AudioBanter.com - View Single Post - Are modern recordings so bad that they would sound the same if recorded on a cassette?

S888Wheel wrote:
From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 5/4/2004 12:57 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel wrote:
From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 5/4/2004 12:16 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

dave weil wrote:
On Tue, 4 May 2004 10:26:35 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

If I was trying for exceptional quality, I would have used one of
the Tascam pro decks or one of the HX decks at my disposal. I'd
tune bias and playback azimuth for the specific cassette which
would be recorded and played on the same deck as quickly as I
could rewind the tape.. I'd also post-process the recording in
the digital domain in ways that would bring perceived sound
quality pretty close to that of a DAT recorder. But I didn't do
that because the claim that I was addressing hinged on the fact
that cassette has poor performance.

This seems weird to me. If you're trying to prove that a format is
mediocre by using a mediocre player and procedure, then what's the
point? Why even bother?

Because I'm not trying to prove that the cassette medium is poor.
That was a given in them minds of the people who were being
critical of modern recordings.

Try reading the thread title. It's firat and foremost about how
mediocre modern recordings are perceived to be.

The origional claim was that modern recordings are so mediocre that
being re-recorded on a poor medium like cassette would not further
audibly degrade them.

Please re-read the OP. It's all there!

Well, I guess the next step in your investigation is to ask the
person or persons making the claim if this was what was meant by an
average cassette recording and then ask this person or those persons
what recordings meet the qualifications of poorness and then get a
copy or copies of said recording or recordings and copy it or them
on to cassette and do your DBTs. Then you can tell that person or
those persons whether or not they were right. It seems like a lot
of work to deal with such an odd and rare claim though.

Been there done that.

Well why didn't you say so? What recordings were cited and what were
the results of the tests?

In the conference where the claim comes up fairly frequently, there
was no confusion.

I don't think it is fair to assume the people at RAO know what goes
on there though. We can only go by what you say on this one.

Just another example of RAO flamers and trolls reading the post they
wanted to see, not the post that was posted.

I'm sure you can clear the air on this one if you fill us in on the
tests that used specific cited recordings. What were the recordings
and what were the results of your comparisons?

The orignal recordings were a test file that is on the Rec.audio.pro CD set
#5, last CD last track.
http://www.recaudiopro.net/rapcds/index.htm