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