No, but until sample rates match up to the "pixal" count of analog, magnetic tape will be with us. Sound is recorded on analog magnetic tape much like FM broadcasting, with a high frequency carrier modulated by the audio. The bit rate of digital consumer formats to date cannot fully match the ability of analog magnetic tape to capture and reproduce the analog waveforms, ultra complex audio waveforms rife with harmonics and overtones. Not the cassette tape, in this case, but half inch format two track at 15 or 30 ips.
Think of digital as sampling the complex waveforms, taking snapshots of them if you will, and converting to binary format. Playback requires taking the data and turning it back into analog waveforms that get amplified and drive speakers. Leaving inherent tape noise and all the other negatives out of the equation, how many samples is it going to take to accurately sample the original waveforms in the first place? How accurately are the samples going to be put back together to reconstitute the original? Answer: more samples than the mathematics predicts. My guess is that sampling into the gigahertz range will be necessary.
About life of magnetic tape: the long life of mag tape you mention really applies to the tape formulations prior to the high output tapes that came along in the late 60's and 70's. The Elvis masters are a good example. Some of this Scotch (3M) product holds up even today. The higher output formulations had a problem with the binder becoming unstable resulting in it falling off the plastic backing.
The Hammond B3 is a good example of analog versus digital.
I have yet to hear a digital sampler synth or other keyboard that claims to be "THE" B3 sound live up to the claim. The harmonic richness of the tone wheels and draw bars played through a vacuum tube amp cannot be easily emulated. Close, but no cigar. More often, not close.
This same analog versus digital thing is what is keeping vinyl LP's alive. Despite the drawbacks: dust, inner grove distortion, degradation, etc ad infinitum, the LP delivers the analog sound, sound pleasing to the ear, sound that is analog all the way.
Kind of like the difference between a filet mignon and a chopped up, reconstituted, reformed filet mignon. It just ain't the same thing, try as you may.
It's getting better, but...
Don't get me wrong. I love the convenience of the CD, and DAC technology keeps coming along.
Maybe in 10 or 20 years the debate will be over. We'll see. Meanwhile, analog remains the format of choice for lots of mastering applications, often demanded by the producer or artist. It won't take over the world, but by the same token, it won't go away either.
Think of digital as sampling the complex waveforms, taking snapshots of them if you will, and converting to binary format. Playback requires taking the data and turning it back into analog waveforms that get amplified and drive speakers. Leaving inherent tape noise and all the other negatives out of the equation, how many samples is it going to take to accurately sample the original waveforms in the first place? How accurately are the samples going to be put back together to reconstitute the original? Answer: more samples than the mathematics predicts. My guess is that sampling into the gigahertz range will be necessary.
About life of magnetic tape: the long life of mag tape you mention really applies to the tape formulations prior to the high output tapes that came along in the late 60's and 70's. The Elvis masters are a good example. Some of this Scotch (3M) product holds up even today. The higher output formulations had a problem with the binder becoming unstable resulting in it falling off the plastic backing.
The Hammond B3 is a good example of analog versus digital.
I have yet to hear a digital sampler synth or other keyboard that claims to be "THE" B3 sound live up to the claim. The harmonic richness of the tone wheels and draw bars played through a vacuum tube amp cannot be easily emulated. Close, but no cigar. More often, not close.
This same analog versus digital thing is what is keeping vinyl LP's alive. Despite the drawbacks: dust, inner grove distortion, degradation, etc ad infinitum, the LP delivers the analog sound, sound pleasing to the ear, sound that is analog all the way.
Kind of like the difference between a filet mignon and a chopped up, reconstituted, reformed filet mignon. It just ain't the same thing, try as you may.
It's getting better, but...
Don't get me wrong. I love the convenience of the CD, and DAC technology keeps coming along.
Maybe in 10 or 20 years the debate will be over. We'll see. Meanwhile, analog remains the format of choice for lots of mastering applications, often demanded by the producer or artist. It won't take over the world, but by the same token, it won't go away either.