Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2.fluke 9/24/84; site vax1.fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!fluke!tron
From: tron@fluke.UUCP (Peter Barbee)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: Wanted: Cassette Deck advice
Message-ID: <932@vax1.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Mar-85 11:28:29 EST
Article-I.D.: vax1.932
Posted: Mon Mar 11 11:28:29 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 12-Mar-85 23:10:34 EST
References: <3753@umcp-cs.UUCP> <88@vice.UUCP>
Reply-To: tron@fluke.UUCP (Peter Barbee)
Distribution: net
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 38

>  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).
> 
>  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.  


For what is worth I just made the decision between the LX-3 and BX-300, I chose
the LX-3 and here is why;

	1) much cheaper (closeout price on LX-3, $450 vs $650, a savings of
	   $215 including tax)

	2) BX-300 didn't sound enough better, I'll admit I only recorded one
	   tape on each machine and they were hooked up to the store's
	   system (Denon amp w/B&O table) but I couldn't tell the difference
	   between the source and the tape with either recording.

	3) BX-300 looks like Tokyo-by-night, how could they do this?!

	4) LX-3 had all the necessary features - I do admit that the 'Auto
	   rewind' feature on the BX-300 would be nice but it wasn't worth
	   $200.

Obviously the looks are purely personal, and some of can probably tell the
difference in sound.  I don't do any live recording so after a bit of a 
break-in period where I learn the deck I don't imagine the third head 
would be a huge advantage for better recording.  It is true that Audio\
tested the BX-300 and found it has the best S/N ratio ever tested for
Dolby C.

Later,

Peter B     {any biggie}uw-beaver!fluke!tron