Nak dragon question. Is it really the best sounding
- Thread starter Normo
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
LAB3
AK Member
Norm go to naks.com they have a Long list of all the
Nakamichi casette decks. The 3 head models can cost up to $6,000.00 new back the 90's. A new Dragon was about $2,400.00 back then 1982 thru 1993. The more features the more $$. I have a basic 2 head BX-100 from the mid 1980's(about $499.00) great sounding deck as long as you use it and keep the rubber idler tire and drive belt replaced every 20 years or so as long as you Use it. Let a Nakamichi cassette deck set idle for several years and the belts and idler tire will need to be replaced. Ask me how I know this now. :tears: For what I see on Ebay etc the prices for a Dragon and up are expensive. I would rather spend that much money on a Pro model Otari MX 5050 series R2R or Studer etc. But that is just me as cassettes run at a slower I.P.S. Hope this helps.
Louis
Edriz
AK Member
I cant compare my Dragon to other Nak decks but I have always used totl or close to totl Pionner decks. Switching to a Dragon about 3 years ago was the smartest thing I could do. Im now getting everything and then some out of my recordings and the Sound quality is fantastic. Like opening a whole new world.
guiller
Toscaninichus Australis
I never lusted for a Dragon and never owned one. I've read many warning comments regarding the complexity involved in servicing it, something that all models of this vintage should undergo. I am the happy owner of a CR-7 though, the best cassette deck I've ever had. I love the self-adjust bias feature and also the on-the-fly playback azimuth head adjustment tool, a superb tool for people that get tapes recorded on different machines like me. Soundwise, the CR-7 does superb recordings that I am unable to distinguish from the original sources. My tech claims that the CR-7 is a reasonable deck to work on.
People on several threads claim that the ZX-9, Dragon, CR-7 and 1000ZXL are the best Nakamichi decks, but I don't have first hand experience besides the CR-7. Going away from the Nakamichi realm, people also claim that Tandberg 3014A or Revox B710 have the right to be named "best decks ever", alongside the top Nakamichi models:
http://reviews.ebay.com/Revox-Nakamichi-and-Tandberg-the-Pros-and-Cons?ugid=10000000001829134
Last edited:
LAB3
AK Member
Does it sound better then your R2R?? I am replacing the belts and tire on my BX-100 now. I just purchased it and it played a tape for 5 minutes and the belts/tire started slipping. I just ordered the special tire from Jeff at ESL and the belts from Fred at MARRS Com. I have it apart again as I ruffed up the glazed over idler tire and put it back together and it played and would fast foward geat for about a hour then it started to slip again. I got lucky as it looks Mint and I paid $50.00 for in Barter Town last week. I have a dual Kenwood cassette player I got new in 1988 and still plays great but my wife plays it every week. It records Ok but not a good as my Revox R2R. The reason I asked about your Dragon as I wanted a Dragon but decent one's on EPAY are over $1,000.00.. A Willy Herman restored one I wanted but it sold for $1,400.00.
vidguy
Active Member
"Better" is always relative.
Recording
I'd say the ZX-7 /ZX-9 are very close to the Dragon, in terms of sound, they share the same basic transport, same rec head, nearly identical rec calibration process.
Playback
This is where the Dragon outshines most other decks.
When working properly, the Auto-Azimuth system really does work, bring out the best out of tapes from multiple sources.
I cannot distinguish a difference in sound between my ZX-7 and my Dragon, but both are carefully calibrated to IEC standards. It is hard to distinguish differences between either cassette deck and my open-reel tapes recorded at 7.5 or 15 ips when listening in open air. But when I listen through headphones, I can sometimes hear very subtle tape flaws with cassette tapes (modulation distortion; brief, uneven output below the "droput" threshold; changes in phase; and so forth) that I seldom hear with open-reel tape. If I am just listening to music and enjoying the sound, either format is satisfactory. When I am listening for flaws--as I have trained myself to do for my job--I find fewer with an open-reel recording.
LAB3
AK Member
You have some nice machines... :thmbsp:.... and I bet you use BASF tape.
good guess 
??? as I remember you from tapeheads.net, you worked for BASF for many years. You had a cool job as we say over here in the "States". 
. I printed the BASF/AGFA chart you posted last year, thanks again Wilhem.Louis
perryinva
IS it vintage????
I believe Wilhelm is also from the States, actually. The point he makes, which is really often the biggest factor in "better", is that his decks are aligned and calibrated to valid standards, as he has access to traceable cal taps and gauges, and the knowledge of how to use them. A potentially great deck can sound like crap just from a small misalignment. I agree with Wilhelm completely. I have a number of Dragons, ZX-9s, ZX-7s, CR-7s, and RX-505s, and they all can sound remarkably similar, with the CR-7 actually having the most noticeable sounding difference from the others. But to get to the original post, yes, all things being REALLY equal, a Dragon will play more tapes, with greater accuracy than the others, but as far as recording a tape and playing it back on the same deck, it depends on the quality of the tape, but they would sound virtually the same, regardless. Naturally, the Dragon has the lowest W&F and most accurate speed, but the differences are not really audible, unless there are consecutive dubs.
Daunia 70
Lunatic Member
The best (normal horizonal) playback sounding Nakamichi cassette deck for me would be the 681ZX/682 ZX's.The latter had a MRRP of $1800 back in 1981,only $49 less than the £1849 CR7,5/6 years later on and on...I also sometimes wonder how much of the MRRP of $2400 was spent on the trendy (but not necessary soundwise) Nakamichi Dragon's "trendy" auto reverse.
Both my ZX's were fully serviced years back by "Bowers & Wilkins",even the lovely green colour illumination for the analogue tape counter to go with the matching tape transport and meter illuminations.These sure can sound awesome!
Both my ZX's were fully serviced years back by "Bowers & Wilkins",even the lovely green colour illumination for the analogue tape counter to go with the matching tape transport and meter illuminations.These sure can sound awesome!
Last edited:
vidguy
Active Member
The Dragon's "auto-reverse" is not important, what's important is the "Auto-Azimuth", and the dual DD capstans, nothing trendy about it, the Dragon's 6 gap PB head is nothing short of technical marvel.
I have a 682ZX as well, and I certainly like it enough to invest money in a proper refurbish job, however it's still not as good as the Dragon
If I were to rate some of my Nakamichi's
1: Dragon
2: ZX-7 (because I prefer manual rec calibration over auto)
3: 682ZX
4: RX-505
5: 582
6: 700 Tri-Tracer
7: RX-202
I have a 682ZX as well, and I certainly like it enough to invest money in a proper refurbish job, however it's still not as good as the Dragon
If I were to rate some of my Nakamichi's
1: Dragon
2: ZX-7 (because I prefer manual rec calibration over auto)
3: 682ZX
4: RX-505
5: 582
6: 700 Tri-Tracer
7: RX-202
Daunia 70
Lunatic Member
I've had a Dragon before and still own a ZX-7.The 681/682ZX's in my opinion easily out perform my ZX7 in terms of playback (and build quality).
Even my 480 sounds better than my RX-202E,again i sometimes have to wonder how much of the MRRP went into the RX-202's trendy unidirectional auto reverse (rather like the dragon).
Even my 480 sounds better than my RX-202E,again i sometimes have to wonder how much of the MRRP went into the RX-202's trendy unidirectional auto reverse (rather like the dragon).
vidguy
Active Member
We'll have to agree to disagree
Auto-Reverse is not the issue.
The Dragon's biggest advantage is auto-azimuth. It set's it apart from all other decks.
Unless you can match the PB azimuth to a signal that's been recorded on a tape, then you cannot to begin to get the best sound. It's just basic fundamentals.
Take a tape recorded on, say a Pioneer CT-F950, now play it back on your 682ZX, sounds good? It should, 682ZX is an awesome deck. It sounds good on my 682ZX too.
Now, swap that tape over to the Dragon, and wow, a jump in clarity and HF response. Dolby tracks better too.
Why? Because the Pioneer's alignment was different than the 682ZX, so some HF information get's lost. the Dragon however, just adjusts it's PB head and get's a perfect track.
As long as the Dragon's NAAC is working 100%, than it will find the best PB azimuth quickly, and flawlessly.
No other deck was designed to do this, other than the Marantz SD-930.
There's nothing "trendy" about NAAC, it's not a gimmick, it was designed to get the most out of every tape you can throw at it, from every source. Auto Reverse is just a bonus.
Not sure how you can say the 682ZX has better build quality. They both have the same transport, made from the same materials, the ZX-7's internal layout is a bit cleaner too.
The 682ZX does however beat both the ZX-7 and Dragon in the Meter dept. Best looking meters.
Last edited:
Edriz
AK Member
Does it sound better then my R2R. Ah, NO!! In defense of the dragon, my 909 has been fully and completely restored by AK's own Rabbi, the master of all things Pioneer Rich Pustelniakr. I even renamed my RT-909 in his honor to the "RP-909" . Can I get the Dragon to sound as good. Yes many times I can,if Im sitting in front of the machine paying attention to the recording and monitoring the recording, I can and do get the tape to sound as good as the source and as good as the R2R.
I also use DBX 224X-DS noise reduction. So much better then dolby I can get tapes virtually hiss free. I will not debate this. Just come have a listen.
I can say using the DBX NR is a downfall also. Tapes recorded thru DBX must be played back using DBX. Not really a problem for me as my tapes are only played on my stereo.
The Dragon, with its auto calibration on playback also makes tapes recorded on other decks sound very good also. Yes Dragons are hard to work on. me being a self professed technoidiot wouldnt even attempt to work on one. I did however, change the sensor bulbs, with help from folks at tapeheads, and I did that successfuly. But I tell ya, theres lots stuff inside these dragons and i wouldnt attempt any more difficuly. I have no problem, when the time comes to send it for overhaul.
I got mine with alot of patience thru AGon for $700 about 3 maybe 4 years ago and it performs flawlessly. I love it. I just wish I had gotten one years ago. But being the stubborn sicilian i am, I have been a die hard Pioner guy for years. If i had an opportunity to get one already refurbed, I wouldnt have any probalem paying $1K for one. Of course, this is all just my own opinion but, if i were you and you have the ability, get The Dragon!!
from a smart man I heard once that the 1000 ZXL does the best recordings (4 different frequency auto azimuth) and the Dragon does the best playback (playback auto azimuth).
perryinva
IS it vintage????
"Best" is always a loaded gun. Many people prefer the sound of the 680 and 682 zx decks over all others because of the way they color a recording. I am amazed at how little tiny aberations in frequency response, seem to greatly alter a perception of the sound. Though I guess I shouldnt be, as it makes sense that an electromechanical device would have the greatest variances, compared to say an amplifier, and there is no end to the debate of what amplifiers sound best, eh! You really just have to hope you like what you can get, as there are never any guarantees that something you buy will live up to the hype.
Last edited:
ssmith3046
Super Member
I recently bought a Willy Herman serviced Dragon and consider it one of the better audio purchases I've made.
captaingamez
Well-Known Member
like perry said "best" is immensely relative, IS the nakamichi dragon the greatest cassette deck ever built and the best thing to ever grace the cassette forum? probably not, is it top 10, oh yea, probably better than that. the NAAC does make a huge difference, but its not the most important thing in cassettes.
but will any of them compare to an even half decent reel to reel? the answer is unquestionable no, most any Reel decent deck will annihilate cassette performance, which is why, while having immense respect for the dragon and wanting one,....
I will never buy one, considering I can for the price, get 2 reels i REALLY want, that both sound WAY WAY better, then i would use the change to buy some reels and the remotes for them.
another consideration, if its gonna be your only deck, get a dragon, but if you use 3 different decks, well then they all should be setup to the same standards anyway, and all aligned with the same tape and same equipment, therefore, any tape recorded on one will be the same and track the same on all of them, so if you do heavy recording between decks and their all setup properly with the same equipment, then NAAC is mostly useless, however the CR7 and all the ZX series become the most useful machines in their class, because they adjust the record head not the playback head, all recordings are always set to playback head tracking exactly, and since we already established that the playback heads are all set precisely, playback between the decks would be the same between those decks. and if you listen to prerecordeds alot and record alot between multiple decks i would have to say the ultimate machine would be the CR7, it has manual playback adjust. so as i said, if its your only deck, dragon makes more sense.
but will any of them compare to an even half decent reel to reel? the answer is unquestionable no, most any Reel decent deck will annihilate cassette performance, which is why, while having immense respect for the dragon and wanting one,....
I will never buy one, considering I can for the price, get 2 reels i REALLY want, that both sound WAY WAY better, then i would use the change to buy some reels and the remotes for them.
another consideration, if its gonna be your only deck, get a dragon, but if you use 3 different decks, well then they all should be setup to the same standards anyway, and all aligned with the same tape and same equipment, therefore, any tape recorded on one will be the same and track the same on all of them, so if you do heavy recording between decks and their all setup properly with the same equipment, then NAAC is mostly useless, however the CR7 and all the ZX series become the most useful machines in their class, because they adjust the record head not the playback head, all recordings are always set to playback head tracking exactly, and since we already established that the playback heads are all set precisely, playback between the decks would be the same between those decks. and if you listen to prerecordeds alot and record alot between multiple decks i would have to say the ultimate machine would be the CR7, it has manual playback adjust. so as i said, if its your only deck, dragon makes more sense.
Last edited:
vidguy
Active Member
I have to disagree.
I happen to own 3 Open Reel decks, RT-909/RT-701, Akai GX-215D
My Dragon can keep up with them quite well.
Vinyl recorded on my Dragon, using TDK MA-R and Dolby C, compares quite well with the same vinyl recorded on my RT-909, using RMGI LPR-35.
Is the Pioneer better? Yes, it is.
Does it "annihilate" the Dragon. (or my ZX-7 for that matter)? No, no it doesn't.
It takes really critical listening, for me to tell the difference between them, they are THAT close.
But then again, it's just my opinion, based on my gear, using my ears.
I happen to own 3 Open Reel decks, RT-909/RT-701, Akai GX-215D
My Dragon can keep up with them quite well.
Vinyl recorded on my Dragon, using TDK MA-R and Dolby C, compares quite well with the same vinyl recorded on my RT-909, using RMGI LPR-35.
Is the Pioneer better? Yes, it is.
Does it "annihilate" the Dragon. (or my ZX-7 for that matter)? No, no it doesn't.
It takes really critical listening, for me to tell the difference between them, they are THAT close.
But then again, it's just my opinion, based on my gear, using my ears.
captaingamez
Well-Known Member
do it on test equipment, not with your ears, that was my point. quite honestly i can tell very little difference between my Akai 747 with a good tape and my 670zx with a sony metal master, but the devils in the details, test equipment will show different, and most likely with any decent reel vs a dragon, the decent reel will substantially outperform on test equipment, again not knocking the dragon it is an amazing piece of engineering, I am just stating the obvious, we are still talking about 1/32th of an inch per track at 1 7/8ths speed, and it has massive limits, but they really mostly arent in the human hearing range (seriously has limits when compared to the standard in reel of 7.5 ips and1/16th per track width). now if you step that up to an otari, tascam, ampex, studer, telefunken,or nagra at 15-30 ips, then yea, the word "annihilate" definitely comes to mind.
and also IMHO, not in any way knocking the RT-909, cause i want one quite badly also, but I dont feel the RT-909 to be the best of decks to compare to, I have compared the 909 to a few decks when I've had the chance, and while being a great deck, it is rarely neutral and i would under no circumstances say that the 909 anhilates ANY TOTL Nakamichi.
and also IMHO, not in any way knocking the RT-909, cause i want one quite badly also, but I dont feel the RT-909 to be the best of decks to compare to, I have compared the 909 to a few decks when I've had the chance, and while being a great deck, it is rarely neutral and i would under no circumstances say that the 909 anhilates ANY TOTL Nakamichi.