Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I stopped using my smartphone for about 1 year now and bought a walkman fiio cp13, it is really cool, but it is really hard to make a good sounding cassette, particularly if you dont know what you are doing (like me).

I record stuff from youtube and make mix tapes.

I am experimenting with "not getting what I want the second I want it", e.g. "I want to listen to XYZ", 1 second later I click on spotify and its done. Now I have to wait, first XYZ might not be on the cassette I have with me, or it might be 5 songs later, and I dont want to waste battery rewinding, sometimes I rewind with the pencil if I am really desperate.

But the feeling of excitement when the song you wanted comes up is really nice :)

Some people recommend the `rewind` player instead of cp13, as it also has bluetooth.

We have forgotten how `not to get things NOW`. It took me a while to get used to it. There has to be some minimal amount of effort for a `thing`, when you go below it, it just becomes nothing. Maybe thats just me.





The GTA games (yes, those ones) have pre-recorded radio stations that I found to be perfect for cassettes. You play songs with no way to skip them with funny commentary in between so it feels like one long take (like Pink Floyd’s DSOTM)

Are you tired of dad?

Dad, no one wants to hear your stupid Vietnam stories.

Are you tired of mom?

Hi angel, do you want to read a book or go outside?

No.

Degenatron!The arcade comes to your living room, only without the creepy guys offering to show you puppies.


How do you like to enjoy a Rusty Brown’s Ring Donut?

Instant, infinite choice = permanent anxiety. The most relaxed I've been in decades was being stuck in an airport overnight, with a broken phone, and a book that was not as good as the show. No where to go, no one expecting anything from me, no notifications, no choice, no anxiety. Finite is fine by me.

> but it is really hard to make a good sounding cassette

It is unfortunate that cassettes are the lowest fidelity consumer medium (of modern times). But there is some room to optimize within that space. If you are curious:

The cassettes available today are Type I, Type II ("high bias") and Type IV ("metal"), each being higher fidelity than the last, but not all portable players supported these types of tape.

Dolby B/C noise reduction could improve the dynamic range of tapes a bit, but again not all portable players supported this.

The ultimate was "dbx", which dramatically improved noise reduction and dynamic range ("tape hiss" was essentially inaudible), but now you're in the territory of needing dedicated rack-mount equipment to record and play your tapes.

My dad was a bit of an audio buff, so I got to experience these things as a kid.

Edit: according to gemini AI:

* Type I had a dynamic range of about 50bB (roughly 8 bits)

* High quality tape with Dolby B, C and dbx yielded roughly 65, 75, and 85dB SNR (about 11, 12.5, and 14 bits)

So you could get pretty close to CD quality, but not quite.


>Edit: according to gemini AI:

>* Type I had a dynamic range of about 50bB (roughly 8 bits)

>* High quality tape with Dolby B, C and dbx yielded roughly 65, 75, and 85dB SNR (about 11, 12.5, and 14 bits)

>So you could get pretty close to CD quality, but not quite.

Source? AI content without it is less than worthless.


Did you actually try any searches? Or is this just an excuse to broadcast your feelings about AI?

The author of the Ogg format claims a bit more pessimistic range of bit depth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM

Here are some measurements of type I, II and IV:

http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Measurements/HD3_v...

http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Measurements/HD3_v...

http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Measurements/HD3_v...

Here are the specifications of a typical dbx unit: https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/dbx/222.shtml


The measurements you are linking to are showing the level of distortion (HD3 v level) not dynamic range! The Y-axis on the graphs is showing the 3rd harmonic in dB in relation to the mV given in on the x-axis. This has absolutely nothing to do with dynamic range and it is also not the signal-to-noise-ratio. The fundamental frequency in those measurements was at 315 Hz. HD3 refers to Harmonic Distortion at 3rd level.

My bad. This Wikipedia article has a table of SNR values for 13 different kinds of tape: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Cassette_tape_types_an...

It's just annoying to post unverifiable numbers without a credible source and expect others to do the hard work of verifying it (or just take you at face value, probably). It has nothing to do with AI except insofar as your own feelings on AI convinced you this is a reasonable method of communication.

Recording with Dolby-B on a Sony consumer level integrated Hi-Fi produced pretty solid sounding cassettes back in the day, given you have used TDK's chrome or metal blanks.

Some gotchas:

    - Loudness wars were just beginning.
    - Many CDs had some analog stages in its recording/mastering stages, so none of them was sounding "razor sharp" anyway. 
Yesterday, I have listened Depeche Mode's Best of album on an Mechen M-30 with a good but not exquisite pair of Philips neck headphones, encoded as FLAC, and it sound superbly enjoyable. While I love vinyl, no, I won't return back to cassette (even though I have a nice deck), thank you.

I just produced an album release on Type I cassette. High quality Type I (ferro oxid) is almost comparable to Type II, but you need the correct bias settings while recording. Practically the 8bits/50db is non-sense. Really. Maybe on a very bad tape deck you have a signal-noise-ratio of 8bit from silence to the first noticeable noise? But the actual music you are playing has much more dynamic range possibilities. Tbh my recordings on tape sound more dynamic then on Spotify.

Do keep in mind 96 dB is only the theoretical dynamic range of the CD medium, 99% of recordings utilize way less. (Besides, you'd be in pain if you cranked up the volume until you had 96dB of range above your hearing threshold, anyway)

CDs also eliminate wow & flutter (which ought to be pretty much inaudible on a decent deck, probably less so on an el cheapo grande walkman), which probably does more for (experienced) audio quality than high dynamic range.

Oh, and better high frequency response, for the young ones. :D


> The cassettes available today are Type I, Type II ("high bias") and Type IV ("metal")

That statement feels a litle misleading. The only type of cassettes produced today is Type I.

Everything else is new old stock, where you might end up with a decades-old, chemically degraded cassette.


> decades-old, chemically degraded cassette

Somehow it never occurred to me. I wonder how all the C64 games in the basement are doing...


About 5 years ago or so I was able to collect my Dad's C64 collection from my Mom's house, buy some new cables and an official C64 monitor off of eBay, and gift him his old computer back for Christmas.

I can't speak to cassettes, we had only cartridges and floppies. My Dad was a prolific pirate, so cases and cases of floppies. I'd say roughly 3 out of 5 worked, and we were able to boot the old game up. Karateka, 4th and Inches, Hat Trick, Bubble Bobble, Impossible Mission...

I was surprised the C64 worked, honestly. It had been stored for nearly a decade in an old Barn next to decrepit plow/cattle equipment from the early 1900's, not protected from the environment at all, just an old cardboard box literally busting at the seams. At least it wasn't on the ground.


I have sealed TDK MA-XG in mint condition. Stored in a dry, dark place. Do you say that they are degraded now?

Your metal tape might be fine if stored well. Chances are you're never going to unseal it anyway.

There are, however, reports of degraded batches of the TDK SA series [0] and other brands.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky-shed_syndrome


I wish the comeback was minidisc. I was just the right age to think this was the future of portable music.

Mostly because I could record radio, other cds and cassettes onto them.


I had a 4 track mini disc recorder, and dreams of becoming the go-to "audio engineer" for all the bands in my school :)

It's less about fidelity, more about portability and customizability.

Today we can hear all the hifi we want, it's a trip to see what the imagination can fill in as well.

If you're really into walkmans, check out the Panasonic ultra small ranges.


The point about fidelity/quality is moot anyway when most people are listening to overcompressed[1] music on crappy bluetooth speakers and/or in a noisy environment.

[1] as in dynamic range compression, not encoding


Some decade, bluetooth will get there.

While it's improved a great deal, there remains a gap.

Noise cancellation is getting pretty good.


It is not necessarily a protocol/technology issue, more a cultural one. Most people are just not looking at quality first and will buy whatever is cheap, loud and has the form factor they want. Music is so compressed nowadays that they don't even hear a difference between crappy and better quality speakers.

Very plausible. Until they hear the same song much clearer and wonder what the difference was, as long as they enjoy music :)

Chances are you're not listening to it in an environment that's quiet enough for 65dB SNR to be even noticeable.

> Type IV

also they are 20$ per cassette :)


Wow! And Type I are about $2.80 on amazon. That's quite the span!

Type IV cassettes were always exorbitantly expensive both due to high cost and low demand (and rarity of the hardware which can record them well).

So, if you were able to afford a Nakamichi / Technics / Akai, then you'd be able to afford them back in the day.


Type IV (also known as Metal) cassettes came in stunning industrial designs – BASF, TDK, Maxell etc.

They were worth owing even if a Nakamichi was out of reach.


Yeah, I didn't argue otherwise. What I was trying to say is, you tend to be not bothered by the price tag if you can pay for a good deck.

I used to have a couple metal cassettes back in the day.


> It is unfortunate that cassettes are the lowest fidelity consumer medium

So what? The quality of music and enjoyment of it isn't depending on fidelity. I have Adam A7X monitors I mostly use day-to-day, but when I listen to lo-fi, I change the output to the output of my monitor which are absolutely horrible, but fits the mood better.


>The quality of music and enjoyment of it isn't depending on fidelity

It depends somewhat on personal preference, but also on genre. Classical music often has very high dynamic range, so analog recordings can have obnoxiously loud hiss in the quiet sections. This is probably a big reason why classical music labels were early adopters of digital recording, and why classical recordings often have a SPARS code [0] prominently displayed. Classical music was also much less affected by the loudness war, removing one incentive for buying on vinyl. You rarely see any preference for analog among classical listeners.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARS_code


>but it is really hard to make a good sounding cassette, particularly if you dont know what you are doing (like me).

All these modern cassette players use the same super basic mechanism. To make a good sounding tape you would need vintage hardware with Dolby noise reduction and less wow/flutter.


Yeah, with high-end vintage decks in good shape, tapes can sound pretty decent, more than enough for day-to-day listening.

A type I tape recorded on a modern player? It'll sound horrible.


There appear to be much higher quality sounding cassettes as well, made by companies like Sony.

Also, the phrase demotape for an up and coming musician to my recollection was often with a cassette tape due to it's accessibility.


> Now I have to wait, first XYZ might not be on the cassette I have with me,

> There has to be some minimal amount of effort for a `thing`, when you go below it, it just becomes nothing.

I had this conversation with someone at the weekend. It's hard to find new music on Spotify because it's too easy to find stuff you already like.

I'm in my early 50s. I grew up in the 80s, in a fairly rural part of the UK with basically one music shop nearby and the next nearest a good four hours each way on the bus.

In 1988 when I was 15, a load of awesome albums came out that I really wanted and mostly couldn't afford. I bought Public Enemy - Fear of a Black Planet, Iron Maiden - Seventh Son, 808 State - Newbuild, and probably a couple of others. I'm sure I got into FLA and and The Pixies round about then too.

These tapes were about a tenner each and I had to repair quite a lot of Amstrad satellite receiver power supplies in my weekend job, and if I spent it all on tapes I'd have no money left for beer.

An awful lot of my tapes were pirate copies from friends, which we swapped at school. To this day I'm convinced that Appetite For Destruction was mixed to sound "right" when copied onto a battered old TDK D90 that's been rattling around in your schoolbag for a month by your mate's big brother who bought the CD because he's got a good job earning nearly £5/hr working on a fishing boat and has a really nice stereo.

The upshot of this is that I listened to a lot of things that I simply did not like very much, because it was new and I hadn't listened to it a million times. That being said, I don't think there was much I heard and thought "yeah I don't care for this at all", but there were definitely tapes I listened to that I wouldn't have picked out by myself.

I wouldn't have listened to 10,000 Maniacs if someone my dad worked with hadn't put it on in the car, and gave me his copy of the tape. I might not have listened to Dire Straits so much if another of my dad's friends hadn't given me a handful of bootlegs of their concerts and a copy of Making Movies, and one of the bigger kids in high school (hi Aaron, hope you're doing well) hadn't given me a pirate copy of Brothers in Arms.

I've since bought all of these on at least one other format.

I wouldn't have listened to Suzanne Vega I don't think, if my aunt hadn't given me a copy of her eponymous first album for Christmas when I was about 12 or 13 (it hadn't been out long in the UK), and I absolutely love Suzanne Vega. Loved her stuff from the first note of "Cracking". Have you ever listened to or watched something that you wanted to play at ten times speed just so you could put it into your head faster, then play it again at one tenth speed so you could pick up all the details?

This doesn't even touch on mixtapes, where someone else puts the effort in to curate a collection of things they think you will like, that represents who you are to them. Mixtapes were beautiful.

Now, with any luck, people will get into media they can hold in their hand. Even just things like MP3s on an SD card in some homebrew Arduino blob of a player.

There's more to music than just the noise it makes.


Also, if you bought an album, that meant getting some tracks you liked, and some you did not. Oddly enough I bought Suzanne Vega's self-titled album with 'Cracked' on it (off a guy in a stall off Brick Lane, only a fiver), and some of them are fantastic some slightly less so. Some albums I own I turn off one or two of the tracks as they are rubbish, but that was slightly more difficult if you had to fast-forward past them on a tape.

That said I listen to a lot of music on youtube, and it's a rare case where the dreaded 'algorithm' actually works to recommend things I had not heard before. I'm pretty sure that's where I learned of Unkle (UNKLE?) - who I _should_ have heard back in the day, but somehow never did.

(Incidentally, I found 'Daughter' recently, a UK band that is similar in tone to Suzanne Vega. Possibly also Heather Nova, although a bit more dreamy.)


> UNKLE

I was a huge DJ Shadow fan as a teen, getting as many albums, mixes and singles as I could find online.

DJ Shadow was involved in the production of UNKLE's first album Psyence Fiction. I recently discovered that there was an intro mix that wasn't on most CD copies of the album that has DJ Shadow mashing ~70 tracks together in just over 2 minutes.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=oRwnUM10mf4


>Psyence Fiction

Its kinda crazy, I loved that album in the 2000's, but hadn't really listened to it in about a decade until youtube brought it up again recently.


I'm looking at cassettes that way as well, a physical limitation to avoid instant gratification and to take my time.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: