't paid much attention since. That was the time when Nak was bleeding itself dry with, I think, 12 different models in its line all competing with each other for the same market. The BX series was the first attempt to reduce their line to something manageable. What I meant to say is that the BX 300 is the first 2 capstan 3 head design in that series. Its performance is on a par with the LX-5 (also a 2c3h deck) and as such represents excellent value, much more so than the LX-3 at the same price. Indeed, it incorporates the same diffused resonance transport introduced in the LX-3,5 and ZX-7. (Notice that the ZX-7 doesn't appear on dealer's shelves anymore? The ZX-9 is the only one left. The biggest difference between these two models is the direct drive capstans in the ZX-9. The ZX-7 didn't have enough basic performance improvement from the LX to survive even with its fully adjustable bias and EQ. The ZX-9 apparently has enough product differentiation to survive. And now the same thing is happening between the LX and BX series.) The LX-3 is an excellent deck. But save one correction, my comments still stand. The wandering squash, -- Shaun Simpkins uucp: {ucbvax,decvax,chico,pur-ee,cbosg,ihnss}!teklabs!tekcad!vice!shauns CSnet: shauns@tek ARPAnet:shauns.tek@rand-relay