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
looscannon
60 posts
 
I think Mike just had a mine burp but cleeds is correct cassettes are 1/8"
There were auto reversing cassette decks but alignment certainly would have been a problem in rather inexpensive transports. I believe it was even a problem in decks that were not auto reversing. Dad worked on reel to reel machines but would not touch a cassette deck.  
mikelavigne
2,200 posts
 
my bad on the cassette tape width. my memory is what it is.

i lived through that time period and had plenty of cassettes. they were remarkably good for what they were, especially for in car listening. 8-track was a better system technically on the tape side of things, but did not get the attention to detail and development of cassette.

you could have a nice sounding cassette based system. and tape is analog and has that going for it.

but nothing like vinyl, or real ’big boy’ RTR.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
I do so dislike making categorical remarks but generally speaking cassettes from the mid 80s through the 90s, the evolved cassettes as it were, have greater dynamic range than many records and certainly greater than many CDs from about 2000 on, you know, because of the Loudness Wars. Tape is a natural medium. It breathes. It’s cut from the same cloth as the master tape. Width of the medium probably isn’t a guarantee of SQ, the digital spiral Width on a CD is only nanoscale. 😬
cd318
2,636 posts
 
Reel to reel original master tape is still the highest quality source for most of the world's back catalogue. Elvis, Beatles, Dylan, Eagles, Pink Floyd etc. Basically almost everything between 1945 and 1990 was recorded on reel to reel tape.

Even digital recording was initially done on tape until they realised how fragile digital recordings were when put on tape.

It is still those original tape masters that are used whenever albums are to be reissued whether in standard resolution or high resolution, vinyl or Cd.

As far as I'm aware there is still no way to improve upon the sound quality of the actual tape although remixes and re-edits are certainly possible.  

It therefore stands to reason that all downloads, CDs, vinyl records will be a subsequent downgrade.

Just how much of a downgrade each one is, is the question.
roberttdid OP
534 posts
 
Well except for all those tapes lost in the UMG fire, and the ones that have been degraded so likely the best is a copy of a master.

I think I saw a 30ips remark above. Generally 30ips is useless as there is no bass response left on the tape. 15 is the best trade-off between bass and treble extension and mechanical stability and averaging out surface errors.  7.5 is better for deep bass.

To clear up a misconception though, tape is very much not "perfect" and can impart its own sound even just variances in alignment from recording and playback, especially when you get into bass frequencies.


Just some graphs for those not familiar with tape realities:    http://www.endino.com/graphs/

These next graphs look really good, but I expect there was some smoothing in the responses:   https://www.tapeheads.net/showthread.php?t=20460 
One interesting thing to note is the high frequency compression at 7.5ips if you push beyond 0db at relatively audible frequencies, and at >10KHz at 15ips. That can tone down high frequency peaks which can be pleasant and contribute to a "warm" sound.

Interesting article by Richard Hess on tape degradation and preservation. It's from 2008, so some comments
More to discover