2. tech-talk
  3. 157932-137904

Vinyl / High qual analog tape / High-res digital -- One of these is not like the other

One common theme I read on forums here and elsewhere is the view by many that there is a pecking order in quality:

Top - High Quality Analog TapeNext - VinylBottom - Digital

I will go out on a limb and say that most, probably approaching almost all those making the claim have never heard a really good analog tape machine and high resolution digital side by side, and have certainly never heard what comes out the other end when it goes to vinyl, i.e. heard the tape/file that went to the cutter, then compared that to the resultant record?

High quality analog tape and high quality digital sound very similar. Add a bit of hiss (noise) to digital, and it would be very difficult to tell which is which. It is not digital, especially high resolution digital that is the outlier, it is vinyl. It is different from the other two.  Perhaps if more people actually experienced this, they would have a different approach to analog/vinyl?

This post has nothing to do with personal taste. If you prefer vinyl, then stick with it and enjoy it. There are reasons why the analog processing that occurs in the vinyl "process" can result in a sound that pleases someone. However, knowledge is good, and if you are set in your ways, you may be preventing the next leap.
roberttdid
glupson
7,842 posts
 
mikelavigne,

Is the record you linked above the same as this...

https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/125556?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIpZn49saZ6gIVB4_ICh0EeQRZEAYYASABEgJjyvD_...


I know it is the same album, but I wonder if you know anything about pressings. The one on Discogs is "limited to 1000" and this one does not mention anything. Significant? Insignificant?

Thanks in advance.
mikelavigne
2,196 posts
 
yes; that is the same one.

same codes and product numbers as mine.

i know it's limited, but exactly how many i cannot say. so i cannot exactly answer your question other than the record i have and i am recommending is the same as what is for sale at Acoustic Sounds.
glupson
7,842 posts
 
Thanks,

I just heard it on youtube and, holy smokes, it sounds good even there. That would not cut it, as far as I am concerned, but I actually like the music.

In short, thanks for recommendation. I am buying it right now.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,935 posts
 
mikelavigne

a cassette tape is 1/4" tape, 4 track, and auto reversing, running at 1 and 7/8th ips. ’4-track’ means 4 tracks on a 1/4" tape. those tracks are tiny, and the sound, while nice on a good cassette, is nothing to write home about.
If you're talking about the Phillips Compact Cassette you're mistaken. It uses 1/8-inch tape. And as a rule, the best cassette decks weren't auto reverse - most of the auto-reversing decks couldn't maintain alignment in two directions.
... 1/4", 15 ips tape on a high quality RTR deck is superior to even the very best vinyl, when the source tape for the transfer is pristine, and the transfer is well done. tape is better. vinyl is not equal ...
That's been my experience.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Whoa, Nellie!! Do you mean to tell me they get that kind of sound quality out of a 1/8” tape?! That’s unbelievable! More dynamic than records, fuller bodied than CDs. Cassettes. They’re real and they’re spectacular! 🤗 Next up, how small can something be and still be considered audiophile grade?
More to discover