Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 156 posts

Re: Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

#71

Post by lloeki »

maloney wrote: post #67
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only good thing about vinyl is the RIAA curve prevents loudness wars. If CDs were mastered correctly without intentional clipping it would be impossible for records to best them in quality.

I don't think that is true, given that digital will always be samples of the original. I worked at a mastering studio that had a laser record player, best sound I have heard.

> I don't think that is true, given that digital will always be samples of the original.

Nyquist–Shannon begs to differ.

Re: Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

#73

Post by lb1lf »

everyone wrote: post #13

This word gets thrown around a lot but, hipsters! As others have attested there is nothing good about tapes. There are very good reasons why vinyl has survived (You can manipulate it with your hand when djing, and see the music on it, also its technically possible to get better sound quality than digital via high quality, high speed, vinyl and an all analog recording to stamping process) But tapes, no, they are shit.…

>(...)also its technically possible to get better sound quality than digital via high quality, high speed, vinyl and an all analog recording to stamping process

-This, with all due respect, is a myth. Much as I love my LPs, by any objective criteria the CD (or any digital media) beats them handsomely. Dynamic range, frequency response, noise floor, channel separation - even on the best mastered, half-speed cut, heavy vinyl albums noise and distortion is orders of magnitude larger than on any competently mastered CD.

Note 'competently mastered'; it is unarguably true that some recordings are destroyed during mastering for CD as part of the so-called loudness wars; this problem is less of an issue when mastering for vinyl as the audience buying LPs often do so precisely to escape from the loudness wars and the problems caused by it.

However, this is a defect by decision; it is not due to any inherent limitation of the CD medium compared to the LP.

Re: Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

#74

Post by lb1lf »

lloeki wrote: post #71
maloney wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that is true, given that digital will always be samples of the original. I worked at a mastering studio that had a laser record player, best sound I have heard.

> I don't think that is true, given that digital will always be samples of the original. Nyquist–Shannon begs to differ.

-In all fairness (and this does not have any practical implication whatsoever for the case discussed here, but nit-picking is a favourite pastime of mine), Nyquist-Shannon is not fully satisfied during music reproduction.

N-S requires, for instance, an analog signal which is perfectly band-limited. This implies that it must be of infinite duration, which, obviously, is not the case.

However, it is plenty infinite-ish enough for all practical purposes.

Re: Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

#75

Post by lb1lf »

digi_owl wrote: post #69
yarrel wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love MiniDiscs. DAT is where it's at, though.

If only Sony Music had not been so copy adverse that they effectively gave the format concrete DRM boots...

-Just buy a pro deck, which ignores the SCMS copy protection bits. :)

(I still use a couple of DAT recorders for live recordings of local bands; both the Sony PCM-M1 and the Technics DA-P1 ignore any attempt at copy protection if you tell it to.)

Re: Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

#76

Post by lb1lf »

taeric wrote: post #49
maxxxxx wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. That's probably like driving stick shift vs. automatic. Automatic may better but stick shift "feels" better. I have noticed that with writing software. I sometimes think it would be really nice to have something tangible you can touch as a result of my work.

Is automatic better nowdays? I thought the physics sided on manual. Granted, I also thought it was ultimately a wash.

I suspect most of the reason automatics got a bad rap efficiency-wise is the torque converter, which is inherently lossy and absent on manuals.

However, today's autos have typically 8 or 9 gears, allowing the gearbox to present a near ideal load for the engine at all times; I suspect they now tie or even win with manuals efficiency-wise.

Also, autos are said to be more reliable - primarily, I suspect, as they are immune to much of the abuse a driver can expose a manual to.

Re: Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

#77

Post by gugagore »

lb1lf wrote: post #74
lloeki wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think that is true, given that digital will always be samples of the original. Nyquist–Shannon begs to differ.

-In all fairness (and this does not have any practical implication whatsoever for the case discussed here, but nit-picking is a favourite pastime of mine), Nyquist-Shannon is not fully satisfied during music reproduction. N-S requires, for instance, an analog signal which is perfectly band-limited. This implies that it must be of infinite duration, which, obviously, is not the case. However, it is plenty infinite-ish…

and since we are nit-picking, Nyquist-Shannon doesn't have anything to say about quantized samples.

Re: Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

#78

Post by [deleted] »

lb1lf wrote: post #74
lloeki wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think that is true, given that digital will always be samples of the original. Nyquist–Shannon begs to differ.

-In all fairness (and this does not have any practical implication whatsoever for the case discussed here, but nit-picking is a favourite pastime of mine), Nyquist-Shannon is not fully satisfied during music reproduction. N-S requires, for instance, an analog signal which is perfectly band-limited. This implies that it must be of infinite duration, which, obviously, is not the case. However, it is plenty infinite-ish…

[deleted]

Re: Music's weird cassette-tape revival is paying off

#80

Post by timthorn »

yarrel wrote: post #24
everyone wrote: post #13

This word gets thrown around a lot but, hipsters! As others have attested there is nothing good about tapes. There are very good reasons why vinyl has survived (You can manipulate it with your hand when djing, and see the music on it, also its technically possible to get better sound quality than digital via high quality, high speed, vinyl and an all analog recording to stamping process) But tapes, no, they are shit.…

I love MiniDiscs. DAT is where it's at, though.

Surely for this thread, Digital Compact Cassette is even better?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Compact_Cassette

Post reply on HN