Tape every time! Not perfect but it does sound good!

Quote SixStringzzz:

---

Tape every time! Not perfect but it does sound good!

---

No contest, Cassette tape every time, especially with Dolby C. I'm thinking of replacing my HHB CD recorder with a Nakamichi Dragon (as a friend has one in mint condition) and I think it will probably be a considerable improvement.

Take care,

Tony.

Yup - cassette - much better than MP3, despite the deficiencies.

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

Hi John, thanks for that link, very interesting indeed.

Take care,

Tony.

Seeing as I'm totally disillusioned with everything digital, I'm on the road to the complete analogue studio, like a lot of people, I shouldn't have been so easily taken in in the first place. Its all hype, digital, just use your ears folks. Its a bit like photography trying to outdo paining, as "a more Realistic medium" but realism isn't the issue, whatever "realism" is. A painting is still more "realistic" and "lifelike" and has more depth than any photo can ever have, and analogue sound stands up to the same comparison.

Take care,

Tony.

Quote SixStringzzz:

---

Tape every time! Not perfect but it does sound good!

---

What nonsense. Care to define what bitrate mp3 you're comparing, please ?

A decent bitrate mp3 encoded with a good encoder is MUCH better than the cassette abomination.

Unless you're talking stupidly-low bitrate mp3.

Or proper tape, not cassette tape.

Quote arpangel:

---

especially with Dolby C.

---

This is April 1st - right ?

technicality aside, a High quality chrome based cassette , with Dolby C + HX pro, definitely had the potential to sound better than the average MP3.

even moderately high bit rate MP3.

and if memory serves me aright, record something on a (very rare) high speed machine and use ( the equally rare) Dolby S, and it got much closer to CD.



(mind you at the time, most CD transport and D/A systems were pretty crude in comparison to today's technology... )


a decent Bit rate AAC sounds somewhat better than an equivalent MP3, ........

--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

I like cassettes. Still use 'em for the old 4 track from time to time. I've no problem with digital, it's all about the end result.

Mp3 can sound good at high bitrates well encoded, but cassette sounds good. It's not tape, but it was all most of us had way back and the more competent among us got very good results i'm sure.
There is more to it than mere nostalgia. I can forgive the (in most cases) barely audible hiss. And on a good machine well maintained wow and flutter was insignificant.

I'm biased.

Tony: http://www.audiosparkle.co.uk/ (this guy also trades on ebay) and http://www.naks.com

I nearly bought a 680ZX (think that's right) on ebay a while ago but it went for a bit more than I could afford at the time. Then I ended up buying a Marantz SD4000 for a pound, so...

Edit: I also run an Aurex (Toshiba) PC-X60AD which came, yup, from a skip!!

--------------------
http://www.myspace.com/fourtrackfrontier

Edited by Sonic The Hedgehog (17/11/07 01:12 AM)

If Casette tape is good enough for Aphex Twin Selected Ambient Works 85-92 its good enough for me.

Casette does bring back wonderful memories ...

I think some here are wearing seriously rose tinted earbuds!

Obviously, we have to consider the caveats of what MP3 bit rate and codec is to be used, and what cassette tape, noise reduction, machine and condition is available. We also need to know whether we are talking about making accurate sonically faithful recordings here, or something that rounds and mellows the sound in a not altogether unpleasing way.

Assuming we are talking about making faithful, sonically accurate recordings, then personally, I'd choose the MP3 option every time provided I could specify a sensible bit rate.

Sure, Philips' dictation format was improved remarkably over its lifespan, but it was never considered a contender for open reel tape, and when the first (awful by modern standards) CD players were launched everyone realised instantly how much quality was lost through cassette tapes (including commercially pre-recorded ones).

The only way you'd get close (and that's all you'll ever get) with a cassette is with chrome (or possibly metal) tapes using Dolby C on an extremely good condition and well set up recorder with a very good transport.

Something like a few of the higher end Nakamichis may still just about do it, or maybe the bomb-proof Studer machines(although they never seemed to be set up as well as they could be for some reason).

But the bottom line is that you can't ignore the inherent problems of severely restricted signal-noise ratio from the stupidly slow tape speed and minimal track widths -- or the limited bandwith and phase response issues.

Equally, you can't ignore the very heavy handed processing of Dolby C and its tendency for clearly audible mistracking and poor transient response with the slightest misalignment.

You also can't ignore the difficulties of accurate and stable tape/head alignment, or of consistent tape tension -- something very few machines ever managed to overcome successfully.

You can't ignore the problems of head wear and gap size.

And most of all, you can't ignore the fact the decent cassette machines are now ten to twenty years old, most in in poor mechanical condition, all with almost irreplaceable parts. Tape manufacture is also erratic, and often with highly variable quality.

Nostalgia is a wonderful thing, and if you want lo-fi as an effect then go for it. But let's not make fairly tales out of the history, eh?

Hugh

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

I think some here are wearing seriously rose tinted earbuds!

---

Nah, just attempting a little lyrical (ear?)waxing about cassettes.

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Obviously, we have to consider the caveats of what MP3 bit rate and codec is to be used, and what cassette tape, noise reduction, machine and condition is available.

---

Meh oui.

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

We also need to know whether we are talking about making accurate sonically faithful recordings here, or something that rounds and mellows the sound in a not altogether unpleasing way.

---

The sensible answer could be the latter. I wouldn't take a cassette deck to record a world class orchestra now, would I? Hmmm?

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Assuming we are talking about making faithful, sonically accurate recordings, then personally, I'd choose the MP3 option every time provided I could specify a sensible bit rate.

---

I'd choose a well encoded high bitrate mp3 too.... In addition to another reliable digital format. Actually, i'd make the mp3 from that.

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

when the first (awful by modern standards) CD players were launched everyone realised instantly how much quality was lost through cassette tapes (including commercially pre-recorded ones).

---

Of course.

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

The only way you'd get close (and that's all you'll ever get) with a cassette is with chrome (or possibly metal) tapes using Dolby C on an extremely good condition and well set up recorder with a very good transport.

---

I assume this would be a given for most extolling any potential virtues regarding cassettes. Who got marmite on my heads? Eh?

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

But the bottom line is that you can't ignore the inherent problems of severely restricted signal-noise ratio from the stupidly slow tape speed and minimal track widths -- or the limited bandwith and phase response issues.

Equally, you can't ignore the very heavy handed processing of Dolby C and its tendency for clearly audible mistracking and poor transient response with the slightest misalignment.

You also can't ignore the difficulties of accurate and stable tape/head alignment, or of consistent tape tension -- something very few machines ever managed to overcome successfully.

You can't ignore the problems of head wear and gap size.

And most of all, you can't ignore the fact the decent cassette machines are now ten to twenty years old, most in in poor mechanical condition, all with almost irreplaceable parts. Tape manufacture is also erratic, and often with highly variable quality.

---

It's my post and i'll ignore if i want to, ignore if i want to.... You're not wrong though. But let's hope that people who choose to use, use sensibly.

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Nostalgia is a wonderful thing, and if you want lo-fi as an effect then go for it. But let's not make fairly tales out of the history, eh?

---

Some of us simply like (or liked even?) the sound of a good mix recorded onto a quality (hopefully a good batch) cassette on a good deck that is/was well maintained. Maybe that's all one had available to capture their work? For example.

Nostalgia is a wonderful thing indeed. Even better when it doesn't cloud ones judgement and one records (past, present or future) on cassette knowing full well of it's inherent limitations. Just a viewpoint.

Cheers.

Ive realised over the years that what sounds better [not what has more 'quality'] depends entirely on my mood. Which is why a record will sound different depending on when you make/mix/listen to it.

As a non engineer, i will think that 'Animals' sounds better on cassette than say 'Steps' on CD... It's all in the mind until you get the measuring tools out innit?

--------------------
Yeah!

Nostalgia always sounds better... in your own mind.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Agreed. It's a fairly well known phenomenom that as time passes we forget the bad things and remember the good things. You know, 'we had better summers' that type of thing.

I believe it's the way the human brain works. I would imagine that 30 years ago if you did a side by side test with (a decent) mp3 and cassette and asked people to choose, I reckon mp3 would take it.

Of course nostalgia ain't what it used to be!

Id just like to get my hands on the azalea that stole my rackmount tascam 4 track..... portastudio, of course.

--------------------
Me? But I`m such a loveable old bugger!

Dreadful little bastards, cassettes were.

I praised the day that they stopped appearing, tape unwound and wrapped round coke cans and discarded sandwich packets by the side of the road at every traffic lights on the North Circular.

And I bet you'd have to have looked far and wide to find a properly clean and calibrated machine to play them on outside of a professional facility.

What is it with the hatred of MP3 from some people on here? I would say that anyone who says an MP3 compressed using a decent modern codec at a reasonable bitrate sounds 'awful' compared to the uncompressed original is guilty of some serious snobbery issues.

Say what you want about the decline of quality in modern music consumables, but don't blame it on the medium. To say you would pick cassette of all things over MP3 any time is just .. I mean ... seriously.

--------------------
http://www.jeremycorbett.co.uk

Quote Mahoobley:

---

I would say that anyone who says an MP3 compressed using a decent modern codec at a reasonable bitrate sounds 'awful' compared to the uncompressed original is guilty of some serious snobbery issues.

---

This is the crux of it though - a lot MP3s aren't encoded with a decent encoder & at a sensible bitrate. To my ears, the artifacts caused by such an encoding process are unbearable & I would far rather listen to a cassette. If an MP3 has been well encoded, then fine, I'll happily listen to it.

--------------------
There's nothing we can't face... Except for bunnies

that was also the position i was coming from...... Cassette was only ever listenable when done well also.... but was far more stable in the car than an LP

--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

Quote Sheriton:

---

Quote Mahoobley:

---

I would say that anyone who says an MP3 compressed using a decent modern codec at a reasonable bitrate sounds 'awful' compared to the uncompressed original is guilty of some serious snobbery issues.

---

This is the crux of it though - a lot MP3s aren't encoded with a decent encoder & at a sensible bitrate. To my ears, the artifacts caused by such an encoding process are unbearable & I would far rather listen to a cassette. If an MP3 has been well encoded, then fine, I'll happily listen to it.

---

To be fair, that doesn't appear the crux of where a lot of people are coming from - to some, MP3 is just evil and unlistenable no matter well it is done and should be dismissed out of hand and banished to the firey pits of hades. Which is just bollocks.

And where do these poorly encoded MP3s come from? I have little experience of iTunes store, but every other legitimate source of MP3 files I use (such as emusic and bleep) are perfectly acceptable. Perhaps some kid sticking stuff on a P2P site is going to be cack, but you aren't getting your music from there though are you

--------------------
http://www.jeremycorbett.co.uk

Quote Sheriton:

---

To my ears, the artifacts caused by such an encoding process are unbearable & I would far rather listen to a cassette. If an MP3 has been well encoded, then fine, I'll happily listen to it.

---

I don't use MP3s because I can generally hear high frequency artefacts, even though my ears are old and out of guarantee. These artefacts are (to my ears) absent from AAC. I'd rather use cassette than MP3.

--------------------
www.bemuso.com

Then you need to be using a modern codec at higher bitrates.

The LAME MP3 codec has consistently proven to be pretty much the best lossy compression technique for music.

--------------------
http://www.jeremycorbett.co.uk

I don't think that a format that is a bitty iffy is a bad thing as a general 'listen to this' type format for the internet. More chance of people paying for a better res version if they really like the stuff.

--------------------
Yeah!

I'm surprised no-one's mentioned the unlamented 8-track cartridge yet.

Interestingly it could have been a good concept, with 1/2" tape, but I doubt anyone ever made a transport system worthy of the name, since they were nearly all done to a stupidly low budget to stick in car systems.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote Max!:

---

that was also the position i was coming from...... Cassette was only ever listenable when done well also.... but was far more stable in the car than an LP

---

Cassette tape certainly rattles much better than an mp3.
Oh! Is that what you do with them?

--------------------
Success is round the corner. It's also round the bend.

Quote Mahoobley:

---

And where do these poorly encoded MP3s come from? I have little experience of iTunes store, but every other legitimate source of MP3 files I use (such as emusic and bleep) are perfectly acceptable. Perhaps some kid sticking stuff on a P2P site is going to be cack, but you aren't getting your music from there though are you

---

I've never used a P2P site or other illegitimate means of finding such things & have no intention of doing so. I've also never bought an MP3 for a whole host of reasons. My judgments are based on what I hear of other peoples' collections and on my own experiences of encoding tracks I've recorded for other people. When you've spent ages mixing a track & know it intimately, hearing the mess that MP3 makes of it is depressing to say the least.

--------------------
There's nothing we can't face... Except for bunnies

Thanks Hugh for a sensible post...I always found the wobble of cassette much more objectionable than the HF rolloff and hiss. 320k mp3 is definitely better.

--------------------
madtheory creations
Synths and pianos for Kontakt

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

I think some here are wearing seriously rose tinted earbuds!

---

Mine are not only rose-tinted Hugh, but are also diamante studded as well, on a bed of glorious brushed aluminum...

Take care !

Tony

Comedy post of the year..

--------------------
Yeah!

Occasionally here at Feline HQ I have cause to delve into the Feline Archive Shoebox and extract summat that was already recorded onto cassette in the 1990s.

Generally, listening now with the decent semi-pro-ish monitors / headphones I have these days, and being able to capture it with a semi-pro soundcard, I'm generally aghast at the grottiness of these old recordings - so much hiss, poor dynamic range, wow and flutter etc etc etc.
They really *don't* tend to sound "good" at all! They sound like someone's smeared the audio over a crap piece of cheap plastic tape like cheap margarine, and I'm watching it through grubby greasy fingerprint-strewn glass. Or sthg.

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

Quote feline1:

---

They sound like someone's smeared the audio over a crap piece of cheap plastic tape like cheap margarine, and I'm watching it through grubby greasy fingerprint-strewn glass. Or sthg.

---

You're right. I've got loads of old cassettes - many of them pukka commercial releases of albums which I chose to buy in that format (I know, I know... I wanted to listen in the car...).

I started a project a couple of months back to digitise them all and burn them to CD or iTunes or something. Using a very good, well maintained Denon rack-mounted studio cassette player.

I gave up halfway through some much-loved John Lennon album. It is, frankly, beyond my talents (or my equipment's capabilities) to make this remotely listenable in a modern-day context. So I'll probably abandon the project (and the tapes) and get on with my life...

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote Steve Hill:

---

It is, frankly, beyond my talents (or my equipment's capabilities) to make this remotely listenable in a modern-day context.

---

Media - MP3
Device - Mobile phone
Optimum listening environment - Top deck of bus

Job done.

Quote The real musiclover:

---

edia - MP3
Device - Mobile phone
Optimum listening environment - Top deck of bus

---

And MUCH better than cassette walkman in top of said bus.

I did listen to a Dolby-S cassette demonstration once - we were all laughing because we thought it had gone wrong - then out of the silence came the music.................

We stopped laughing then...

--------------------
John - Sound-Link ProAudio
President - Federation Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

Quote Chris Edwards:

---

And MUCH better than cassette walkman in top of said bus.

---

Quite possibly. If you are listening on a decent pair of compatible headphones with a decently encoded mp3 on a decent phone on a decent bus!
And not through the crappy little speaker blaring out tunes of dubious quality sourced from gawd knows where at whatever mp3 bitrate... But that's irrelevant, that's the speakers fault partly. I must ask the next youth I see doing such on the bus what bitrate he uses and suggest quite selflessly a good decent portable set of cans. But i'm sure he don't care as long as he is annoying any passengers.

The opening post merely expressed a liking, a preference even. Not actually asking what is better. He himself said it isn't perfect!

I like cassettes. As do others. Some do not. Wouldn't have it any other way.

Cheers.

Quote John Willett:

---

I did listen to a Dolby-S cassette demonstration once - we were all laughing because we thought it had gone wrong - then out of the silence came the music.................

We stopped laughing then...

---

Yep, very good. Used one myself.
I've also made recordings on a 238S back in the day. Cassette is limited, but limits can be good.

Interesting thread, I lost my (rather cheap) Mp3 player a couple of months ago and yesterday had a day trip down to london. I took a rather decent quality walkman.

Sound quality of even comercial releases was poor (top end and dynamics )and being old tapes that hadn't been played for a while there was a lot of wow and flutter.
I normally encode MP3s at 192kbps and IMO they sound much better than cassette but possibly due to the top end loss I found the cassettes less fatiguing over a 4 hour trip.