Let's move on to a SONY MetalXR, an excellent type IV tape from the early 90s:

The MetalXR, again, performs very well. The linearity is not up to the ones seen in the SA or the UX-Pro, but that slight issue of about 1dB of drop off at 5-6kHz doesn't really make that much. All in all the performance is great.

Let's move into a real winner: a SONY UX-S from the '92-94, one of the best chrome tapes and one of the best performance/value like the good TDK SA.

As it can be seen, the performance is top-notch, on par with the SA. Actually it is identical! So, if you like the SA's response, you'll love the UX-S too. In fact, I'd prefer the latter because it isn't as prone to show some issues like 'railroading' which TDK tape do tend to show. The UX-S keeps its reputation of being one of the best price/performance tapes ever made in the high quality arena.

Now let's move on to a simple but still good SONY HF from the '90:

If the UX-S performance is impressive, the HF should be on par. To see such a cheap tape to show a performance that is almost perfect, but for a price of less than 1 euro is somewhat jaw dropping...

Now let's go for the latest one, one of those rare type III tapes. I don't have many different tapes of this kind in my collection so I really couldn't choose between many, but I think the SONY could be a great one. Let's see how it performs:

FeCr tapes didn't ever took off. They were a good experiment with bad luck. They got the benefits of good ferrics and Chrome tapes together, but they also got problems: they don't have a particular good bias setting, but two combined, that caused that weird response.

Yes, with a good EQ you can lower those irregularities but it will never be like a good metal tape. Reason why metal tapes took off and FeCr disappeared. So, yes, it's nice to have a position for type III but it's only to play a bit with some old type III tapes, not really to make excellent recordings.