 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
140.80.199.91
This post is not intended as a flame.
I'm trying to understand why there is still so much interest in cassette decks and reel to reel deck? I own two cassette decks and am in the process of replacing any cassette recordings I ever made with vinyl or CD. The way I understand it, the tape medium is difficult to work with be it in a casette or reel to reel. Purchased prerecorded cassettes never sounded as good as vinyl and now I can't even find Chrome cassetes let alone Metal Oxide cassetes around. Can someone share some insight on this?
Follow Ups:
You said "Purchased prerecorded cassettes never sounded as good as vinyl"
Here are how some pre-recorded tapes sound on my "azimuth" correct Nakamichi cassette deck:
MFSL High Fidelity Cassettes always sound better than the MFSL LP versions especially in the deep bass and the mid frequencies!
In Sync Labs real time duplicated cassettes (TDK SA-X on Nakamichi machines) sound way better than the Connoisseur Society and Vox original LP versions.
The Nakamichi Reference Recordings on TDK Metal cassettes are also superb and often beat the LP versions, the sole exception would be the Sheffield Lab series made from the analog back up tapes, the Direct to Disc LPs are of course more realistic. But the Nakamichi Reference cassettes get quite close.
The Ryko Analogue cassette of "Dafos" sounds even more realistic than the 45 RPM Reference Recordings LP which is know as one of the most realistic percussion recordings of all time. The deep bass on this sounds like the real thing and the cassette retains more of the ambiance of the recording site than the LP. It is at 70us EQ (Chrome) and Dolby B encoded. If you love the 45-RPM LP version you'll love the cassette even more. Also the other Mickey Hart Ryko Analogue cassettes which otherwise are only available on CDs are must have on Ryko pre-recorded cassettes as they totally blow the CD versions away.
The Rounder pre-recorded cassettes are not only superior to the LP versions but the SACDs versions as well. If you think Alison Krauss sounds good on SACD or LP you've got to hear the cassette version.
Also many pre-recorded cassettes beat the regular issue LPs, as cassettes as a rule have deep, powerful accurate bass. To get deep bass on LP you usually have to buy audiophile LPs.
Yes there are standard pre-recorded cassettes with rolled off highs, I would say maybe 15%. When I get one of these I just donate it to a thrift store.
Anyway this is why I am not giving up on my favorite format, cassette! Since you are leaving I guess it means more for me?
In my system the most realistic format does remain 7 1/2 IPS reel to reel, I can't play 15 IPS yet. But it is amazing what the lowly cassette can do!
I've been using a Studer A710 for well over 20 years now. Back when CD's began to gain popularity...I would borrow a friend's CDs and record them onto the Studer. I still listen to those tapes regularly. I also listen to my Crown reel to reel machines still...I have MANY original symphonic recordings which I recorded that sound BETTER than CDs.
Since I am in the car a fair amount, I listen to books on tape, lectures on tape, classes on tape, and of course, music on tape.
When I replaced the factory stereo in my car a number of years ago, cassette decks were still fairly common in cars (even though CDs were probably already dominating) and I had a lot of music on cassettes, so I got a head unit with cassette that hooks to a CD changer in the trunk.
I was delighted to have the cassette unit when I later attended school - most lecture or study aid series were still predominantly being published on cassette tape at the time - this was 2001-2004. By the end of school, these, too, had completely switched to CD, but in the meantime, I'd made good use of my commute time, listening to lecture and review tapes which unquestionably improved my understanding of the material and the grades I received.
Though the market for these types of titles, like music, has gone predominantly digital (lectures are now available on Podcast, review recordings are published on CD), a lot of libraries and especially discount sellers (like Half Price books) and re-sellers of every stripe have tons of program material on cassette, and it is dirt cheap compared to CDs, if you can even find it on CD.
That's the bright side, in my opinion, of the mass rush to digital - it leaves loads of music, books, all kinds of things, available on analog formats (vinyl, cassette) very, very inexpensively.
Frankly what I'm fairly certain I would find really inconvenient - would be the task of converting all that to CD, editing it and cataloguing it - and buying a CDP head unit for the car - avec flashing lights and 4 million eq options that I would just HATE.
And, it is NOT my experience that Vinyl sounds significantly better than a 3-head cassette deck on pre-recorded tapes. The hiss on good speakers doesn't happen where the music happens.
Lastly, I can hear the degradation of 44.1/16-20-24 bit ADC's quite easily, can't you!?
NB you may not be aware of what you're missing if your listening diet precludes recordings made in real stereo - with only a handful of mikes or just two. These really should maximise the amount of detail and player / ensemble nuance you can hear. Why? Because they lack all those anti-phase boundary-loss-points, that are built in to all pan-potted multi-miked-mono mix-down recordings as in POP recordings. Yes I too have heaps of them, but I can hear the seams, every time.
I just might consider archiving everything, when and IF, an affordable (to me) home use ADC / DAC combo arrives with 192k 24 bit (minimum) to record onto dual-side DVD disks, at speed, at home, and a disk burning package that does NOT assume I want to insert nulls between each track, which kills the decay tails on most classical disks. OR allows me to default to straight copying and not have to turn off all the POP assumptions each fricking time!
And a universal car player that sounds GOOD / has not wasted 90% of the budget on 'pointless shit circuits'!
Nostalgia? BULLshit! Just clear minded preferences based on musically trained ears!
WarmestTimbo in Oz
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio ScroungerAnd gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
http://www.theanalogdept.com/tim_bailey.htm
partly the lure of things spinning that make sound and partly being able to afford junk that in a previous life, I could only dream about. I'm not going to get into the analog versus digital debate. It was foolish of the industry not to amalgamate the two formats. In the constant effort to always market something 'new' and/or 'improved', manufacturers often kill the good products/formats they have. I have nothing against digital, but I feel it's a pretty volatile medium right now, with lossless compression, DVD-A, SCCD. May the winner take the spoils....but in the meantimes, I'll stick with what I know and enjoy-LPs, cassettes and R2R. Whatever camp you're in, i.e. digital or analog (or both), I don't hear anyone saying that high-end analog is crap or sounds lousy.
... that I can get prerecorded cassettes of some albums that have long been out of print or hard to find, for peanuts. I can then buzz them off to CD after cleaning them up with computer software.
I've bought entire shopping carts full of cassettes for only a few bucks. Not bad.
I don't really record to cassette much anymore, though.
Cheers,
Bobbo :-)
Music that is no longer available. Classic recordings and great performances.
I don't have a hardwire connection between my PC and my main listening system. A second=hand good quality cassette deck is currently serving as the "middle man".
Personally I find recording onto tape much easier then any digital format. I just bought a CD recorder for music and I'm already finding out that I must use more expensive Music CD-Rs to record with, and secondly I can't play or dupe those discs on my computer. It seems any digital format that isn't recorded onto the computer (compromise) has too many hassles with copy gaurd issues, making the format very unfriendly to use. At least with tape there's nothing about the format that forces you to not be able to make any further recordings. And tape stays in the analog domain which some may think of as a plus. Digital may make technically perfect copies, but they don't sound like real music to me in terms of how the feel when you listen to them.
A CD is so damn boring. The engineers have covered up everything. I can't even read the nomenclature on the back of any BLACK plastic component made in some sweat shop in China, Taiwan or Mexico or where-ever. At least they could print the inputs and outputs, switches in white against black. The manual that came with my recent HP fax machine is printed with such faint ink I had to buy a magnifying glass to read it. The HP fax machine survived only about a week when static electricity came in on the phone line and destroyed it. Yep, it's made in China!
I really feel that the bulk of the consumer electronic industry has committed itself to selling CRAP. It's marketing driven to make you buy a new one every 6 months. The wishes of audiophiles are not considered. Ray Hughes
HelloWhen I was 12, I started getting interested in hi-fi. I could, however, buy nothing at that time. I dreamed of possessing some good gear at that time, Other boys were interested in basket, soccer, or porno magazines, whereas I just looked again and again those pics of the nakamichi BX-300, REvox B-215 and so on.
years passed and one day my interest started to decay slowly. When I had money I bought a very modest equipment. And didn't thought to improve it for some years. But two years ago I decided to become again a child, I'm coming back to be interested and at first, I just wanted to have, finally, a good deck, but now, I have about 30 and will buy some more.
I find it funnier to put a tape, and play some music, even though I have it ready in my computer or in CD.
Think about it, the centerfolds other kids drooled over are 45 or older today and cars are mostly junked.
And you can have your objects of desire to your heart's contents.
One reason is similar to why folks still have turntables. Some people think that the best analog audio still sounds better than the best digital audio. Whether you believe it or not, the simple truth is that analog turntables and LP records have had something of a comeback in recent years. If you're a fan of analog, most would agree that there is no better analog source than tape, particularly a 15ips dub from the original running master (the tape used to cut the original lacquer for LP pressing). One might call such a tape a 3d generation recording (studio master to running master to dub), whereas an LP is 5th generation (studio master to running master to lacquer to stamper to LP).
Tape is far more expensive than LP records, however, and for many years there have been no sources of prerecorded tapes. But now The Tape Project is running 15 ips dubs of running masters, which many people would agree are the ultimate analog source (behind the running master, of course, which is not generally something consumers can get their hands on).
So, pick up a recent copy of Stereophile (with its Recommended Components) or The Absolute Sound (with its Editors' Choice components) and see how many analog turntable/arm/cartridges are in there. Now figure those folks might be interested in the best analog source available. Add to that musicians who think that running a mix through analog tape gives it a "different" more-pleasing sound than pure digital, and you have something of a market for this "outdated" equipment.
John C.
... good commercially-recorded reel tapes can make your jaw drop.
I have a fairly impressive CD-playback system (Classe transport/Theta DAC), but when I really want to "enjoy"; I thread a reel onto my modest TEAC 2300SD, hit the play button, and just lay back and listen. It is just hard to put into words.
Prehistoric 4-Channel Lizard
I'll start off with 3 reasons:
1. There is the opinion that the audio signal stored and retreived from analog media is superior/sounds better than that encoded to redbook cd specification. You will find 15-20 posts on this board each week from someone in the analog camp who has answered the debate absolulely, once and for all. You will also find 15-20 post each week from those in the digital camp who have accomplished the same. They are easy to spot because of the enormous number of responses and moderator interventions.
2. Reliability of CD-R media. I record the worship service direct to CD-R at my church each Sunday. When it works, the sound is preserved as faithfully as I could ask for. If the disc was bad, it is usually un-readable and the event is lost. When I recorded to cassette tape, if I had a bad tape I would get sound that is compromised, but still useable. I suppose we could record to hard disk, find a volunteer to transcribe to CD, look into tape or disk backup solutions, etc. But, that seems to be a far more complex effort that cassette tape.
3. It's fun for us. I know a guy who wacks a little white ball around a park for fun. I know another guy who drinks all night until he pukes then passes out. He says it's fun too... We all have our quirks. If you ask a Ford Model A enthusiast why he doesn't drive a (insert the name of your favorite ultra-reliable import/domestic look-alike bubble car here), and he/she will wax eloquent for hours. We just like tape machines.
I dont think CD is a good way of storing your collection to last long
If one has to remplace Casette i would look elsewhere to like Minidisc which i use and have only had 2 failed recording of over 1000 compared to CD which i had lot more errors.
Also Cd get scratched and is a pain to keep cleaning, on other hand Casettes can get corrupted by Dust or magnetic interferences over years.
Minidisc on other hand is safe because the little CD is inside a cartdige.
Personaly i prefer Mp3 for outdoor use and My computer for indoor use
CDs is not realy that perfect that some belive it is.
As for vinyl i dont know have never used it.
Everyone has their personal way of storing music
For me i belive the best way is backup all recordings on Minidisc.
So if want to remplace Audiocasette go for Minidisc or something like that.
Minidisc is very neat - I have one - a Sony 930 series. Atrac 5.0. I really wanted a 555ES and couldn't afford it at the time in 2001. I admit, its outrageously cute and better by miles than any data reduced MP3, 2/4, or the MSoft one - better than them all with the one exception of DCC. I have a Philips DCC 600 and that is subtlety better again - but of course much less sexy and much less convenient. But genuine lossless (don't mention Apple or Meridian) - i.e. pure analogue wins the day. Smooth extended highs, no grittiness, seamless integration of frequencies, no vagueing out on busy passages (even DCC and the best of mini-disc does this and as for lossy anything, they are unlistenable even at 192kHz). Also bear in mind that mini-disc truncates frequencies below 20hz and above 16kHz - yes I know your spec manual says that the frequency response is from 2hz and up to 22khz - the machines circuitry may indeed perform on those parameters - the media and ATRAC coding doesn't. Not a chance – no space. PASC is slightly better with an 18 bit word and 18kHz upper threshold.
3dB, if you're still there, I listen to tapes because they offer superior recording - I don't much like CD recording. Media is sometimes a reliability hassle and odd order distortion rises as dither, clocking and other errors are successively re-approximated by the error correction chipware. This is aggravated if using yellow and orange (RW) book devices instead of red book machines working in real time.
And analogue is more fun. Recording on them, which I do often, is rewarding. I copy to CD for friends and relations who are unfortunate enough not to have a cassette deck or place instant track access above sonic quality.
Cheers all - MH
JL and MHugo, are you guys musicians? I'm a musician, and these are the formats I use for recording; Cassette(my first choice) and MD(my second). Cassette sounds better and MD is easier to transport and has less risks with getting eaten or dirty. I also like to use my MD to record rhythm tracks and then dub over them on cassette for solo pieces. Cassettes are closer to real, but can have some timing issues--pitch issues for overdubbing unless you have a great machine. I am currently in the market for a great machine.
CD just has too many issues for me at present. The MD,IMHO, doesn't sound quite as good as a cd--a little more vague--but I never have any playback issues as long as I take it with me. Unfortunately most people never caught onto what these little things can do.
Sorry for getting off topic a bit.
Dan
Silver Iris owning analog addict. Please help.....
Hi Dan,
Sorry for the delay - no I'm not a mnusician!! The funny thing is that MD have been popular here with musicians and in pro-live situation - for live backing tracks. My involvement in music in the recording studio and in concert recording live events. I agree that it has been really sad that it did not take off more as a convenience based home hi-fi thing a bit more. I like the sheer clourful aspect, nice to touch and handle and the definite durability. Also, the 5 second grace-recording, shuffle and delete/insert, indexing - just thrashes CD (talking about digital formats here).
Take care - Marc
I have 700 Grateful Dead and other tapes I still like to play.
Hi RWF,
Please tell me - I am always sorry I missed out on that era of music somehow - the concept of tape trading, especially with bands such as Grateful Dead and Phil Lesh that shunned the recording industry and encouraged music sharing. Well, probably natural, I have been in South Africa. But please tell me, what was (bear with me please if you have answered this before) the most frequently used tape amongst tape traders to your experience, the most preferred, the ones you have the most of, the ones you like the best, the preferred mastering tape, the preferred machines in the field, the no-nos and so forth.
Many thanks - Marc
Dear Marc,
Sorry you missed out on that as it was on hell of a ride. I saw the dead about 150 times from 85-95, seeing them right until Jerry's death. I did a bit of taping and toured with lots of tapers. All the tapers I knew recorded the live shows on Maxell metal tapes. The predominant deck was the Sony D-5. We used Sennheiser Shotgun Mics. Other people used different things I guess but this was the setup of about everyone I knew. The DATS came in toward the end I guess. Some people had them earlier but I would say that the D-5 was the deck
With regard to my collection, I had a wide range of different tapes as I did not have a lot of money back then. By far the most tapes I have are Maxell XL II (and XL II S when I could afford it). I also have Sony Metals and Fuji Chromes as I used to be able to get a good deal on them at a tape shop by the ten pack. I also have some TDK Chromes. I would bet I have pretty much every kind of commonly avaiable Chrome tape in my collection but the vast majority are Maxell XL II's. The one thing I never purchased ever was normal bias tapes. They are all chrome or metal. I still play them to this day and they still sound good to me. I am sure that some other deadheads will pipe in as well with their experiences but for what its worth this was mine in ten years of touring.
Richard
Hi Richard,
This is great - thanks a lot for bringing that magic alive to me. "...they still sound good to me..." I bet they do!! I have the highest regard for Maxell XLII over the years. The Sony D-5 - I have heard of it before. It makes sense using type IIs for generational copies because of their low noise floors and I know you guys were very strict on the no-Dolby rule for all those compatibility issues. What decks are you using?
All the best - Marc
The Sony D-5 was as far as I know the best battery powered deck that was available. It used D batteries and was portable. When we taped at the shows no power was available to us so we had to use battery powered equipment. On occasion we were allowed to be patched into the soundboard but mostly used mics.
My current decks are both Yamahas-a KX-1200 U and and a KX-W332. I also have a Yamaha EQ-630 since the tapes sound better equalized. And yes no dolby was supposed to be used although sometimes people did not know that. Really an equalizer is a must in any case at least for me.
Anyone remember when Telarc were putting out cassettes on TDK SA? I think it was the very early 90s and I bought a couple of their titles. I have to say that I thought they sounded much better than the CD equivalents. I played them in an entry level Nakamichi.
I've been tossing with the idea of some sort of analogue format to make copies of my pristine LPs. But as others have pointed out, even if machines can still be bought, good tape is extremely hard to find.
Interestingly enough, in terms of digital I have found that the Fraunhofer compression codec seems to offer a very "analogue tape" type of sound compared to the source it is encoding.
I agree the Telarc's on TDK SA's that use 70us EQ do sound much better than the CD versions. This includes all the Classical releases, some of the Kunzel and a couple of the Jazz releases. The ones at 120us EQ are not as good but I think they are at least as good or better than the CD versions.
However for a real thrill find on Nakamichi Reference Recordings recorded in Real Time (1:1) on TDK Metal tape available with either Dolby B or Dolby C encoding. There are very close to the sound of Telarc SACDs!
Those were the days...you'd get lovely glossy monthly updates from Telarc via snail mail and their CDs were the best of a bad lot...I seem to recall Telarc went on quite a bit about their state of the art cassette duplication (I think it was 4 x speed but I could be mistaken). They even spoke about how the huge pancakes of SA tape were delivered from TDK.I used to get very excited when I saw a new Telarc cassette on the shelves at the music store. There was always something about the accuracy of instrumental timbre on my Telarc cassettes that the CD did not match. It's a bit like the vinyl versus CD viewpoints I have today.
I used tape a heck of a lot in the 80s and 90s and even ended up buying a TEAC open reel. It had quite an appetite and cost me a wad to fuel it's diet of Ampex 456. But it did not suffer the annoying but subtle flutter problems that I had with cassette - even with the Nakamichi.
I have no idea how you get the stuff you talk about but I'm happy for you that you have it. In the end the thing that knocked tape on the head for me was actually the lack of a range of titles. This was of course long before the internet. Now I see lots of stuff for sale including lots of old pre-recorded open reel.
Oh, btw I just found your website. Excellent! I agree completely with your summations of all the different formats with their strengths and weaknesses.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
