Given how many of the excellent bootleg live recordings from the 1970s were made on cassette decks (Mike Millard, Dan Lampinski, JEMS, etc etc) clearly quality can be had (most of these gentlemen went to Nakamichi decks with good quality microphones) in that mode.
So compared to the average Joe whose turntable might not be audiophile grade, records themselves worn and poppity etc, the OPs statement is correct, can being the operative word.
When I had my shop, we used to put a record on and a tape we recorded on a Nak and switch back an forth on an Audio Research/Magneplaner system.
The ONLY difference we heard was a "hollow" sound (best word I can use to describe it--same word we used in 1976)--on the tape deck. Otherwise, the Nak and the vinyl sounded the same.
FYI, back then the vinyl was played on a Linn-Sondek, I think, with either a Supex or Satin cartridge, but it has been a while, so...might have been a Thorens and Decca, but Thornes were very inexpensive back then, so we might have tried both. We used SME arms, I believe...
Biggest issue back then was that every Nak deck broke pretty quickly and had to be sent back for service. They did it, but customers were not pleased!
Aiwa made some incredible cassette decks at the same time those Naks were made, mainly the top of the line f990. I had one, but sold it...as I owned three Awia decks. I still have both the f770 and f660. You would be hard pressed to distinguish between the source material and the tape. Awesome machines. I generally use TDK and Maxell tape type 11. Some pre recorded tapes sound absolutely wonderful on these machines.
The
best cassette decks like the Nakamichi Dragon or any of several other
high performance Naks (I have a 682ZX) or Tandberg or 3 head Tascams,
using Dolby B, are capable of recording a signal with wider frequency
bandwidth and less noise than mastering machines like the Scully and
Ampex decks which were used for some of the most treasured recordings
ever made.
That's simply not possible. The wider tape width and higher speed of reel-to-reel give it an inherent advantage over cassette. There's really no comparison. For example, that's why tape deck manufacturers used -20dB levels when they quoted frequency response for cassette decks. You really don't want to know what it looks like at 0 dB.
As others have said, live mic to 2-track (or Tri-Mic) on a clean, well aligned, degaussed crystalloy or sendust Nak or JVC or Sony portable recorder certainly made for some enjoyable listening back in the day, and I have fond memories, but how can a knock-off from an LP beat the original, even on RtoR? And never mind finding compatible playback on random decks without carefully matching head alignment. The Cassette Era SUCKED! Good MP3 is waaay better if only because of its immunity from playback compatibility, pumping and breathing, dirt, stray fields, etc. Both formats are lossy, but in analog it’s a mess.
Well, I will say that a few years ago I picked up an MCS 3570 tape deck on the cheap at an estate sale, and that when I hooked it up and popped in in my cassette copy of Tracy Chapman’s first album, I was shocked to discover that it sounded on par with my turntable. Granted, my turntable at that time was a Technics SL-1500 running an Audio Technica AT-3600l. Still, having been at least a decade since I’d played a cassette tape, it sounded worlds better than I was expecting.
Oh, and by the by… MC Hammer did indeed release an Addams Family song, “Addams Groove”. It is of course, perfectly dreadful.
Hello Leemurray2007. I use a program called WavePad to record, de-hiss (Noise Reduction), and equalize music from cassettes and get remarkable results. The same program can also largely reduce clicks and pops from vinyl records. The program has a free version you can try out and use forever if you wish. I did get the paid for version and use it almost daily. Digital music need not be deadly. Enjoy! I get audio books from thrift stores and digitize them for use on long trips.
The best cassette decks like the Nakamichi Dragon or any of several other high performance Naks (I have a 682ZX) or Tandberg or 3 head Tascams, using Dolby B, are capable of recording a signal with wider frequency bandwidth and less noise than mastering machines like the Scully and Ampex decks which were used for some of the most treasured recordings ever made. So does a cassette sound better than vinyl? It can, depending on the source of the music on the tape - and there will be no warp wow or inner groove distortion, and clicks, pops, and noise from groove wear will not spoil the sound of a tape like it will a vinyl LP with frequent playing. A top quality cassette deck using metal or TDK or Maxell type II cassettes, properly aligned and biased, can give you a playbeck quality identical to what is being recorded, so whether it sounds better than vinyl is entirely dependent on how good the recording is - and yes, at its best it will absolutely destroy MP3’s, even 320K, and be as good or better than CDs.
Now, if what you’re talking about is a pre-recorded cassette compared to a record with the same music, being that the cassette was duplicated at a very high speed, typically 60 IPS, and from a second or third generation source tape - or worse, yes, the LP will sound better, at least when new.
I used to record all my just-brought albums with a Nak and Maxell/TDK tape. Luckily I worked in an audio/record store at the time so could afford to do that. Although I could not say they sounded better then the LP, it was very close and great for everyday listening. It also kept the records pristine and was especially good when having several friends over having beers and such. Kept the records and even more important, the needle and turntable safe. Well worth it. I still have many of those tapes which are decades old now and they definitely sound better then MP3's even today.
Let’s think of the ways in which a CR-7 could be better than vinyl. Let’s assume that the Nak’s important caps have been bypassed by styrene or teflon, drive mechanism is belt rather than gear, and that the machine is otherwise to spec, and Dolby is not engaged; at least not Dolby C.
If one records a record onto a very good metal tape, say TDK MA (metal frame), or MA-XG (ceramic frame), then the difference between original and casette is small. Certainly less than the difference between a cold and a fully warmed up phono and cartridge.
So, if you carefully warm up your CR-7, your phono, and your cartridge, say 8 hours, 8 hours, 2 hours respectively, then your recordings should be better than a cold phono and cartridge. IMO.
So why don’t I do it? I like variety, and my cartridge may be immortal. And, oh yes, lazy, lazy ...
There are few cassette decks that do a very good job of replicating the source. They cannot beat a good vinyl playback system but can hold their own. Nakamihcis, as good as they are, could not replicate the ambience and image like the vinyl source. The best decks I've heard in my system are Tandberg 3014s. They create better soundstage close to source.
I agree with Ralph, you lose bass with faster tape speeds. On my RtRs the bass is better at 7.5IPS than it is at 15IPS. The disadvantage of cassettes is the tape width, not enough real estate to put music down and saturate very quickly.
I agree with the premise that cassette as good as vinyl. Our RTR tech tweeked my CR5 and the only tape I put through it was TDK MA-XG and SA-XG that I cut for length.
Surely Cassettes at
1.875" per second are far too slow to be able to complete with records, which in the day would have been recorded on tape running at 15" per second. That's 0.8523 miles per hour!
At 0.15" wide Cassette tape is just too narrow and its limitations are exposed are easily exposed.
Cassettes, for me, were ever more than a way to get my curated music on the road. Now that I can get more tunes on a drive the size of a thumbnail (with easy access) than a station wagon packed with cassettes who needs 'em? Better sounding too.
Well, you might believe it is true and are certain entitled to your opinion, however why are inserting MP3's in this thread about analog. (notice the category)
You can get the top end of a cassette to sound pretty good but there is
not enough tape width to get all the low frequency stuff.
@russ69 Actually its the tape speed that says what the bass will do, coupled with how much gain the tape head preamp will have. At some point the designer cuts off the bandwidth because with each octave lower another 6dB of gain is required (one of the side effects being that hum can become a problem). The faster the tape speed, the harder it is to play bass for this reason. 1/78 ips isn't all that fast.
You can get the top end of a cassette to sound pretty good but there is not enough tape width to get all the low frequency stuff. And then we got to ask about your source. Prerecorded cassettes? They are awful. Digital? OK with me. From an LP? Can't do better than the original.
leemurray, your numerous posts about cassettes have aroused my interest enough that I think I will dust off my Nakamichi ZX7, and give it a listen again.
I do agree that Nakamichi was the best cassette machine going back in the day. But I have never heard a cassette sounding better than a vinyl LP, even at Nakamichi dealers. Consequently, I gave up on cassettes long ago.
I do agree that a live music recorded directly to cassette on a good machine is better than an LP recorded to cassette. But in the few cases when I had a Tanberg reel to reel recording live music at high speed, it always sounded better than any cassette made of the same recording. Then again, I didn't use a Nakamichi deck.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
