Will cost you and not be cheap. Walkman also repair technician nightmare. Better to get a 3 head, 3 motor Marantz field recorder or high end Sony similar model than a high end Walkman. Much more useful.
Oh okay. That makes a lot of sense. I don't know anything about walkmans and I never bought one even back in the 80's. Because all of my friends has one and most of the time they are broken. LoL. So I just stuck with home decks and alpine stereo for cars. Now I want a cassette on my car. But I don't wanna change the stock prius system besides the extra 2 amps and speakers I loaded. in this setup, there is a missing ingredient. The sound source is not right. Ill look into the deck your talking about. Thanks man. I always knew were gonna be buddies...
Personal computers sucked in the 1980's. All MS DOS. I hated them. Super hard to use. I didn't get PC until 1999. And even then they were slow. All VCRs back in 1989 had composite video and RCA audio connections.. S-video connectors on VCRS and CRT sets didn't appear until Super VHS. My first VCR was Toshiba flag ship DX-900C ($1300) It had the standard composite video and RCA inputs/outputs. S-Video and component video connections didn't appear on CRTs until 23 years ago. And regardless of how you connected it up you still only got 250 lines of resolution. My video picture did get better by connecting up to the TVs component input but the picture was still only 250 lines at max. If you had a Laser disk player, a rear projection CRT all hooked up via S-video, and a laser disk that was cut at 30 mins per side then yea - 440 lines. Otherwise forget it.
I began using computers with the DEC PDP-8, and RSTS. Teletypes and DECTape. Then graduated to PDP 11/70 (added 8" floppy discs as well, and a DECWriter), then came PC/M, Apple DOS, Macintosh, MSDOS, DRDOS, Windows, the Vaxen, Unix System V and later, BSD, and Linuxes. The joys of growing up in a tech town.
I didn't use MS-DOS computers outside of school or work until 1995. I used Atari 8-bits, Trash-80's, Atari STs, Apple //'s, Macs, etc. A bunch of those had composite or even Y/C chroma/luma video outputs, although at the time they came out - the Atari 800 made its debut circa 1980 - there were very few sets that exploited them. SVHS came out in '87. I remember seeing them in stores like Federated by '88, along with sets that sported "S Video" inputs. Around that time a friend's parents had to get a new TV, an RCA I think, which came with new S-Video inputs. I rigged up her Atari 800 with an "S-Video" cable to run into it. Looked amazing for an old 8-bit computer. Text was incredibly sharp. It's a pity these inputs didn't become common until the late '80s, by which point RGB monitors were dropping in price. The old 8-bit computers like the 800 and Commodore 64 would have been a lot more usable for productivity with S-Video connections. S-Video was definitely available in '88/'89. That's over 32 years ago now.
I'm switching a different type I media soon due to I'm running out of the old NAC stash. NAC wont sell me 90 mins anymore. Anyways the other day, first time I paid attention on the TDK-D90 "high output" (type I). So far its doing fine when I dropped a full recording the other day. I was very surprised with the dynamic results. Its got a lot of "excellent" bass and the highs are "good". Sound staging 3d is perfect. I was looking at the media and it doesnt look like an ordinary type 1. This is a lot darker and shinier than the normal. I use to not pay attention to these tapes but now I find it a perfect match for my nakamichi and pioneer upper class 3 head recorder. My question is, they came out with so many high output models, which one is the one do you guys tried thats really good? Thanks. I dont wanna dip into my type II and up tape for I'm saving it for something special.
Thank you very much for your reply, sir. What do you think about the current cassette decks? Maybe you have already discussed them in this thread, and I missed this discussion. Machines like Pyle/ION/Marantz Pro cost $100-$150, advertise 0.2% WRMS and actual measured value is 0.25% WRMS. Machines like Teac/Tascam are sold for $500 (list price), advertise 0.25% WRMS and actual tested values are in the range of 0.1%-0.15%. Also, what do you think of the following claim that the effects of wow & flutter would become noticeable at 0.5% RMS (see attached picture from a 1950s Ampex brochure) ? As I understand, this value is not weighted, but I do not have any idea whether weighed (WRMS) and unweighted (RMS) values can be compared. For example, when Mike Rivers tested Marantz Pro double-cassette deck, he found the following: He keeps saying "flutter", not "wow & flutter", so I am not sure that he measured both components. It seems, the numbers can go both ways, and it is not possible to say that, for example, unweighted is always higher than weighted. But even if unweighted were twice higher than weighted, like Mike Rivers' measurement for the TASCAM suggests, then translating Ampex numbers into WRMS we would get a noticeable limit of 0.25% WRMS, not 0.1% WRMS. Did they care less about W&F back in 1950s? What do you think, sir?
Post or send me an image of which D you are talking about. I've got a ton, boatload, whole lot, a great deal, or a huge quantity. I also have about 150 each of the NAC 90 Cobalt and Chrome. M~
Mmmm....You take a digital file, convert it to analog, record it to cassette and it sounds more life like? That goes against information theory. I have no doubt you enjoy all the flaws of analog and it sounds better to you, but your cassette cannot have more detail than the original digital file or CD.
John, when you go here in the northwest, you can stay at my house. Well spend atleast 2-3 days of nothing buy laying tracks. Youll be blown away on what 2 heads can do. When I started doing hi fidelity cassette recording, its just one guy that thought me and we spent months and months of recordings in his house or my house. That's when I started clipping medias, overdubbing. we were doing it all by hand in the 1981 technology. I still have those tapes. If you want I can send you a copy of the old one and my recent recordings in the mail. That will speak it all. Give me you mailing address if you wanna pm it to me. Atleast you can give mean advise in what I need to improve. But I promise you these tapes that I made recently is really shocking. Were just only talking about Type I. Hold on to your seats and its gonna be a big ride.
okay give me a few minutes and I'll stack a tapes including the high output so you can see the difference.
Okay here is a copy of all the tapes you guys are familiar with. Photo close-up with flash and no flash. From left to right as follows: 1. Maxell High Position Type II 2. TDK High Position Type II 3. Sony Ferric-Chrome Type III 4. TDK D90 Type I High Output 5. TDK Normal Bias Type I PS double click the picture on server so it will max out. The one that I'm really interested #4 TDK Type I High Output. I heard they made a bunch of these but which ones are the ood sounding ones. I dont know the year of what I got. But by far it fits my needs.
Yo. The top three stacks are high output, plus the two just below the top give me about 20 that I can lay my hands right now. I also put in the green letter version which I love. To the best of my knowledge I have not tried the high output version. The tape to the right of the green one is also very good and I have a ton of them. BTW, notice the black letter high output D., I'll have to check on that. Hell, my bad I just look real closely and that tape to the right of the green letter version is a high output version and I have a ton of them, used though. M~
Hey I am 52 with a crappy memory. I thought S-VHS didn't appear until the mid 90's. Yes, but the only VCRs with S-video were Super VHS video machines. And since the CRTs could only do 250 lines the S-video inputs were pretty useless. It did give a better picture. I started using component inputs on my TV in 2008. The jump in picture quality was excellent but still no higher resolution.
Biiiatch... try it right away. Here is my interface setting.. As long as youre in 96000/ 256 and above with a a real good dac preferably saber 32 ultra or PCM56 level setting +2 to 3 db (to avoid over-modulation). Bias setting center. No EQ. I'm gonna start hunting for that tape. But let me know what you hear... Thanks,,
Oh come-on John. Why would I come up with a high fidelity cassette recording worst than a CD? Itll defeat the purpose of the whole analog recording process. I'm there you wanna try to get all the information that you can. You have to remember also how you transform that signal back to analog. the combination of your DAC, recording level and setting, type of cassette and deck your using. These are the magic ingredients that you'll have to provide. your cd or digital file might sound brighter, but the name of the game is how long are you able to listen and appreciate that sound? Are you with me? Ive seen a lot of people doing discussion which one is better one not. There is nothing really better than the other one. Its all a matter of personal preference. While all that discussion, I'm continually recording more and more. Youre experience will always be the final solution to the sound quest.
Mmmmmmmm.....Interesting. Back in the 1950's they said a lot of stuff we know isn't true today. Many thought human hearing stopped at 15 khz. The Jim Crow laws of the South were still alive and in place as well. Back then they thought the races shouldn't mix, let alone have children. My Uncle Derek and his white wife didn't come to America until after the Jim Crow laws were abolished in late 1967. Uncle Derek wasn't looking forward to being hung from a tree. A black man who had dared to marry a white woman in 1957. In Jamaica they had no racial laws. Not officially anyway. Interracial marriages were common in Jamaica back back then.... In 1954 my Great Aunt, Evelyn Andrade won the 54' Miss West Indies title. Here is what it says about her on Google: "...An accomplished dancer and swimmer, with a 36-24-36 figure, 18 year old Miss West Indies of 1954, Evelyn Andrade became the first colored woman admitted to a major white beauty contest in the United States. Her father was a Syrian Jew and her mother was a black native from Kingston...." GARBAGE LIES. Her Father (my Great-Grandfather), Mosses Andrade was a white Portuguese Jew. Her mother was a white Syrian Jew. Both were born in Jamaica. Here is what happened. The American press were very bigoted and prejudice back then. I will not use the word racist because it doesn't apply here. The Amercian press went to Jamaica to get the scoop on my Great-Aunt. Unfortunately the Americans were going by the One-Drop-Rule which doesn't apply here. Evelyn's grandmother was a white woman from Syria. To the racist Americans back then anyone from Syria was an Arab (wrong!) and since Arabs are Wogs, and Wogs were coloured people therefore my great Aunt was a colored (black) woman. The idiot Journalist even managed to make Mosses a Syrian. This incorrect story was all over the news papers of 1954. And it is all over the web. It is bogus! Evelyn Andrade is my Great-Grandfather's first child from his first marriage. She is a member of my family and I know her more than any dope who puts up some post on the web. Miss Andrade is the woman on the right. Google Image Result for http://old.skabook.com/foundationska/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/andrade14.jpeg I don't think this is a good pic of Evelyn but..... Google Image Result for http://old.skabook.com/foundationska/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/scan0001-1-715x1024.jpg Google Image Result for http://old.skabook.com/foundationska/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/andrade3.jpeg So I don't care if the mighty people at Ampex made a claim that any wow and flutter rating of 0.5 % RMS or lower is "undetectable." They said a lot of stupid, bone headed, ignorant statements back in the 1950's. This is just one of them.. Not surprised. Back then 0.5 % RMS was the best they could do back then. So what were they supposed to say? "Well 0.5 % RMS is really crappy but this is the best we can do at the moment. Come back in 15 years. RTR will be better then..." LOL I did a SOS recording project back in 1989. I recorded a piano in stereo onto my $200 cassette deck. (0.06 % RMS) I then ran the piano part through a mixer to add a vocal. That went to PCM unit which had unmeasurable wow and flutter. I then ran the 14/ 44.1 PCM half inch tape through my mixer again adding more vocals. This time recording back to the cassette deck. You could hear the wavering on the piano notes. Very obvious. If it was this present on a tape machine rated at 0.06 % RMS, imagine one rated at 0.09 % RMS or worse 0.5 % RMS.
Don't wet yourself over it. No really don't. LOL. I am sure your cassette sounds super good. In studios they make records of digital masters all the time.. They usually sound good. But it is impossible for your cassette tape to have more detail then the original. You must know that is impossible. Yes, I have no doubt that your cassette dubbies are "easy to listen" to then your compact disks. Because 16/44.1 is so horrible. LOL And , yes, better sounding. But not accurate. I can take a Rush - Roll The Bones and slap some EQ on: - 2 db @ 14 khz @ Q of 0.5. - 2 db @ 8 khz @ Q of 1. +2 db @ 60 hz @ Q of 1. + 1.5 db @ 150 hz @ Q of 1. + 1 db @ 600 hz @ Q of 1. And my new digital file will sound better than the crappy Rupert Hine 1991 toxic mix. But it will not have more detail and it can not have a better stereo image.. Even 16 bit digital is 96 db signal to noise ratio. A weighted. A CD is 5 - 20 000 hz +- 0.5 db. And unmeasurable wow and flutter. The best RTR in the world - 1 inch half tracks can't beat this! The best cassette can do: 20 - 22 000 hz +-3db (30 - 20 000 hz +-2db) 93 db signal to noise ratio with Dolby S. Except you don't to use NR. So your tapes can maybe pull 62 db on a good day. But with Dolby C, a real hot level and Metal tape - 75 db A weighted. 0.025 % RMS wow and flutter. I am sure your cassette sound kick-ass and sound amazing but they can't have more detail. And they can't be the same. You are the cassette master Classic Car Dude. But Cassette is not linear. Not like RTR is..With analog you add: frequency deviation, wow and flutter, distortion and compresion. This may make the cassette dub sound super duper but it is not an accurate representation of the CD or digital file that you make your cassette dubbed from.. No one saying that your cassettes sound bad. Anymore than a vinyl cutting of Rush - Presto is bad. Actually, I own the vinyl of Presto and the vinyl kicks the CDs butt into orbit. Way better bass. Now probably the cutting engineer snuck some bass EQ onto the record. Doesn't matter, still sounds better. Hint. Maybe you need a new converter. I know you have a good converter but if you went to the $3000 and up category, you would appreciate how poor you have become. I mean how good 16/44.1 really can sound.. I think you are too hard on poor 16/44.1 ALL I AM SAYING IS GIVE 16/44.1 A CHANCE......
