Will Magnetic Tape Eventually Go Full Circle

Elgordo, I was hoping someone wouldn't mention that. It causes all of the above statements to lose any and all validity.

Buscis2, vinyl is a LOT more convenient than R-R tape. To play the second "side," you have to run the tape all the way through. To find a specific track anywhere on the tape, good luck. If you're not prepared to sit through both sides of the tape (assuming it's a 4-track tape). don'tg even think about playing it. and threading a tape is a lot less convenient than playing a record, plus there's likely to be 3-5 minutes of dead air before the music begins on side 1.

Oh, and the decks themselves are high-maintenance relative to turntables. So you REALLY gotta love this medium to even think about getting into it. Yet more and more audiophilkes seem to be doing just that. Dave

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.

Don't forget that we audiophiles, or just those who CAN appreciate improved sonic reproduction are a tiny niche market that may only represent <1% of the total electronics entertainment business. We own, or can appreciate the equivalent of Ferrari's, Porsches, BMW's, etc. vs. the average public that just wants some overpriced crap car for basic transportation. I really love the fact that most people who buy an SUV will NEVER take them off road! Digital and home theater are the revenue generators for the next few years. People want something new and trend setting, even if the new technology is inferior to the old! As Borsteen said, "You sell the sizzle, NOT the steak!"

Some observations on tape medium: Buscis2, I still have a TDK MAR metal tape! They had milled aluminum housings instead of the plastic ones. They were not cheap, however! The standard TDK metal tape could be had for $3- to $5-, while the MAR with the aluminum housing went for $16- in the early '80's! But what a piece of workmanship! I NEVER bought a pre-recorded cassette, since most were encoded with Dolby B (if you were lucky), not Dolby C, and were dubbed at high speed. Take into account the poor quality of the plastic housing, and parts tolerance resulting in azimuth alignment problems, and you had a frequency response of 10-12 kHz (maybe) on the pre-recorded commercial junk. DCC, MoFi, and Nakamichi did make some really great pre-recorded cassettes. Another problem was that of the head azimuth alignment on the recording machine, and that of the playback machine. For those of us who recorded cassettes at home, to be played back on our car decks, the azimuth difference could easily drop the frequency response to 15 or 16 kHz. I always had my home machine aligned with my car deck (before installation). Unfortunately, the azimuth angle could change, due to climatic conditions, or amount of tape on the take-up spool! I ended up with the Nakamichi TD 1200II reversible car deck, with continual automatic azimuth alignment (a mobile version of the Dragon!) Not cheap, $1200- in the mid '80's, but the best of the best...and never equaled! Toward the tail end of the cassette format, I believe that S/N ratio was 73 dB on some of the better Nakamichi home decks.

All magnetic tape will degrade over time! Similar to old color movie film-stock. There are many thing that you can do to preserve magnetic tape (low humidity storage, "Tails Out" storage...NEVER REWIND BEFORE STORAGE, store away from magnetic sources[including all electronic devices]), but eventually, the magnetic material will start to separate from the Mylar or similar backing. Certain magnetic material (KrO2) could be very abrasive on some heads, and certain types of record/playback heads are known for rapid wear. Regular head cleaning and degaussing are a must.

I have had more experience with professional reel to reel tape decks (Ampex 440's), which is in another league than consumer machines. They were 1/2 track, used 10" metal reels with speeds of 7 1/2 and 15 I.P.S. or ones that were actually using 15 and 30 I.P.S.! Half track and high recording speeds allowed for VERY hot recording levels without tape saturation, great S/N ratio, and very wide frequency response. Add professional DBX encoding/decoding, or professional Dolby type A noise reduction at 30 I.P.S., and tape "hiss" completely vanished on the master tape. Unfortunately, home machines playing 1/4 track 7" reels at 3 3/4" were a far cry from the fidelity of professional machines. Dopogue, I think that the reason that your R-R recordings sound better than vinyl is due to the fact that R-R pre-recorded tapes were taken from 2nd or 3rd generations of the master tape. Vinyl pressings had to actually re-master the master tape. Due to the many limitations of vinyl pressings, the "artistic" interpretation of the vinyl mastering engineer, and the marketing pressures of the record companies executives, whose primary concerns WERE NOT fidelity and sonics, most '70's and '80's rock and vinyl pop albums are but sonic shadows of the master tapes!

8 track tape was a revolution for car audio! At last, you were not dependent on a DJ for your music, commercials were eliminated...IF you could handle a song switching tracks in the middle, and the ensuing 5-10 second delay for the resumption of play, and the unavoidable and inevitable mechanical misalignment of tracking! I couldn't; but car cassette players were just around the corner!

Does anyone remember the EL cassette? It was a large cassette that resembled a video tape. I think the tape was 1/4" or maybe larger. The "concept" was basically a cassette that had reel to reel tape loaded into it. I remember seeing one around 1975. Obviously, it was a marketing failure but I think that the concept was sound, in fact I have seriously considered the marketability of a similar machine using vhs cassettes. The player would be a two track two channel machine that used analogue style convential tape heads and not vhs rotary heads. So, now we are talking about 1/2" tape ran at 30 i.p.s. or higher on a mass marketed media that is available everywhere!!! I think that there would be a large demand for high quality pre-recorded tapes. When you consider what the best digital transports, upsamplers and D.A.C.s cost, plus all the required cables $$$, and most people still say that a budget turntable sounds better than all of that if you can even afford it, I think my idea starts to seem reasonable. If that is not exciting enough, realise that it is a RE-recordable format, analogue to analogue or digital to analogue and is backwards compatible with all blank vhs tape. It might in fact sound so good that people would want to make digital copies from the analogue source for their cd,mp etc.players;) P.S. Does anyone besides me realise that the real reason for 5.1 SACD is for automobiles and not home theatre? It is just my opinion, I may be wrong...