| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1115158863k@trad... In article writes: Umm, those items are not durable goods. A 20 year old loaf of bread isn't worth anything to anybody. Not even on eBay? Only if it sprouting mold in the form of a religious icon. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
|
Joe Sensor wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: My hope is that with the drop in the dollar, the US manufacturers will actually be able to compete in the broadcast-grade tape marketplace. Funny thing, we rent both tapes and DVD's at the video store. We get unplayable DVD's all the time, but rarely a problem with the tapes. Agreed as to the situation with DVDs. It's almost like Blockbluster doesn't know about water. IME unplayable DVDs are pretty easy to recover, if your house has running water and you know how to use it with a little soap. Try that with tapes! |
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
I totally agree with what you're saying. You're talking about buying
smart. Buying quality used gear that holds it's value. The original question was talking about buying recording gear...more specifically open reel tape decks as an investment. That's what's crazy. What you do is on the money...you buy used...get a better price on gear than new. Use it...make money on it...then, down the road can sell it for what you paid or maybe even a bit more. I do that ALL the time, but I'd hardly call it an investment strategy. later, m |
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote:
IME unplayable DVDs are pretty easy to recover, if your house has running water and you know how to use it with a little soap. Try that with tapes! You must have some pretty hard water...stuff that can buff out scratches and return data to it's organic state is pretty rare. PapaNate |
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
Papanate wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote: IME unplayable DVDs are pretty easy to recover, if your house has running water and you know how to use it with a little soap. Try that with tapes! You must have some pretty hard water...stuff that can buff out scratches and return data to it's organic state is pretty rare. Arny knows his 0's and 1's. If any are missing, he just fills them in with a green marker.  |
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
analog tape is going the way of the caribou. every year, less machines alive, less machines used, less hours used, less tape used. why invest in a standard that is dying? Assuming this is not just a troll, here are several reasons: * Because no-one has settled on a replacement format Digital has gone through 32khz, 44, 48, 64, 88, 96, 192 in increasing bit depths and this shows no sign of abating. It seems likely that linear PCM could be replaced in general use by some other coding format, perhaps just floating-point PCM, but also PWM or perhaps some other format entirely. In most cases, conversion will introduce artifacts. Since digital formats are continually dying, one could perfectly well ask the same question.. why invest in a dying standard? * Because analogue stability is a known factor Stability of the physical media is more of a known issue on analogue than any digital format bar tape, and digital tape seems to be on its way out too. Analogue tape has its own problems of course, but there are known fixes for that, and analogue degrades gracefully. Digital tends to be either wholly readable, corrupted or gone depending on the extent of the damage, how compressed it is, and how much error-correction is used. I'm not saying that analogue is the be-all-and-end-all for archiving, but you must accept that analogue archiving is better understood. IMHO if you truly care about something, you should archive it in as many different forms as you can, analogue included. (Tape was supposed to be dead for data backup to. That was over 10 years ago. It still isn't.) * Because analogue tape is close-to-the-metal In 30 years time, given suitable engineering skills you could MAKE a tape deck from scratch. Try to make a DVD-type machine from basic principles 30 years from now when the standards are lost and forgotten, or the information has been deliberately destroyed/suppressed through Palladium or some similar DRM system. First you'd have to design a way to track a disk using a laser of the right wavelength, and get the reflectivity levels. You won't immediately know if you've got it right either since the raw binary data will have to go through several subsequent processes before we can learn if we're decoding the data correctly at the physical level. You'll probably have to reconstruct the data from some kind of lookup table as well, if it works anything like CD coding. Don't know what's supposed to be in the lookup table? Uhh... Next, you'll have to decode the filesystem, some obsolete standard from over 50 years ago. Oh, and the files will be encrypted. Don't know what the (trade-secret/DMCA-protected) key is? Uhh... Okay, so we've managed to discover the physical coding scheme, reverse-engineered the filesystem, decrypted the data (probably illegally), how do we get at the audio data? We have to run it through a proprietary CODEC of some description which could use anything from DCT to wavelets to god-knows-what. Then you'll have to convert the actual raw PCM data to whatever digital audio format you need to output as. Or, you could build a machine that pulls tape across a pair of wire coils at 15 inches a second and amplifies the induced current up to audio level. (And then imposes some equalisation curve upon it) * No DRM There have been attempts by the US government to outlaw most existing digital recording systems and replace them with a copy-protected system which will be rather.. inconvenient.. for recording studios and the like). So far, this has failed, but analogue won't have that problem unless ADCs and DACs are outlawed, in which case nothing matters anymore anyway. [danger: the following links will take you on a paranoia trip!] http://www.uniquehardware.ca/article...article1.1.php http://www.eff.org/endangered/list.php#converters * Because it's fun I decided to use analogue tape because it's different to computer-based editing. I think it's more fun. Obviously, people will have a different opinions and agendas. Someone who records for their own entertainment will have different constraints than someone who works with audio for a living. I also had a feeling that it was declining, and I decided that I wanted to try my hand at it while it was still possible. my guess is that the decline-in-use curve would look something like y=1/x. eventually 12 years from now it will be riding real low near zero for the few kooks who are hanging on and the occasional remastering of an old rock album into the latest digital standard. The same thing was said about valves, too. Now what do we have? Stupid, stupid prices for valve amps.. kits alone for 650 pounds! Korg, putting high-voltage valve circuitry into digital synthesizers. My dad almost choked when he saw THAT advert. There was also a time when you could pick up a Minimoog, or a Prophet or an Oberheim for practically nothing. God, I wish I had. It may be that tape is headed for the dustcart, but I hope not because I feel that people who want to use it, or are just looking for a different way of doing things should be allowed the choice. Pick the best tool for the job. Cheers, -- JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- Fun things to do with the Ultima games http://www.it-he.org Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB---- uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976) |
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yeah, it's a good thing that analog tape "standardized" so quickly as
well in its lifecycle. (sarcasm) 1/4" mono 1/4" stereo 1/2" stereo 1/2" 4 track 1/2" 8 track 1" 8 track 1" 16 track 2" 16 track 2" 24 track I know I missed a few, but you get the idea..... later, m |
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... .. Nahh, most unplayable DVDs seen here are covered with big greasy fingerprints. Especially the porno ones ! geoff |
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Geoff Wood" wrote in message
... "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... . Nahh, most unplayable DVDs seen here are covered with big greasy fingerprints. Especially the porno ones ! geoff Umm.... That's not grease. -- Dave Martin DMA, Inc Nashville, TN |
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
Yeah, it's a good thing that analog tape "standardized" so quickly as well in its lifecycle. (sarcasm) 1/4" mono 1/4" stereo 1/2" stereo 1/2" 4 track 1/2" 8 track 1" 8 track 1" 16 track 2" 16 track 2" 24 track Not to mention: All the different equalization standards: NAB, IEC, AES Calibration for different brands of tape (admittedly only a recording issue) Dolby, DBX -- Anahata -+- http://www.treewind.co.uk Home: 01638 720444 Mob: 07976 263827 |
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
LOL....
|
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
"J. P. Morris" wrote in message ... wrote: analog tape is going the way of the caribou. every year, less machines alive, less machines used, less hours used, less tape used. why invest in a standard that is dying? Assuming this is not just a troll, here are several reasons: Nominated for Troll Response of the month. |
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article znr1115245369k@trad, Mike Rivers wrote:
It's deader than it is for audio. It's not uncommon for a facility that no longer has the capability to read backup tapes that they've stored. I understand that the IRS is in this position (for some tapes anyway) but that might just be a good Internet story. With analog tape, you just need a tape deck of the right size, speed, and track format and interfacing it to the real world is easy. With a digital data tape, not only do you need the tape drive, but the proper hardware interface for the drive, drivers, and a way to decode what comes off the tape. Anyone remember EBCDIC? (or for sure even how to spell it?) Sort of, but the problem is that tape formats have changed dozens of times in the past 30 years. Tape is still very much alive, but now it is SDLT tape with drives that can't read that 556 bpi 7-track BCD tape from your IBM 1130. I will say, though, that 9-track tape does seem to be the best archiving format around today for data. And THAT is scary. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
|
anahata wrote:
wrote: Yeah, it's a good thing that analog tape "standardized" so quickly as well in its lifecycle. (sarcasm) 1/4" mono 1/4" stereo 1/2" stereo 1/2" 4 track 1/2" 8 track 1" 8 track 1" 16 track 2" 16 track 2" 24 track Not to mention: All the different equalization standards: NAB, IEC, AES Calibration for different brands of tape (admittedly only a recording issue) Dolby, DBX Touche. -- JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- Fun things to do with the Ultima games http://www.it-he.org Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB---- uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976) |
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article znr1115245369k@trad, Mike Rivers wrote: Sort of, but the problem is that tape formats have changed dozens of times in the past 30 years. Tape is still very much alive, but now it is SDLT tape with drives that can't read that 556 bpi 7-track BCD tape from your IBM 1130. I will say, though, that 9-track tape does seem to be the best archiving format around today for data. And THAT is scary. I read a fascinating post in a 9-track mailing list a while back, I think the post was in March last year. One of the posters advocated using EMTEC 911 in his 9-track drives, and one of the other guys went totally mental. Found it: http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/...ch/038001.html Since then I've often wondered if Quantegy 467 would work. Any ideas? (Not that I have a 9-track to feed, or anything) --scott -- JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- Fun things to do with the Ultima games http://www.it-he.org Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB---- uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976) |
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
J. P. Morris wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: In article znr1115245369k@trad, Mike Rivers wrote: Sort of, but the problem is that tape formats have changed dozens of times in the past 30 years. Tape is still very much alive, but now it is SDLT tape with drives that can't read that 556 bpi 7-track BCD tape from your IBM 1130. I will say, though, that 9-track tape does seem to be the best archiving format around today for data. And THAT is scary. I read a fascinating post in a 9-track mailing list a while back, I think the post was in March last year. One of the posters advocated using EMTEC 911 in his 9-track drives, and one of the other guys went totally mental. Found it: http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/...ch/038001.html Since then I've often wondered if Quantegy 467 would work. Any ideas? (Not that I have a 9-track to feed, or anything) I used 456 once, and it was okay at 1600 bpi but didn't work at 6250. The digital tape is intended to operate in saturation mode.... the early 800 bpi tapes were not really any different than cheap red oxide audio tape, but the NRZI stuff brought in tapes with finer grain structure that were intended to saturate and give a nice square wave. What is more fun is doing the opposite and using 1/2" computer tape on an audio deck. It sort of biases up on an ATR-100, but when you actually try it, the bias sounds way off and it distorts very weirdly. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scott Dorsey wrote:
J. P. Morris wrote: Found it: http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/...ch/038001.html Since then I've often wondered if Quantegy 467 would work. Any ideas? (Not that I have a 9-track to feed, or anything) I used 456 once, and it was okay at 1600 bpi but didn't work at 6250. The digital tape is intended to operate in saturation mode.... the early 800 bpi tapes were not really any different than cheap red oxide audio tape, but the NRZI stuff brought in tapes with finer grain structure that were intended to saturate and give a nice square wave. Yes, I can well imagine. 467 is digital tape though, it appears to be the same formula used in DAT cassettes but also available on 1/2" reels for DASH or ProDigi. I don't know how fast the tape runs in 9-track drives, but I would imagine it shouldn't be too much of a problem if the tape can be used in DAT machines which are helical-scan, IIRC. OTOH I can't imagine the 9-track people didn't try it.. What is more fun is doing the opposite and using 1/2" computer tape on an audio deck. It sort of biases up on an ATR-100, but when you actually try it, the bias sounds way off and it distorts very weirdly. --scott -- JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- Fun things to do with the Ultima games http://www.it-he.org Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB---- uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976) |
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
|
J. P. Morris wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: J. P. Morris wrote: Found it: http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/...ch/038001.html Since then I've often wondered if Quantegy 467 would work. Any ideas? (Not that I have a 9-track to feed, or anything) I used 456 once, and it was okay at 1600 bpi but didn't work at 6250. The digital tape is intended to operate in saturation mode.... the early 800 bpi tapes were not really any different than cheap red oxide audio tape, but the NRZI stuff brought in tapes with finer grain structure that were intended to saturate and give a nice square wave. Yes, I can well imagine. 467 is digital tape though, it appears to be the same formula used in DAT cassettes but also available on 1/2" reels for DASH or ProDigi. Right. I think that's a metal particle tape, so it will take a _lot_ more field to magnetize it than a ferrous oxide tape. I don't think a 9-track drive will like that at all. But, I bet if you could write it, the 9-track drive could read it back. I don't know how fast the tape runs in 9-track drives, but I would imagine it shouldn't be too much of a problem if the tape can be used in DAT machines which are helical-scan, IIRC. Depends. It can run really slowly on an incremental drive, and it can run really fast on a high-speed streaming drive. We have a Kennedy where the speed can be altered in software, which can be very handy for dealing with tape kinks and other tape damage. Now, if I can figure out how to deal with CDC Cyber display code (and the wacky CDC dump format), I will be good to go. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#61
|
|||
|
|||
|
Merkan wrote: Would it make any sense to buy a high quality analog open reel machine, new or used, as an investment? Will they increase or decrease in value? This one seems pricey. http://www.tascam.com/Products/BR-20/BR-20.html If not open reel, is there any analog audio equipment still available new that will be in demand at a good price after manufacturing stops? Thanks, Merkan As an investment, no. As a collectable, yes. To record new music, I'd say no. To savor and play with, sure. Some of those machines do wonderful things to sound, and they're a joy to own. And in the future, SOMEBODY will want that machine, if you keep it in good shape. Fresh tape will be hard to come by. There is nothing I love more than pulling out my old home multitracks and playing them on a Teac 2340/3340 or a Fostex model 80. Ditto for 4-track cassettes on a Yamaha MT1000 and ADATs on an Alesis. Or stereo mixes on an Otari MX-5050. And with digital technology, I can dub or mix old stuff to CDs, DATs, computers, etc. |
|
#62
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#63
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| on topic: we need a rec.audio.pro.ot newsgroup! | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
