Cassette Crosstalk

I never owned a Sony Walkman especially the high end. I saw one guy at work he has a Walkman that has a back to back cassette. Now what is that for?
The farthest I use was an Aiwa. I end up screw-drivering my car stereo and added an auxiliary input for the aiwa through the head unit then the rockford fosgate tri-amp setup. Now that sounds incredible!

 

Oh, you want to speak to John?..... Ahhhh.....He died when the 500 pound Sony 3348 HR fell on top of him. He died in agony screaming over and over again, "Don't let Giles remix Rubber Soul in 2025. Someone stop him!! Please. Please - Don't let him do it. Please!! Ahhhhh!!...."

Seriously though.
Death by DASH. horrid.....Cruel.

Why not just record it on a Super VHS HI-FI VCR or a quarter inch half track reel to reel? You would get top pro Pro analog and without all the fuss. You can buy Super VHS tapes on Amazon.ca for $15 each. That was the same price they were going for 25 years ago. (1996 - $9 to $15 A tape)

Or run your file through analog tape and tube emulation software. It would probably give you better results than you are getting now..

Recording it to cassette gives you:

1. Uneven frequency response. Dips mostly at the low and top end.
2. Natural compression caused by tape distortion.
3. Analog distortion
4. Wow and flutter. At 0.03 % RMS (any good 3 head machine) you won't hear it anyway. Most 2 inch 24 tracks running at 15 ips are roughly between 0.03 and 0.05 % RMS. Not an issue.

I suppose you are trying to get what a MFSL tspe would sound like. Noble effort.

One question. Could you please explain this statement:

"...Any small volume difference or error on the recording will cause an obvious and over modulation on my system...."

Could you give a real life example of what you mean.

 

I didn't really go to the boom box the earlier years but yeah there you go...
trying to record better results than mobile hifi. I will probably choose reel on the next level and I might need to ask you later one what machine and all that when I'm ready.
But right now I have a better sound recording (only on cassette) by using the tube / buffer preamp setup I have than software emulation. As we both know, I can only get close enough to get to the modern analog sound by doing this process. But its really good enough. If I run a visual software simulation its getting all the correct frequency peaks. But in reality its not really proving the true analog sound that I'm after for. If I record digital music on cassette even with the same volume level settings vs analog, even on a volume signal I can sill hear the full punch. Its really evident when I'm playing it on live with my setup. Big difference. but even the sound is thicker, just like what you say the signal varies more than the norm on my VU meter.
what I mean on the last sentence is, due to my playback setup which is running a 1/3 octave analog eq, and preamp, I tend to appreciate the original pre recorded albums more than the remastered ones. If the remastered ones are not recorded correctly, it easily spoils the sound on my system.

Look mah'. I got the pioneer cassette done with the new pinch rollers and all the rubbers.

Oh man I cant hardly wait for the doorbuster sales tonight. I'm charging all my recorders for I don't wanna miss out on the baseball bashing event sales tonight. Live on Video!
Happy thanksgiving... American Style!

 

MFSL tapes prove you're only giving one side of the argument.

MFSL Interview w/ Gregg Schnitzer

 

Cant wait to try this new NAC FerroMaster C256 tomorrow. I'm gonna compare it the sound of the old NAC tapes with the same songs and settings. See what it does..????

 

My sense is NAC showed integrity by suspending production until they could provide an acceptable/ excellent product. I would expect this new one to be an improvement.

 

I was told by the company that this tape is formulated and can be more visibly biased results equally on both high and low frequency. This is the one thing that I like about normal quality tapes like the old tdk type 1 I use. They are really remarkable to listen in a long stretch. My sony recorder is really good on these types of tapes. Well see..........

 

I just finished recording the new ferromaster. I'll follow-up with the sound experience shortly. I'm trying to listen to the behavior of the Wow and Flutter. The physical difference from the old one is lighter color and slight dull finish.

 

Thanks for the update. Timbre quality is of interest.

What is Timbre in Music? Why is it Important?

Timbre - Wikipedia

 

SUPER interesting interview!

 

I was trying to listen to the recording for a week now if there's any changes. Since this is new formula, I'm trying to determine if the sound has noticeable fades in a period of time. There is no change on fade.
The sound quality is in good to better. Its got and "excellent" bass and "good" highs.
The recording modulation drops at -4db. which is quite standard on normal bias.
vs. lets say the tdk sa-90 high bias is almost 0.
I'm not super excited with the sound. its just on decent average category.
Very clean and no audible hiss sound...

 

Wow and flutter is really dependent on the deck. Tape shells/parts can make a difference but not that you would notice.

 

Hey John... I wanna ask you if you know someone that can fully recap one of my 2 head decks. Both are running great and it has all new rubbers and rollers but I think I wanna have atleast one of them fully done. Then followed by the other one.
1980 Jvc Kd-A55
1980 Pioneer CT-F555 tape
Let me know if so.

 

Blasting this epic album @ 1:20 in the morning. Good thing my neighbors are far!

 

I have read this interview many times. I think you have misunderstood my post. It wasn't out knocking cassettes. Just pointing out the limitations of the format.

It all depends on the machine and tape. I am well aware of the 1:1 MFSL tapes. But they dropped those and went to 8 × speed later. And all their real time cassettes were made from 16/80 and 16/100 PCM tapes made from the analog masters. Those old 1:1 MFSL lab tapes show what we would all do later - record from a CD with Type 2 with Dolby B on a good machine. And that is what they sound like. Take a good 3 head 3 machine with Dolby S, Metal tape and record a good CD from the 1980's. It will kick MFSL tapes to the curb.

I have mentioned that other audiophile labels have put out Jazz and Classical releases on Metal tape with Dolby C duplicated at real time. Although MFSL tapes were unequaled during the 1970's they are no where near the best pre-recorded tapes ever released.

 

But he hears what sounds like print through none the less.

Why? Most likely a backwards delay setting on the digital reverb.. It is set at 0.6 seconds. The AUX SEND (post fader) knob is turned real low so you only hear it during the soft passages.

Check out the backward phase effect on, YOU COME TO MY SENSES from Chicago 21. The most effect drenched album in music history! Love it. Really tacky.

 

That is just the way it is with some pre-recorded tapes..Adjusting won't help.

 

I had a Ridgewood receiver back in 1987 that looked just like that. It had a FM/AM radio section on it that would put many modern tuners to shame. Miss those days of analog.

 

I'm thinking about getting an audio interface connected to my PC, so I can edit the music to 196 then record out to a 2-track cassette recorder. Maybe later on I can afford to buy a used otari. then I'll pug in to 4. I was thinking about getting the motu 4...

 

Any good USB interface will do. Try to get one with a switch for consumer/ pro level.

 

I had a very long talk with the guy from motu. He said that's the way to go. I bought the 4-track instead when later on I can use it on the reel to reel. I been eyeing on this reel locally. But the guy wants so much. I told him that the hardware is nothing but just a big paper weight sitting and not put to work. Lets see what he says this weekend. I been messing around with different blank cassettes. I notice the old Sony hf90 normal sounds very vocal and clear in midrange. its like turning on a dynamic expander when listening on high fidelity. A lot of people in classic music will like this tape. I set my equalization in V format so this tape is excellent but its not for me. Some of the high quality maxell type 1 and tdks is what I like the most.

 

You purchased a 4 channel interface? Good. Why Type 1? Type 2 you can still get for under $20 each.

 

The processor is good and the other thing is I play music too so I can also plug the keyboard or guitar on front. Ill just use the 2 tracks on cassette going to the RCA.
what interface do you have in mind?

 

It is too late but if you wanted to record music you should look into the new Tascam 12 track (liers! Really 10 tracks.) DAW would have been perfect.

You can record either 8 mono tracks or 6 mono tracks and 2 stereo tracks at once.

You get a full mix section. Not 8 faders with a mouse!

ON EVERY CHANNEL OF YOUR 10 TRACK RECORDER ($800 USD):

* fader with buttons to send your channels to the main mix, or group section.

* STEREO PAN

* MUTE and SOLO button.

* 2 EFFECT SEND knobs (2 built in Effect units)

* 3 band EQ. +- 15 db
LOW EQ: Fixed 100 hz
MID RANGE EQ: Varible
HIGH EQ: Fixed 10 000 hz

* LOW CUT @ 100 hz

* Compressor

* Trim knob. Allows you up to 60 db in gain alteration.


* main stereo equalizer to apply to mix in mastering.

* Inserts on Channel 1 and 2.

* MIDI

* AND LOTS OF OTHER STUFF........

* records on SD cards or straight to your PC or use analog output for making a nice cassette.mixdown of your great songs.


Even an old TASCAM DP-02 or DP-03 (built in stereo mikes) 8 track would do.

But for an interface. Stick to Tascam, Mackie, etc. Get one with a switch for pro / consumer levels.
If you can move up to the $300 and above range.
Oh and make sure your input level knobs click with each change in level and are clearly marked. This will ensure that the left and right are the same.

 

Print thorough. And believe it or not it happens with quarter inch, half track masters. Even on 2 inch. But that is rare.