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

111–120 of 156 posts

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

#111

Post by lb1lf »

UweSchmidt wrote: post #105
lb1lf wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>(...)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…

Recently I had the priviledge to hear a high quality LP (Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms) on high-end equipment (100k speakers, 40k amp, 35k Player) and switch back and forth to a FLAC that came from another expensive looking box directly into the same amp. There was a definite difference in quality between the LP and the FLAC file, especially when switching from good (LP) to bad(file). I can only assume but not guar…

This is as good a time as any to refer to Ivor Tiefenbrun (Of Linn fame) and his claim that digital was a dud (He didn't use those words, but anyway...)

Short version - the Boston Audio Society invited him to listen to one of his own turntables, using music of his choosing - and also listen (blind!) to the signal from the turntable passed through an A/D-D/A loop. He couldn´'t tell the difference.

http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.h...

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

#112

Post by ascagnel_ »

disordinary wrote: post #40
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.…

What you find with vinyl is labels actually mix the album differently, not because the medium is better quality but because the listener expects different things. Digital music often has a "wall of sound" mixing which results in a loss of fidelity and clipping but vinyl is mixed quieter with clear shapes to the waveform.

Don't forget the RIAA curve!

http://sessionville.com/articles/what-is-the-riaa-curve

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

#113

Post by theandrewbailey »

sandworm101 wrote: post #2

Cassettes might be fun for young people, but those of us old enough to remember when they were the only real option couldnt care less. They sounded bad. They required complicated mecanical trickery to use. They broke, sometimes taking the player along with them. Good riddance. CDs were better in every single way. Also, the cassette-playing tech today is far better than it was. Listen ro them without noise reduction t…

> They required complicated mecanical trickery to use.

What? I haven't used a cassette in over a decade, but I still remember how they are used, and it didn't involved complicated trickery. Turn on and open the deck, slide in the cassette, close, and press play. Maybe rewind when you're done, and eject.

Streaming music is arguably more complicated, but that's not stopping it.

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

#114

Post by dTal »

gugagore wrote: post #77
lb1lf wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-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.

People always forget that part!

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

#115

Post by dTal »

woofyman wrote: post #23
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.…

The problem with vinyl is it degrades every time you play it and you have to be very careful handling it so you don't get fingerprints on it.

Product idea: a vinyl record player with a built-in A/D converter, hard drive and label recognition. The first time you play a new record it records it. The second time you play it you hear the recording, and the player makes a show of spinning the record and moving the needle (without actually touching it). All the tactile pleasure of vinyl, none of the degradation. The needle would last longer too. If the hard drive runs out of space it can just drop stuff out of cache.

Would also be fun to watch unsuspecting vinyl nerds gush over "superior analog sound".

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

#116

Post by santaclaus »

I listen to a few bands that will only release on cassette, followed by maybe a vinyl pressing. If you are lucky some generous soul will upload to youtube...

From a marketing perspective the strategy seems to foster a sense of rarity and exclusivity (sort of like Snapchat's Spectacles). You are only part of the in club if you go through the effort of obtaining a (physical!) tape and the means to play said tape.

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

#117

Post by alistoriv »

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #50
fsiefken wrote: post #17

Tapes can do 110 minutes and sound just as good to non-audiophiles as cd's. You could put around 50 MB data on it, which translates in around an hour of high fidelity music (Opus codec or HE-AAC). You can't put a CD in your pocket, you can do so with a cassette. They have a much higher nostalgia value... With the fast-forward/backward, pause and record buttons you can more easy copy or record stuff to create a mix-ta…

I always carry a 16Gb USB flash drive in my pocket. I can play music from it in both of my cars (USB ports), at most places I visit (plug it into a computer), and the music doesn't degrade with playback. Oh, and I could throw about 133 hours of high quality audio onto it and it would still be half empty. AND...my phone has plenty of room for another 8Gb of music, and to play that I just need to hit play; plugging it…

For starters, not everybody can afford that kinda stuff. The comment you're replying to even talks about how his car only has a tape player and a radio. This cassette revival is primarily happening with young people who are in college or have otherwise low paying jobs (or no jobs). A lot of young people have old used cars with cassette players. For people in bands, as well, putting out music on a cassette is the most cost effective way to put out music physically.

And to address the bit about the phone, you'd be surprised how fast phone storage fills up with other stuff. My (admittedly several years old) phone's 8gb storage is more than half filled by system bloat so I have to use an sd card to put music on it. And that's not even including apps. This, unfortunately, isn't really an option anymore for the vast majority of phones (with the notable exception of most Samsung phones).

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

#118

Post by DiThi »

geon wrote: post #90
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.…

High quality tapes sounded great. https://youtu.be/jVoSQP2yUYA

Came to say this. Most people only knew about the bad type 1 tapes and very shitty cassette players. Double deck were double shit for the same price.

My father was a radio announcer and technician so he had good players and good tapes that were wonderful, even though I didn't know the metal type.

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

#119

Post by torrent-of-ions »

lb1lf wrote: post #73
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…

Yeah, it's true that CDs are technically superior. But vinyl is certainly high enough quality that it's good enough. Tape is noticeably low quality. But vinyl records, regardless of their technically deficiencies, sound really good. And, at the end of the day, if music sounds good, it is good.

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

#120

Post by torrent-of-ions »

notahacker wrote: post #104
lb1lf wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>(...)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…

Arguably the same process of "competent" mastering that increases dynamic range etc results in a product with less fidelity to how recordings from certain eras were originally enjoyed[1]. There were comparatively few recordings made that were intended to be consumed exclusively on cassette. [1] Granted, it would have been perfectly possible to master CD audio to vinyl's sonic limitations and even introduce artificial…

Mastering shouldn't increase the dynamic range. It should rather preserve all meaningful dynamic range, while making the most of the medium.
Post reply on HN