About a two years ago, I posted here about tapes. I messed about with my 
tape deck for a couple of evenings, then stuck it back in the box and forgot 
about it.

Three days ago, I set it up and once again, have just spent two thoughrougly 
enjoyable nights putting some music back on tape and I'm now left scratching 
my head, why the format has virtually died out?

Using the very cheap but extremely good TDK SA tapes purchased from Richer 
Sounds last week and replacing the 99p RCA leads with some much better but 
also inexpensive leads http://tinyurl.com/5zzmq5 I fired up the old Pioneer 
CT-740S.
Pushing the Super Auto BLE button and watching the machine work out the 
chareristics of the tape was such fun. Wondering whether to use Dolby B, C 
or S ...ah nostalgia

Selecting the tracks I wanted to record and then using the Peak Search on my 
on my ancient Sony CDP-990 to set the recording levels... Marvellous. The 
results, excellent!

Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they used, the 
brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape recording, or if 
they think tape could ever make a comeback?

Cheers all
tox

"The Legend Returns" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote in 
message news:DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2...
> About a two years ago, I posted here about tapes. I messed about with my 
> tape deck for a couple of evenings, then stuck it back in the box and 
> forgot about it.
>
> Three days ago, I set it up and once again, have just spent two 
> thoughrougly enjoyable nights putting some music back on tape and I'm now 
> left scratching my head, why the format has virtually died out?
>
> Using the very cheap but extremely good TDK SA tapes purchased from Richer 
> Sounds last week and replacing the 99p RCA leads with some much better but 
> also inexpensive leads http://tinyurl.com/5zzmq5

I'm scratching my head as to why someone who is satisfied with cassette tape 
is bothering about leads?

>
> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they used, 
> the brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape recording, 
> or if they think tape could ever make a comeback?
>

I usually had Dolby switched out. Even with the most expensive cassette 
decks there always seemed to be problems with mistracking between the Dolby 
encode and decode processes. And with later tape formulations tape hiss 
wasn't intrusive.

David.

In article <DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2>,
   The Legend Returns <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they used,

Dolby A or SR.

> the brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape
> recording, 

AGFA

> or if they think tape could ever make a comeback?

It's never gone away. Or at least in certain ways. It still tends to get
used for TV production as it's cheaper to keep than any other storage
medium - at least currently.

But if you mean compact cassette - I, for one, was glad to see the back
of it.

-- 
*Therapy is expensive, poppin' bubble wrap is cheap!  You choose.

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"David Looser"  wrote in message 
news:6ihu2jFqp2iuU1@mid.individual.net...
> "The Legend Returns" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote in 
> message news:DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2...
>> About a two years ago, I posted here about tapes. I messed about with my 
>> tape deck for a couple of evenings, then stuck it back in the box and 
>> forgot about it.
>>
>> Three days ago, I set it up and once again, have just spent two 
>> thoughrougly enjoyable nights putting some music back on tape and I'm now 
>> left scratching my head, why the format has virtually died out?
>>
>> Using the very cheap but extremely good TDK SA tapes purchased from 
>> Richer Sounds last week and replacing the 99p RCA leads with some much 
>> better but also inexpensive leads http://tinyurl.com/5zzmq5
>
> I'm scratching my head as to why someone who is satisfied with cassette 
> tape is bothering about leads?
>
>>
>> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they used, 
>> the brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape 
>> recording, or if they think tape could ever make a comeback?
>>
>
> I usually had Dolby switched out. Even with the most expensive cassette 
> decks there always seemed to be problems with mistracking between the 
> Dolby encode and decode processes. And with later tape formulations tape 
> hiss wasn't intrusive.
>
> David.
>
>
I used Dolby C, but it was extremely critical of line-up. I can well 
understand why anyone without access to test equipment would prefer cassette 
without Dolby, even B. However, if the machine was properly lined-up, it 
could give truly excellent results, comparable with R-R without Dolby. Tape 
saturation wasn't that much of a problem if you kept record levels down, as 
Dolby C would take care of the noise.
Of course R-R with Dolby A was a lot better, and a LOT more expensive on 
tape costs.
Interesting how it all went away with recording on Hard-Disc.

S.
-- 
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

Serge Auckland wrote:
> 
> "David Looser"  wrote in message 
> news:6ihu2jFqp2iuU1@mid.individual.net...
>> "The Legend Returns" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote in 
>> message news:DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2...
>>> About a two years ago, I posted here about tapes. I messed about with 
>>> my tape deck for a couple of evenings, then stuck it back in the box 
>>> and forgot about it.
>>>
>>> Three days ago, I set it up and once again, have just spent two 
>>> thoughrougly enjoyable nights putting some music back on tape and I'm 
>>> now left scratching my head, why the format has virtually died out?
>>>
>>> Using the very cheap but extremely good TDK SA tapes purchased from 
>>> Richer Sounds last week and replacing the 99p RCA leads with some 
>>> much better but also inexpensive leads http://tinyurl.com/5zzmq5
>>
>> I'm scratching my head as to why someone who is satisfied with 
>> cassette tape is bothering about leads?
>>
>>>
>>> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they 
>>> used, the brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape 
>>> recording, or if they think tape could ever make a comeback?
>>>
>>
>> I usually had Dolby switched out. Even with the most expensive 
>> cassette decks there always seemed to be problems with mistracking 
>> between the Dolby encode and decode processes. And with later tape 
>> formulations tape hiss wasn't intrusive.
>>
>> David.
>>
>>
> I used Dolby C, but it was extremely critical of line-up. I can well 
> understand why anyone without access to test equipment would prefer 
> cassette without Dolby, even B. However, if the machine was properly 
> lined-up, it could give truly excellent results, comparable with R-R 
> without Dolby. Tape saturation wasn't that much of a problem if you kept 
> record levels down, as Dolby C would take care of the noise.
> Of course R-R with Dolby A was a lot better, and a LOT more expensive on 
> tape costs.
> Interesting how it all went away with recording on Hard-Disc.
> 
> S.

I've posted this before, but I think it is useful here - it is a plot of 
the frequency response and noise levels of my Sony Walkman Pro. There 
are three noise plots, normal, Dolby B and Dolby C

http://81.174.169.10/odds/dolby.gif

It isn't a pretty sight with any of them.

d

The Legend Returns wrote:

> if they think tape could ever make a comeback?

Why ?

There's hardly any tape factories left btw !

Graham

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

>    The Legend Returns <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
> > Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they used,
>
> Dolby A or SR.

LOL !

Graham

"Eeyore"  wrote in message 
news:48C3F96F.D354D36@hotmail.com...
>
>
> The Legend Returns wrote:
>
>> if they think tape could ever make a comeback?
>
> Why ?

Why not, sounds good to me... Browsing through the Internet, throws up shed 
loads of people still using the format.

> There's hardly any tape factories left btw !

The TDK SA, is still readily available and at just 59p for a C90 is about as 
good as it gets.

tox

"Don Pearce"  wrote in message 
news:XtqdnQQq8sgvfV7VnZ2dnUVZ8uednZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> Serge Auckland wrote:
>>
>> "David Looser"  wrote in message 
>> news:6ihu2jFqp2iuU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> "The Legend Returns" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote in 
>>> message news:DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2...
>>>> About a two years ago, I posted here about tapes. I messed about with 
>>>> my tape deck for a couple of evenings, then stuck it back in the box 
>>>> and forgot about it.
>>>>
>>>> Three days ago, I set it up and once again, have just spent two 
>>>> thoughrougly enjoyable nights putting some music back on tape and I'm 
>>>> now left scratching my head, why the format has virtually died out?
>>>>
>>>> Using the very cheap but extremely good TDK SA tapes purchased from 
>>>> Richer Sounds last week and replacing the 99p RCA leads with some much 
>>>> better but also inexpensive leads http://tinyurl.com/5zzmq5
>>>
>>> I'm scratching my head as to why someone who is satisfied with cassette 
>>> tape is bothering about leads?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they 
>>>> used, the brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape 
>>>> recording, or if they think tape could ever make a comeback?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I usually had Dolby switched out. Even with the most expensive cassette 
>>> decks there always seemed to be problems with mistracking between the 
>>> Dolby encode and decode processes. And with later tape formulations tape 
>>> hiss wasn't intrusive.
>>>
>>> David.
>>>
>>>
>> I used Dolby C, but it was extremely critical of line-up. I can well 
>> understand why anyone without access to test equipment would prefer 
>> cassette without Dolby, even B. However, if the machine was properly 
>> lined-up, it could give truly excellent results, comparable with R-R 
>> without Dolby. Tape saturation wasn't that much of a problem if you kept 
>> record levels down, as Dolby C would take care of the noise.
>> Of course R-R with Dolby A was a lot better, and a LOT more expensive on 
>> tape costs.
>> Interesting how it all went away with recording on Hard-Disc.
>>
>> S.
>
> I've posted this before, but I think it is useful here - it is a plot of 
> the frequency response and noise levels of my Sony Walkman Pro. There are 
> three noise plots, normal, Dolby B and Dolby C
>
> http://81.174.169.10/odds/dolby.gif
>
> It isn't a pretty sight with any of them.
>
> d

I no longer have it, but my old Nakamichi 482Z had much better frequency 
response than that. At 0dB record level (200mM/mm) it was flat (-1dB) to 
20k. Noise curves look about similar, typically broadband noise about -60dB, 
Dolby tracking within 1dB. It did need a lot of tweaking to get it like 
that, and it did rather vary tape to tape, even within the same manufacturer 
and formulation. I wasn't sorry to give up on cassettes and go to hard-disk.
S.
-- 
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

The Legend Returns wrote:
> About a two years ago, I posted here about tapes. I messed about with my 
> tape deck for a couple of evenings, then stuck it back in the box and forgot 
> about it.
> 
> Three days ago, I set it up and once again, have just spent two thoughrougly 
> enjoyable nights putting some music back on tape and I'm now left scratching 
> my head, why the format has virtually died out?
> 
> Using the very cheap but extremely good TDK SA tapes purchased from Richer 
> Sounds last week and replacing the 99p RCA leads with some much better but 
> also inexpensive leads http://tinyurl.com/5zzmq5 I fired up the old Pioneer 
> CT-740S.
> Pushing the Super Auto BLE button and watching the machine work out the 
> chareristics of the tape was such fun. Wondering whether to use Dolby B, C 
> or S ...ah nostalgia
> 
> Selecting the tracks I wanted to record and then using the Peak Search on my 
> on my ancient Sony CDP-990 to set the recording levels... Marvellous. The 
> results, excellent!
> 
> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they used, the 
> brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape recording, or if 
> they think tape could ever make a comeback?
> 
> Cheers all
> tox 
> 
> 

I did a test of a range of chrome tapes some years ago (probably more 
then 10) and concluded TDK SA was the best. However, I have recently 
been working with a friends 8 track cassette recordings and have found 
the tape edge of SA tapes is rather poor. Best tapes in this respect so 
far seem to be Maxell.

Cheers

Ian

Serge Auckland wrote:
> 
> "Don Pearce"  wrote in message 
> news:XtqdnQQq8sgvfV7VnZ2dnUVZ8uednZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>> Serge Auckland wrote:
>>>
>>> "David Looser"  wrote in message 
>>> news:6ihu2jFqp2iuU1@mid.individual.net...
>>>> "The Legend Returns" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote 
>>>> in message news:DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2...
>>>>> About a two years ago, I posted here about tapes. I messed about 
>>>>> with my tape deck for a couple of evenings, then stuck it back in 
>>>>> the box and forgot about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Three days ago, I set it up and once again, have just spent two 
>>>>> thoughrougly enjoyable nights putting some music back on tape and 
>>>>> I'm now left scratching my head, why the format has virtually died 
>>>>> out?
>>>>>
>>>>> Using the very cheap but extremely good TDK SA tapes purchased from 
>>>>> Richer Sounds last week and replacing the 99p RCA leads with some 
>>>>> much better but also inexpensive leads http://tinyurl.com/5zzmq5
>>>>
>>>> I'm scratching my head as to why someone who is satisfied with 
>>>> cassette tape is bothering about leads?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they 
>>>>> used, the brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when 
>>>>> tape recording, or if they think tape could ever make a comeback?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I usually had Dolby switched out. Even with the most expensive 
>>>> cassette decks there always seemed to be problems with mistracking 
>>>> between the Dolby encode and decode processes. And with later tape 
>>>> formulations tape hiss wasn't intrusive.
>>>>
>>>> David.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I used Dolby C, but it was extremely critical of line-up. I can well 
>>> understand why anyone without access to test equipment would prefer 
>>> cassette without Dolby, even B. However, if the machine was properly 
>>> lined-up, it could give truly excellent results, comparable with R-R 
>>> without Dolby. Tape saturation wasn't that much of a problem if you 
>>> kept record levels down, as Dolby C would take care of the noise.
>>> Of course R-R with Dolby A was a lot better, and a LOT more expensive 
>>> on tape costs.
>>> Interesting how it all went away with recording on Hard-Disc.
>>>
>>> S.
>>
>> I've posted this before, but I think it is useful here - it is a plot 
>> of the frequency response and noise levels of my Sony Walkman Pro. 
>> There are three noise plots, normal, Dolby B and Dolby C
>>
>> http://81.174.169.10/odds/dolby.gif
>>
>> It isn't a pretty sight with any of them.
>>
>> d
> 
> I no longer have it, but my old Nakamichi 482Z had much better frequency 
> response than that. At 0dB record level (200mM/mm) it was flat (-1dB) to 
> 20k. Noise curves look about similar, typically broadband noise about 
> -60dB, Dolby tracking within 1dB. It did need a lot of tweaking to get 
> it like that, and it did rather vary tape to tape, even within the same 
> manufacturer and formulation. I wasn't sorry to give up on cassettes and 
> go to hard-disk.
> S.

I have a three head Denon machine here with variable bias - I'll give 
that a test soon using the same method and post the results.

d

> I'm scratching my head as to why someone who is satisfied with cassette 
> tape
> is bothering about leads?


Ah yes, the Compact Cassette.
Did for sound recording what Disk Film and the 110 cartridge did for still 
photography.

-- 
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

The Legend Returns wrote:

> "Eeyore"  wrote
> > The Legend Returns wrote:
> >
> >> if they think tape could ever make a comeback?
> >
> > Why ?
>
> Why not, sounds good to me... Browsing through the Internet, throws up shed
> loads of people still using the format.
>
> > There's hardly any tape factories left btw !
>
> The TDK SA, is still readily available and at just 59p for a C90 is about as
> good as it gets.

Cassettes sound SHIT ! And they wear out. I know people with Ampex ATR100s that
have a stereo headblock on 1 inch tape. Now that may be worth listening to.

Graham

In article <DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2>, The Legend
Returns
<trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:


> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they used,
> the brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape
> recording, or if they think tape could ever make a comeback?

If you mean cassette tape, then I tended to use Maxell type2 tapes like
UDXL2. (Tried TDK but found their mechanisms were ropey, and the recordings
prone to print-though. More recently, playing old TDK cassettes show they
are more prone to 'scalloping' and developing ripples whilst stored than
were the Maxell ones. Some recordings badly affected by that. Shame you
can't iron a tape flat and still playback the recording.  :-)

For reel to reel I ended up preferring Maxell UDXL. But stopped bothering
with reel-to-reel once I had a cassette deck that produced acceptable
results.

Tried various other tapes over the years, starting with the awful EMItape
of the 1960s/70s. This seemed to have to oxide 'bound' <sic> onto the tape
with gnat spit, so more came off on the heads than stayed on the tape! But
tapes like the Maxell seemed to minimise droputs, oxide loss, etc.

Used Dolby B and did do some test recordings to ensure they recorded/played
back with satisfactory tracking on the same machine. Lacking reliable test
tapes playback on a different machine might alter results, but when
replaying my old tapes on a different (Nakamichi) machine the results still
sounds OK.

Can't see the point of going back to analog mag tape. Recording onto CD or
other digital media seems fine to me with none of the worries about head
cleaning, dolby adjustments, etc, etc. I only use tape now when replaying
old recordings to transfer them to CD.

Slainte,

Jim

-- 
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

"Jim Lesurf"  wrote in message 
news:4fdb1b7835noise@audiomisc.co.uk...
> In article <DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2>, The Legend
> Returns
> <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
>
>

> Can't see the point of going back to analog mag tape. Recording onto CD or
> other digital media seems fine to me with none of the worries about head
> cleaning, dolby adjustments, etc, etc. I only use tape now when replaying
> old recordings to transfer them to CD.

 But to me, that's half the fun of a cassette deck, all the messing about 
and experimenting with different tapes.

You may well ask why people bother with vintage and veteran cars. They're 
cold, dirty, break down every few hundred miles and need more attention than 
a new born baby! However, people still enjoy driving and working on them.

BTW, dare I ask this, but did you use metal tape cassettes?

tox

"The Legend Returns" <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote in 
message news:YG5xk.111$1i2.9@newsfe29.ams2...
>
> "Jim Lesurf"  wrote in message 
> news:4fdb1b7835noise@audiomisc.co.uk...
>> In article <DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2>, The Legend
>> Returns
>> <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
>>
>>
>
>> Can't see the point of going back to analog mag tape. Recording onto CD 
>> or
>> other digital media seems fine to me with none of the worries about head
>> cleaning, dolby adjustments, etc, etc. I only use tape now when replaying
>> old recordings to transfer them to CD.
>
> But to me, that's half the fun of a cassette deck, all the messing about 
> and experimenting with different tapes.
>
> You may well ask why people bother with vintage and veteran cars. They're 
> cold, dirty, break down every few hundred miles and need more attention 
> than a new born baby! However, people still enjoy driving and working on 
> them.
>

Indeed they do. But they don't "scratch their heads wondering why people 
gave up using them" or ask if vintage cars "will ever make a comeback".  And 
just as most people prefer a reliable, comfortable modern car to a vintage 
one when they actually want to get somewhere, most people prefer their iPods 
to their old walkman any day. And whilst many audiophiles still prefer the 
LP to the CD, few HiFi enthusiasts get nostalgic about the sound of 
cassettes!

David.

In article <YG5xk.111$1i2.9@newsfe29.ams2>, The Legend Returns <trabant
owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:

> "Jim Lesurf"  wrote in message
> news:4fdb1b7835noise@audiomisc.co.uk...
> > In article <DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2>, The Legend Returns
> > <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
> >
> >

> > Can't see the point of going back to analog mag tape. Recording onto
> > CD or other digital media seems fine to me with none of the worries
> > about head cleaning, dolby adjustments, etc, etc. I only use tape now
> > when replaying old recordings to transfer them to CD.

>  But to me, that's half the fun of a cassette deck, all the messing
> about and experimenting with different tapes.

For me, the point of audio equipment is to allow me to listen to and enjoy
the sound of the music/speech/etc. Not to fiddle about. Happy to leave the
fiddling to the people in the orchestra.  :-)

I agree it can be fun to design or build your own kit, and to discover how
it works. But I regard that as a seperate interest. Once designed and built
I want it to work without more fiddling around on any regular basis.



> You may well ask why people bother with vintage and veteran cars.
> They're cold, dirty, break down every few hundred miles and need more
> attention than a new born baby! However, people still enjoy driving and
> working on them.

That is fine for them if that is their source of pleasure. I don't have a
car, though.   :-)


> BTW, dare I ask this, but did you use metal tape cassettes?

I did experiment a few times with metal cassettes. However they didn't seem
worth the expense at the time, and with the deck I had - which I suspect
could not fully drive them. The type 2 tapes seemed OK to me.

Slainte,

Jim

-- 
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

I tape from CD to Cassette once in a while, though I have hundereds of
Cassettes from early CD to Tape recordings.

I don't use Dolby at all, as I don't like the resulting sound of the
Ride Cymbals when listening to Jazz.
Bg

The Legend Returns wrote:

>  But to me, that's half the fun of a cassette deck, all the messing about
> and experimenting with different tapes.

Trust me, there are better things to do. I used to have to do that kind of think
for a living once on anything from quarter inch to two inch machines.

Graham

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 09:58:52 +0100, "The Legend Returns" <trabant
owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:

>
>"Jim Lesurf"  wrote in message 
>news:4fdb1b7835noise@audiomisc.co.uk...
>> In article <DPOwk.279053$gM4.164739@newsfe25.ams2>, The Legend
>> Returns
>> <trabant owners club@Nicks place.comco> wrote:
>>
>>
>
>> Can't see the point of going back to analog mag tape. Recording onto CD or
>> other digital media seems fine to me with none of the worries about head
>> cleaning, dolby adjustments, etc, etc. I only use tape now when replaying
>> old recordings to transfer them to CD.
>
> But to me, that's half the fun of a cassette deck, all the messing about 
>and experimenting with different tapes.
>
>You may well ask why people bother with vintage and veteran cars. They're 
>cold, dirty, break down every few hundred miles and need more attention than 
>a new born baby! However, people still enjoy driving and working on them.
>
>BTW, dare I ask this, but did you use metal tape cassettes?
>
>tox 
>
I bought 2 or 3 Metal tapes in my lifetime.  Must say, I did like the
results but I've heard people talk 'bad' about them and I don't know
why.  Maybe excessive head wear?  At least you didn't need Dolby with
Metal tapes.  BTW, used TDK MA.

Marky P.

In article , Marky P
 wrote:

> >
> I bought 2 or 3 Metal tapes in my lifetime.  Must say, I did like the
> results but I've heard people talk 'bad' about them and I don't know
> why.  Maybe excessive head wear?  At least you didn't need Dolby with
> Metal tapes.  BTW, used TDK MA.

IIRC there were two concerns.

1) That they needed a higher applied field to record up to the max levels,
and to correctly bias the tape. So many of the decks that had a 'metal'
setting for them were unable to use them properly - e.g. because the record
head saturated before the tape!  :-)

2) That early examples of the tape were prone to degrading as the metal
oxidised or otherwise reacted with their environment.

Can't say how well founded the above ideas were. I just tried metal
cassette a few times and decided that - in my recorder - they didn't seem
worth the money at the time.

IIRC head wear was also said to be a worry with some early 'Crome' tapes.

...and I can say I miss cassette much. Useful before I had digital
recording, but...

Slainte,

Jim

-- 
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics  http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Well these chaps are trying to help Reel-to-Reel stage a comeback, so
anything is possible:

http://www.tapeproject.com/

Personally I hope they do not get too many classic tape decks to
butch .. er I mean modify.

Incidentally I still do use cassettes - mainly to create copies of CDs
to listen to in my old car.  I have a Denon DN 790R and use Dolby B
and ferric tape for compatibility.

Regards

Paul

On 7 Sep, 12:31, "The Legend Returns" <trabant owners club@Nicks
place.comco> wrote:
> About a two years ago, I posted here about tapes. I messed about with my
> tape deck for a couple of evenings, then stuck it back in the box and forgot
> about it.
>
> Three days ago, I set it up and once again, have just spent two thoughrougly
> enjoyable nights putting some music back on tape and I'm now left scratching
> my head, why the format has virtually died out?
>
> Using the very cheap but extremely good TDK SA tapes purchased from Richer
> Sounds last week and replacing the 99p RCA leads with some much better but
> also inexpensive leadshttp://tinyurl.com/5zzmq5I fired up the old Pioneer
> CT-740S.
> Pushing the Super Auto BLE button and watching the machine work out the
> chareristics of the tape was such fun. Wondering whether to use Dolby B, C
> or S ...ah nostalgia
>
> Selecting the tracks I wanted to record and then using the Peak Search on my
> on my ancient Sony CDP-990 to set the recording levels... Marvellous. The
> results, excellent!
>
> Anyone care to discuss what type of Dolby setting (B, C or S) they used, the
> brand/type of tape they used or indeed, still use when tape recording, or if
> they think tape could ever make a comeback?
>
> Cheers all
> tox

wrote in message 
news:36d96632-f80c-49a0-9e93-6478a2cd76a5@k7g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Incidentally I still do use cassettes - mainly to create copies of CDs
> to listen to in my old car.  I have a Denon DN 790R and use Dolby B
> and ferric tape for compatibility.
>

Fine, until you change your car and find that the new one has a CD player, 
but no cassette player.

David.

In article
,
    wrote:
> Well these chaps are trying to help Reel-to-Reel stage a comeback, so
> anything is possible:

> http://www.tapeproject.com/

 Plenty still like vinyl - and endow it with much of the qualities the
testimonials there do.

 Personally I always liked 1/4" more than vinyl - my ears preferred the
distortions of that over LP.

 Then along came digital...

-- 
*Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.*

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:57:15 +0100, Jim Lesurf 
wrote:

>In article , Marky P
> wrote:
>
>> >
>> I bought 2 or 3 Metal tapes in my lifetime.  Must say, I did like the
>> results but I've heard people talk 'bad' about them and I don't know
>> why.  Maybe excessive head wear?  At least you didn't need Dolby with
>> Metal tapes.  BTW, used TDK MA.
>
>IIRC there were two concerns.
>
>1) That they needed a higher applied field to record up to the max levels,
>and to correctly bias the tape. So many of the decks that had a 'metal'
>setting for them were unable to use them properly - e.g. because the record
>head saturated before the tape!  :-)

Must admit, the meters on my Yamaha cassette deck went way off the top
and the tape still took it.
>
>2) That early examples of the tape were prone to degrading as the metal
>oxidised or otherwise reacted with their environment.
>
>Can't say how well founded the above ideas were. I just tried metal
>cassette a few times and decided that - in my recorder - they didn't seem
>worth the money at the time.

They were a bit pricey.
>
>IIRC head wear was also said to be a worry with some early 'Crome' tapes.
>
>...and I can say I miss cassette much. Useful before I had digital
>recording, but...
>
>Slainte,
>
>Jim
I remember TDK briging out a Ferric tape that could be pushed to the
limits like a metal tape.  Think it was AR-X or something.  It did
perform very well but was still nearly the price of a metal tape.

What I did like about cassettes was that not everyone could make
decent recordings.  You had to make an effort.  I made recordings for
mates at school and they were envious of the excellent sound quality
:-)

Marky P.

On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:34:56 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
 wrote:

>In article
>,
>    wrote:
>> Well these chaps are trying to help Reel-to-Reel stage a comeback, so
>> anything is possible:
>
>> http://www.tapeproject.com/
>
> Plenty still like vinyl - and endow it with much of the qualities the
>testimonials there do.
>
> Personally I always liked 1/4" more than vinyl - my ears preferred the
>distortions of that over LP.
>
> Then along came digital...

Anyone remember 'That's' tapes?  They had a triangular window instead
of the regular square one.  I used to buy them in the 80's as they
looked cool :-)


Marky P.

Marky P wrote:
> Anyone remember 'That's' tapes?  They had a triangular window instead
> of the regular square one.  I used to buy them in the 80's as they
> looked cool :-)

Yes I remember them.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiyo_Yuden>

But I was a stickler to TDK. TDK AD was my favorite - and took a nice 
bit of abuse with the levels. The AD-X even moreso :-)

First D, then AD, then AD-X, then SA, then SA-X, then AR
<http://www.btgallery.com/tdk/index.html>


-- 
Adrian C

"Marky P"  wrote in message 
news:193jc45jo9kd6camh3k8en8fh30kg2pabb@4ax.com...
>
> Anyone remember 'That's' tapes?  They had a triangular window instead
> of the regular square one.  I used to buy them in the 80's as they
> looked cool :-)

I have a boxful of them, all still sealed, including...

EM-X60, CD/IVF90, CD/IIF, MG-X90, That's Suono 74 and MR-X90PRO

I also have loads of TDK metal tapes all sealed, including a few TDK 
MA-XG90, which now make £20 each these days.

tox

hi Guys Really Interested Topic i am New to The Forum thankx




-- 
car_audio11

"Marky P"  wrote in message 
news:193jc45jo9kd6camh3k8en8fh30kg2pabb@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:34:56 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
>  wrote:
>
>>In article
>>,
>>    wrote:
>>> Well these chaps are trying to help Reel-to-Reel stage a comeback, so
>>> anything is possible:
>>
>>> http://www.tapeproject.com/
>>
>> Plenty still like vinyl - and endow it with much of the qualities the
>>testimonials there do.
>>
>> Personally I always liked 1/4" more than vinyl - my ears preferred the
>>distortions of that over LP.
>>
>> Then along came digital...
>
> Anyone remember 'That's' tapes?  They had a triangular window instead
> of the regular square one.  I used to buy them in the 80's as they
> looked cool :-)
>
>
> Marky P.

In the mid '80s, I did an evaluation on all the main brands of tape. That's 
Tape came out best for MOL, frequency response and noise. It was also pretty 
good on consistency batch to batch. Maxell came out next best and TDK third. 
The main problem with TDK was that they kept bringing out "new, improved" 
formulations that screwed up your tape machine settings. If you were Joe 
Public, then it didn't matter, they did things like increase slightly the 
bias requirement so you got more top, so it sounded "better". If you had an 
immaculately lined-up Nakamichi, that was flat to 1dB at 20k, 1dB Dolby C 
tracking and -60dB noise, it screwed things up totally.
I stuck to That's Tape. Still have a few although I no longer have the 
immaculately lined-up Nakamichi. Sad in a way, but my PC does infinitely 
better recordings with a lot less faf.

S.
-- 
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:56:17 +0100, Adrian C <email@here.invalid>
wrote:

>Marky P wrote:
>> Anyone remember 'That's' tapes?  They had a triangular window instead
>> of the regular square one.  I used to buy them in the 80's as they
>> looked cool :-)
>
>Yes I remember them.
>
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiyo_Yuden>
>
>But I was a stickler to TDK. TDK AD was my favorite - and took a nice 
>bit of abuse with the levels. The AD-X even moreso :-)
>
>First D, then AD, then AD-X, then SA, then SA-X, then AR
><http://www.btgallery.com/tdk/index.html>

Reminds me of a song I wrote all about TDK tapes.  All the tape types
were sang about from D right through to MA-XG :-)

Marky P.

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:38:07 +0100, "Serge Auckland"
 wrote:

>
>"Marky P"  wrote in message 
>news:193jc45jo9kd6camh3k8en8fh30kg2pabb@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:34:56 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>>In article
>>>,
>>>    wrote:
>>>> Well these chaps are trying to help Reel-to-Reel stage a comeback, so
>>>> anything is possible:
>>>
>>>> http://www.tapeproject.com/
>>>
>>> Plenty still like vinyl - and endow it with much of the qualities the
>>>testimonials there do.
>>>
>>> Personally I always liked 1/4" more than vinyl - my ears preferred the
>>>distortions of that over LP.
>>>
>>> Then along came digital...
>>
>> Anyone remember 'That's' tapes?  They had a triangular window instead
>> of the regular square one.  I used to buy them in the 80's as they
>> looked cool :-)
>>
>>
>> Marky P.
>
>In the mid '80s, I did an evaluation on all the main brands of tape. That's 
>Tape came out best for MOL, frequency response and noise. It was also pretty 
>good on consistency batch to batch. Maxell came out next best and TDK third. 
>The main problem with TDK was that they kept bringing out "new, improved" 
>formulations that screwed up your tape machine settings. If you were Joe 
>Public, then it didn't matter, they did things like increase slightly the 
>bias requirement so you got more top, so it sounded "better". If you had an 
>immaculately lined-up Nakamichi, that was flat to 1dB at 20k, 1dB Dolby C 
>tracking and -60dB noise, it screwed things up totally.
>I stuck to That's Tape. Still have a few although I no longer have the 
>immaculately lined-up Nakamichi. Sad in a way, but my PC does infinitely 
>better recordings with a lot less faf.
>
>S.
Let's face it, it's nearly impossible to make naff recordings these
days.  Early 80's music centres made abysmal recordings, especially if
they had auto level adjustment.


Marky P.

Serge Auckland  wrote... 

> Sad in a way, but my PC does infinitely 
> better recordings with a lot less faf.


The cassette format has had a good lifespan, nearly
50 years now isn't it? I got a used MiniDisc deck 3 years ago
and am very pleased with it. Ideal for digital recording from DAB
and DVB the editing/naming facilities are super for that sort of
use. Sadly I seem to have climbed onto the bandwagon just as the wheels
were falling off. 3 years ago there were 3 sources of blank discs in my
town now there are none and its a 20 mile hike or fleabay. Looks like 
Sony are giving up on MD after only 16 years.

On Dolby C; 5/6 years ago I picked an old Aiwa cassette deck at a car 
boot just because it had C. I noticed a lot of pumping on recordings I 
made,one in particular, some Synth pop stuff  was so bad that it had me 
on my knees in a fit of giggles at the poor thing. Was this a 
characteristic of C or was it just the Aiwa? 

-- 
Ken

http://www.members.lycos.co.uk/buddyduck/

"UnsteadyKen" <unsteadyken+BT@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:MPG.23350b4a1dd42e59896bb@news.btinternet.com...
> Serge Auckland  wrote...
>
>> Sad in a way, but my PC does infinitely
>> better recordings with a lot less faf.
>
>
> The cassette format has had a good lifespan, nearly
> 50 years now isn't it? I got a used MiniDisc deck 3 years ago
> and am very pleased with it. Ideal for digital recording from DAB
> and DVB the editing/naming facilities are super for that sort of
> use. Sadly I seem to have climbed onto the bandwagon just as the wheels
> were falling off. 3 years ago there were 3 sources of blank discs in my
> town now there are none and its a 20 mile hike or fleabay. Looks like
> Sony are giving up on MD after only 16 years.
>
> On Dolby C; 5/6 years ago I picked an old Aiwa cassette deck at a car
> boot just because it had C. I noticed a lot of pumping on recordings I
> made,one in particular, some Synth pop stuff  was so bad that it had me
> on my knees in a fit of giggles at the poor thing. Was this a
> characteristic of C or was it just the Aiwa?
>
> -- 
> Ken
>
> http://www.members.lycos.co.uk/buddyduck/

Dolby C was effectively two Dolby B processors cascaded, and working at 
different frequencies. In fact, the earlier implementations which both 
Nakamichi and AIWA had was made from exactly that, two Dolby B processors 
with different filter components. Then, some years later, an IC was released 
that had B and C on one chip, but, it was incompatible with the earlier 
implementation, probably not far enough out for the general public, but 
clearly audible if you had your machines well lined up. I had a Nak and 
bought an AIWA for my Dad so the tapes I made for him were compatible.

Anyway, Dolby B was sensitive to alignment, and Dolby C doubly so. If you 
found Dolby C to give you pumping noises, then I'd say the alignment was 
out. Tape machines had to be aligned to 1dB on Dolby tracking if pumping was 
not going to be audible, and the only way of doing that, was to get the 
machine aligned to one formulation of tape, and stick to it. Even sticking 
to one manufacturer was no guarantee, as they kept "improving" their 
formulations so they could put a "new, improved" sticker on the packet, but 
which screwed-up the alignment totally. In the mid-80s, I saw many if not 
all "enthusiasts" saying they didn't like or use Dolby as it screwed up the 
sound, and in every case that I investigated it was due to poor line-up 
and/or inadequate machines that couldn't be aligned accurately.

In the studios where I worked in the mid '70s, we realigned the tape 
machines every morning, as Dolby A tracking was critical, perhaps we could 
have got away with realigning once a week, but it showed that alignment was 
crucial. Translate this now to domestic machines that usually never got 
aligned, and it's no surprise that the Hi-Fi fraternity never took to Dolby. 
With my own machine I realigned it every time I did a recording, and it was 
a right faff.

Dolby, especially C, was a great system, but it required a degree of 
maintenance that just wasn't possible for the consumer, so very few heard it 
working properly.

S.
-- 
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

In article ,
   Serge Auckland  wrote:
>  Tape machines had to be aligned to 1dB on Dolby tracking if pumping was 
> not going to be audible, and the only way of doing that, was to get the 
> machine aligned to one formulation of tape, and stick to it.

I never bothered much with cassettes - but sticking to one brand and type
of pro open reel tape was no guarantee its sensitivity would be
consistent. For our multitracks we used to test every single tape when new
and mark them - then use them in a batch of the same sensititivily to
reduce line up time. We also used to recycle them for the same reason.

-- 
*If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) a écrit :

> I never bothered much with cassettes

I have a cassette deck, not really expensive, that tests the tape 
before writing and ajust the bias

the result seems good at the time I had it, but MD is better, even 
with max compression and Zoom H2 much better, now. The standard change 
and I'm not sure it's always necessary (laser copy for an invoice...)

jdd

-- 
http://www.dodin.net
http://valerie.dodin.org
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-eic8MSSfM

"jdd"  wrote in message news:gagg3q$i4j$2@aioe.org...
> Dave Plowman (News) a écrit :
>
>> I never bothered much with cassettes
>
> I have a cassette deck, not really expensive, that tests the tape before 
> writing and ajust the bias
>
> the result seems good at the time I had it, but MD is better, even with 
> max compression and Zoom H2 much better, now. The standard change and I'm 
> not sure it's always necessary (laser copy for an invoice...)
>
> jdd
>
> -- 
> http://www.dodin.net
> http://valerie.dodin.org
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-eic8MSSfM

Adjusting bias is only one line-up adjustment necessary: Tape sensitivity 
varies considerably with different tape manufacturers and will seriously 
affect Dolby tracking, azimuth will vary cassette-to-cassette and EQ 
adjustment may be necessary as heads wear. Cassette was incredibly capable 
considering the narrow track width and slow tape speed, but only if it was 
meticulously maintained, which of course very few actually were.

MD was definitely an improvement, in spite of the lossy compression, but 
once hard-disc recording became possible, everything else just seems so 
difficult.

S.
-- 
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

Serge Auckland wrote:
> 
> Dolby, especially C, was a great system, but it required a degree of 
> maintenance that just wasn't possible for the consumer, so very few 
> heard it working properly.
> 

I've just picked up from a boot sale a Car Stereo Radio Cassette with 
both Dolby B & C. Rare?

-- 
Adrian C

"Adrian C" <email@here.invalid> wrote in message 
news:6j5ae0F1gvuvU1@mid.individual.net...
> Serge Auckland wrote:
>>
>> Dolby, especially C, was a great system, but it required a degree of 
>> maintenance that just wasn't possible for the consumer, so very few heard 
>> it working properly.
>>
>
> I've just picked up from a boot sale a Car Stereo Radio Cassette with both 
> Dolby B & C. Rare?

I've can't ever remember seeing never seen one. What make is it?

I've also never owned a car radio cassette, that didn't chew up at least one 
tape a week
:-(

tox