Backing up my music cassette tapes

Hi,

What cassette do you all recommend for me to back up my pre-recorded music cassettes so that I can play those instead of the originals? Would it be bad to use the Maxell URs? Would 60 min tapes suffice or would the 90 min be better? Basically I just want to make a 1:1 copy and play my music on my boombox and car player but also don't want the tape to sound so bad that I can tell it is not the original.

Any other recommendations welcomed and thanks for replying.

Hi there Algeeba!

I like your name, (assuming that's your name and not a username, if so, I like your username!)

Well, first it is very important that you decide how excellent a recording you'd like and how much you're willing to spend to get that "sound".

If you have a pretty decent quality double-deck to start out with, then the rest is just a matter of choosing a really good tape, for example the Maxell XLII (from the 1988-1991 period preferably).

If you don't have a double-tape deck, you can either get one for a real good price at a thrift store and then take it to a technician to have it refurbished with belts and so or buy a high end deck on ebay

Once you have that decent double-deck tape (or two single-tape decks connected) and that Maxell XLII tape or any other type II (Chrome) then you can pretty much count on having a good 1:1 copy of your original.

Am I right jaetee? Did I miss something? Oh yeah, if you can get a Nakamichi deck! Heheheheheh...

BTW, Jaetee is the expert, I'm only a Padawan when it comes to Tape Decks... but soon will be a Jedi!

Thanks Strānj-Bōōmbŏks.

I have a cheapo Sony TC-W345 dual cassette deck that I got at a Goodwill store a month ago for this exact reason, backing up, but I haven't tried it out yet. It has Dolby B & C. I guess the best thing to do is to try both the UR and the XLII and see if I hear a difference using my equipment. If I don't hear much of a difference then I guess the UR is the way to go since they will be cheaper. Remember, this is just to use on my boomboxes and car cassette radio.

Thanks again.

If you happen to go to the thrift again look for decks with multiple heads.
Clean and de-mag the heads of the decks if you haven't already to get the best sound. Do the same to your box periodically too!

Hi Algeeba, Welcome to the board!

I'm actually going to go another route completely here and suggest that you consider playing your tapes into the line-in on your PC and using WAV recording software (like soundforge) and burn them to CD, rather than making tape to tape copies. It might be a bit more work for you, but I think you'll have much better recordings that way

If that's not an option for you, I'd go find the best looking used Maxell XLII's you can find in thrift stores or maybe an ebay seller getting rid of his Greatful Dead concert recording collection. Those used chrome tapes will do a much better job than brand spankin' new Maxell UR any day of the week. I have bought a great many of those used tapes and had awesome results with them. Another very good, and plentiful tape out there is the TDK SA. They are just as good as the mentioned XLII, and depending on what year they were made, they might even be better.. Last week I bought a dozen used XLII's at a thrift store for $0.20 each.

If you don't mind me asking, what are some of the titles you wish to copy? Are your cassettes really rare, is that why you don't want to use them? Unless your tapes are exceptionally rare and somehow sentimental to you, I would not really bother to make backup copies of any prerecorded tapes. I say all of this this because a majority of the prerecorded tapes I've heard sound flat and lifeless when compared to the original vinyl or CDs. I own over 500 tapes with music on them and only 30 or 40 are prerecorded. The rest were all recorded by me.

In your place, I'd consider hitting thrifts, flea markets, garage sales and maybe even ebay to source the CD's to match your cherished tapes. You can buy them for pennies on the dollar vs. what they cost new nowadays. Even eBay is a good option. Then you don't have to make any copies. And if your tapes get eaten by an aggro-tapedeck, you can make a new tape using your purchased (or burned) CD and put it with that tape artwork.

As mentioned before, I found that I can make a better recording than 99% of the prerecorded tapes I've ever heard. No joke. Using XLII or TDK SA, just set your recording levels to have your VUs peak at around +3 to +5 db and I think you'll actually find that your recorded copy sounds better than your prerecorded tape ever did. If using a UR, set your peaks a bit lower as that tape can't handle as much signal as a quality chrome, like to peak at +1 instead.

Making tape to tape copies is always a bit of a challenge and your copies will seldom (if ever) be very close to the quality of the original source tape. I don't know how good of a performer your deck is, but often the sound quality drops two complete letter grades from original tape to the copy, especially when using the lower end of available dual well decks. And if you use the high speed dubbing option that will typically make matters even worse still. The exception occurs when you use top shelf tape decks and employ the use of an equalizer between them to shape the sound to your liking. (As Stranj hinted, I have a thing for Nakamichi decks. I happen to own four of them).

But, you should definitely experiment if you have some time on your hands and want to learn something about tapes and recording.

Do you own any tapes where you also have the CD??? If you do, then I suggest you take an hour or two and make some comparisons... This exercise will help you decide exactly how you want to go about this project. Get the matching CD your prerecorded tape and pick a song with quiet passages and some strong dynamics... Then, go to work and try these methods:

1) Tape to tape copy onto Maxell UR
2) Tape to tape copy onto Maxell XLII
3) CD to tape copy onto Maxell UR
4) CD to tape copy onto Maxell XLII
5) Tape to PC copy and burn to audio CD (IMPORTANT when burning into PC, make sure you stay below -1db or -2db on PC's VUs at all costs, check your levels during the loudest part of the CD or tape or you will get digital clipping which will ruin your recording. Digital recording cannot handle nearly as much signal as analog recording)

I think you will find that #4 will be the clear winner, which is probably also the most expensive option. #5 is the cheapest solution, but you may need to buy software to record WAV files and burn the CDs. (I recommend soundforge for recording and CD architect for burning CDs. you can get old versions cheap or free if you are clever)

Of course sound quality is entirely subjective. And if you can live with the quality that option 1 gives you, that is by far the the "easiest" overall solution as it just involves simply popping in tapes and hitting the dub button. You can forget all about what I've written and go forth with your project as planned.

As for whether to use 60 min or 90 minute tapes, that depends on your sources. I would say try to have both on hand. Most older albums would fit on a 60 minute tape, but when CD became the standard, artists started releasing albums with longer and more tracks to fill up the 74 minute redbook standard CD length.

Good luck and have fun! And ask questions if you get stuck... There are lots of guys here who are just as experienced at this as I am...

is my tascam 302 dual deck considered a cheap deck too JT??

Algeeba, here's a pretty easy software you can use. It's called Audacity.
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ and the best part is that it's a freeware audio recording and editing software, real easy to figure out, btw!
JT, thanks for complimenting my info with those few "extra" tips...

ahardb0dy said:

is my tascam 302 dual deck considered a cheap deck too JT??

Click to expand...

Okay, I'll admit I'm a bit of a tape deck and tape snob and will go edit my post. I wasn't implying that all dual-well tape decks are cheap, nor even implying that the one the OP is using is cheap. But, dual well decks are a generally a shortcut tool that, more often than not, yield inadequate results to my liking.

Again, we're back to sound quality is subjective. Yamaha, Denon, Teac, Aiwa, Akai, Pioneer, Onkyo and Kenwood all made some very decent and capable dual-well decks. And for all I know, the OP's could be a very good unit. Hence my suggestion to test it extensively. I just don't believe in them. I'd rather spend more $$ and have several tape decks. For one, if a belt breaks and you need to have it repaired, there goes both of your decks off to the shop at the same time. But, if you have two separate decks, then you at least still record and listen while the other is in repair. Not only that, I don't think there was ever a dual deck made that had a 3-head configuration, so you could not monitor the playback head during actual recordings. To me, that's critical if you want to tweak bias and really get the most out of the tape... but, again, I'm a tape-snob.

Tascam makes really good tape decks and I've never used or heard the 302. Even at that, Tascam is the professional arm of TEAC, and if they put their name on it you can believe it is better than average. The real answer to your question is... If you are happy with it, then it is good enough. Not being a smart ass, just being sincere... Personally, I wouldn't buy any dual well deck. I'll stick with my Naks and forego saving space and saving money when it comes to tapedecks. But, that's just how I am. And with the prices that you can get good 3-head decks nowadays... why not?

Hey if I got a Nakamichi deck for $10 so can you!

I think the Tascam is a good deck I was just messing with you JT, lol

Wow, nice follow up Jaetee. Nice information.

Well yesterday I finally tried it and made a copy using both a UR and an XLII, normal speed and Dolby NR off. The XLII was the clear winner in that it basically sounded crystal clear, especially the highs, compared to the UR and to me it might've even sounded a bit clearer than the original. Don't know if that is possible w/my equipment but my brain said it was .

My next step was to copy to PC using Audacity, thanks Strānj, and then to tape and using the backup tape. But that would entail buying a lot of tapes to backup the originals, which are in abundance and relatively cheap. My tape collection is such as AC/DC, Journey, Motley Crue, Joan Jett, etc, etc... 80's music, so no rare ones in there, I think . Basically I didn't want the originals with the lettering on them to get eaten but why worry about that so much, right? I should be enjoying playing them and stop worrying so much.

It now makes more sense to me to copy to PC, then backup to CD. Store the CDs and then if a tape gets ruined make a copy onto an XLII or TDK SA. I don't have any of the equivalent CDs to my tapes but also makes sense to find those cheap when I can and buy them for even better backup quality, hmmmm. I'm trying to keep this as cost effective but with good results.

Questions regarding copying to PC - how do I "stay below -1db or -2db on PC's VUs ,,, check your levels during the loudest part of the CD or tape"? Where do I check this? Is it during copying to PC or from PC to CD?

Again, thank you all for the information and opening of the eyes which you have given me.

algeeba said:

Questions regarding copying to PC - how do I "stay below -1db or -2db on PC's VUs ,,, check your levels during the loudest part of the CD or tape"? Where do I check this? Is it during copying to PC or from PC to CD?

Click to expand...

You're very welcome. Glad you sorted things out and made some progress! Let the hunt for thrift store Maxells & TDKs begin!!!! (If you have boomers, it's always good to have tapes handy for making your own compilations of favorite tracks, or even swapping with other boombox aficianados)

As for your question about keeping the VU's lower on the PC, the software I use has a VU meter that shows up when you hit record (Soundforge). You may not need to worry about it if the software that Stranj directed you to did a good enough job for your liking.

But, if necessary, you can control the strength of the signal for recording two ways, assuming that software has a VU meter option....

First, via the window's sound mixing software by tweaking the "line-in" input slider. Additionally, when you go to the sound mixer preferences and select "recording" you get a different set of sliders. There, you locate the one labeled "what you hear" and can tweak that one as well.

For best results in soundforge, I want to see that VU jump as much as possible during loud passages and drop to almost non-existent during the quiet passages or between songs. During quiet passages, you will see your signal bottom out and remain constant where it registers the tape hiss. That is basically called the noise floor. You want that to be as low as possible, but you want your signal max to go as close to 0db on the VU scale as possible without going over. That's why it is imporant to find the quitest and most dynamic parts of your music and adjust your VU's to both ends of your sonic spectrum. When in doubt on the computer, lower your levels a bit as going over the 0db mark on a PC will flat-spot your waveform and cause distortion that is commonly known as digital clipping. You should avoid that at all costs.

Again, if the software you are using is doing a good enough job as is, don't rock the boat.... keep it simple.

But, if you do twiddle with the settings, there is a delicate balance to getting it just right. But when you do, it is possible to make very good analog to digital conversions, even using relatively mediocre soundcards. I use a cheapo RCA to 3.5mm headphone jack via my inexpensive SoundBlaster Audigy 4's line-in jack and have made WAV recordings that I converted to 320kps MP3s. When done properly, they sound good enough to be played on big club soundsystems.

I also have live DJ recordings that I made using minidisk recorder that I recorded onto the PC in this manner and made great CDs.

Take care and good luck!

JT

Thank you. I think I got and will try.

I do have 3 boomboxes as well

Hi there Algeeba! In Audacity, there's a toolbar called "Mixer" that's the one that has the sliders for the "Line In" so you can play with that until you get the desired input volume. If you don't see it, go to View-Toolbars-Mixer Toolbar and that should do it.

Also after you've got the whole track recorded. You can highlight the whole wave by doing a Ctrl+A (Select All) and then choosing from the Top Menu "Effect" and about halfway down is "Normalize". That will take the whole track or Wave you've selected and will not let it peak over the dB you choose there on that function. Play with it!

Hope it helps!

Will try real soon, hopefully tomorrow (day off) or Saturday, Strānj. Thanks for the tips.

By the way, are you really from far away Venezuela? I'm over here on the big state of Texas, U.S. The power of the internet. I love it.

algeeba said:

Will try real soon, hopefully tomorrow (day off) or Saturday, Strānj. Thanks for the tips.

By the way, are you really from far away Venezuela? I'm over here on the big state of Texas, U.S. The power of the internet. I love it.

Click to expand...

Si señor! I was born in Caracas, but raised in Palo Alto, California (went to Elementary, High School and a bit of College) then I moved back and now I'm living in Mérida, the highest point in the country (Andes Mountains)! It's "cooler" here....
Where did "Algeeba" come from?

Yeah, about that. Well my name is Albert, kind of put "gee" like in gee whiz into it, who knows where the "ba" came from. I had to come up with a username a long time ago to use in all the forums a like to visit.

After I came up with it I felt it sounded a lot like algae, which I still think it does, but kept the username. Glad you like it.

I bought this plusdeck2 about 8 years ago, ripped a shoe box full of mixiez and it worked graet for mp3 conversions.
Cassette to cassette? Personally I like the BASF CHROMEDIOXIDE EXTRA II 90min & 60min cassettes (blue & silver stickered cassettes). This cassette tape always had low noise, crisp and clean highs and deep bass.

I would record with the dolby on, then dolby off during playback, that is the recommended use for dolby with most cassette recordings. I also remember the less tape there is on a real the less likely it is to eFuP, 60, 90, 100, or 120 minute tapes. 120 minute cassettes are primarily for vocal interviews or field recordings. 90 minute cassettes are good for music and 60 minutes are less likely to get loose and chewed. One thing you can do for a loose tape is synchronize it by fast forwarding the cassette twice, once on each side. This helps tighten the tape evenly.

I've had and still have various original "Real to Real" cassettes such as "teac" etc. these are of good tape quality but horrible durability. The extra real foil between the plastic casing and tape itself gets worn and is limited to fewer playbacks. It binds and breaks more than most normal cassette tapes. These "Real to Real" tapes are best for displaying equipment and not much good for anything else, except to preserve a one time recording that you don't plan on having excessive playbacks with.

BTW: if you believe any word I said then you're a sucka', j.k.