[Scott Dorsey]

jailhouserock wrote:

I already have a CD changer, single CD player, SACD/DVD-A player, and
DVD-R with HDD that can record AC-3 Dolby Digital 2.0 stereo- digital
is no big deal- analog has superior resolution

That is a stupid generalization. To say "analogue has superior resolution"
or "digital has superior resolution" without specifying anything else is
like saying "red cars are faster." It is a non sequitur.

Cassette is a cheesy dictation format that was hardly good enough for
voice applications until they added Dolby B to it. This allowed you to
trade noise floor for pumping artifacts because it was nearly impossible
to keep the alignment correct.

at 1-7/8", yes it was. At 3.75 IPS, no, it's actually pretty damn
good.

I'm sorry, but I had to actually WORK with that crap twenty years ago
when people were submitting tapes in those rotten formats. I know what
it sounds like and "damn good" is not in the ballpark.

take a listen for yourself- I just got a BIC T-3 today, it sounds
awesome at 3.75 IPS

I am terribly, terribly sorry.

Look, you post to an audio production group about some vomitous crap equipment
and people tell you it's vomitous crap. Then you get all defensive and start
talking about how great it is. If you thought it was great, why did you even
bother asking? If you didn't want to hear the answer, why did you even bother
asking? Why are you even bothering to reply?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."