After reading comments here on cassette tape, I'm reminded that the most 
common tape type universal to so-called serious audiophiles and to blue light 
special shoppers alike is "Type BS".  
Type "BS" tape has every characteristic ideal for your immediate need.  
It may cost under 35 cents per cassette, and include hours of recording time. 
 OTOH, it may cost such absurdly high amounts one would question the sanity 
of anyone buying it to even use the old Norelco format tape, except among 
testosterone overdosed ego stroking competitors inclined toward similar 
lunacy on nights without full Moons.  
Type "BS" cassettes always include specific, finite technical specs which may 
be quoted at will to prove how good or poor they are for specific uses.  
Complicating fine print comparing frequency and operating level dependant 
distortion, headroom, bias noise, and other traits never need be included for 
numbers tossed out in tenths of a dB to be both precise and accurate when all 
test conditions and hardware references are ignored.  
Type "BS" cassettes are optimized for all user preferences.  That includes 
portable machines bearing the name "Crown" not related to the Indiana company 
which stopped producing tape recorders decades ago, equally with machines 
bearing names like Studer or Nakamichi.  Use of Dolby B, C, SR, DBX-II, no 
NR, or mismatched bias and Eq make no difference, nor does operating with 
meters held 20 dB below saturation or always off the red.  Dolby HX Pro has 
no effect on effective headroom, distortion, or s/n, as Type "BS" tape is 
ideal for all user choices.  
=================================================
Bonnie of course gave a somewhat valid suggestion, that anyone having to ask 
what the best tape types are should pay to have equipment aligned to a few 
suitable choices suggested by more technically astute persons, and just stick 
to those.  Not a very specific answer, but about the only one simple enough 
for average consumers as a general response.  
No one here mentioned that typical "chrome" tapes, which for a decade or more 
have often been modified ferric media simply optimied for the "chrome" high 
bias levels (which affect recording only) and 70 uS Eq (rec or PB), have 
higher typical audio distortion at operating levels than comparable quality 
ferric cassettes.  This distortion spec is typically about 50% higher on 
chrome, in exchange for typically better high end headroom.  The latter may 
yield lower perceived distortion (as well as high end loss) on some material, 
by keeping audio less often into saturation, even on tape with a higher 
distortion spec at typical single reference test conditions.  On other 
material such advantages may be moot, and the ferric spec's may be 
preferable.  
A number of dynamic range specs were tossed out, and little mention was made 
of tape quality.  To start with, some comments equated ferric (Type I) tape 
with traits which might include poor surface finish, marginal slitting 
tolerances, and junk shells.  That's simply not true, as any tape type can be 
well or poorly made in such respects.  In addition, different vendors may 
have typical physical tolerances which are not identical, another reason why 
use of a limited number of brands and models often gives better performance 
on specific equipment than mixing randomly nominally similar products.  
There's no such thing as Type I tape having 58.5 dB dynamic range and Type IV 
tape having 75 dB by virtue of the labels.  Those are funny numbers, and are 
based on test conditions that include filters to alter direct measurements, 
as well as operating modes that are not direct indications of tape 
performance alone.  In addition, they ignore the variations of up to 15 dB in 
saturation levels and noise at various frequencies of different brands and 
models of same nominal type tape from various vendors.  It takes about 2 full 
pages of detail to list the real basic specs of any given tape type, usually 
with slight differences in references not always fully comparable if 
comparing Ampex, Agfa, 3M, BASF, Maxell, Sony, TDK, etc.  Then there are 
tapes with packaging of various duplicator products with the same markings, 
sales of minor manufacturing rejects, and other such econo and marketing hype 
lines that can be impossible to compare without batch testing every single 
batch of product.  Even major quality vendors have a bad run now and then.  
Anyone ready to use about $20,000 of test equipment and labor can easily 
develop some rational reasons for picking specific tape types comparatively.  
Others get to rely on trusted advice from dealers or magazine labs which may 
do such testing, or personal arbitrary perceived experiences.  
Terry
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------