This thread is a consequence of my nostalgia for what I still consider one of the best and simplest to use of audio equiqment: the cassette recorder and its sibling the radio cassette recorder.
Sadly, technology has taken from users their ability to record audio to a very high quality with simple and easy to access electronics these days are no longer in production. I will not go into the merits and the reasons why modern audio equipment lacks the ability of recording.
Progress has taken away the simplicity of cassette recorders and replaced it with complex digital systems which are mostly not accessible to the home user. For instance, how would anyone record audio without expensive equipment but with the same quality that was offered by humble cassette recorders?
A press of A SINGLE BUTTON was enough.
Sadly, technology has taken from users their ability to record audio to a very high quality with simple and easy to access electronics these days are no longer in production. I will not go into the merits and the reasons why modern audio equipment lacks the ability of recording.
Progress has taken away the simplicity of cassette recorders and replaced it with complex digital systems which are mostly not accessible to the home user. For instance, how would anyone record audio without expensive equipment but with the same quality that was offered by humble cassette recorders?
A press of A SINGLE BUTTON was enough.
Didn't you have to press 'record' then 'play' to initiate the recording process? 
If you think about it, recording to tape would be seem a complicated process to today's consumers, as this 'instructables' illustrates:
How to Record Cassette Tapes : 7 Steps - Instructables
If you think about it, recording to tape would be seem a complicated process to today's consumers, as this 'instructables' illustrates:
How to Record Cassette Tapes : 7 Steps - Instructables
Then, it is not an 'instructible', but a 'confusetible'.Galu said:
To properly and justly compare, one has to consider how today recording to the same quality is done. Is it simpler? Is the required equipment costlier?
I remember once I recorded the transcript of a short play I wrote for one of my classes when I still worked as a maths teacher. The clarity and quality was enough for the recorded script to be played on a large public address system for the whole school. The quality was indistinguishable from a professionally recorded script.
Is it possible to get the same results these blessed days with modern technology that is commonly available at homes?
I know what you mean - how easy was it to make a mixtape from your LP tracks!
Cassette recorder facilities did vary, however.
My Panasonic radio cassette recorder only records from its built in microphones or from its built in radio. There's no provision to record from an external line source, making it of limited use to me in the recording stakes.
My Goodmans cheapo twin cassette deck does has the provision to record from an external line source. It has no provision to record from microphones though, unlike my long lost JVC cassette deck.
Cassette recorder facilities did vary, however.
My Panasonic radio cassette recorder only records from its built in microphones or from its built in radio. There's no provision to record from an external line source, making it of limited use to me in the recording stakes.
My Goodmans cheapo twin cassette deck does has the provision to record from an external line source. It has no provision to record from microphones though, unlike my long lost JVC cassette deck.
Last edited:
IIRC, in 1970 you could get a mono cassette machine for $13 with DC bias (45dB S/N) and still a dynamic mike (150Hz-5kHz). C-60 gave a half-hour per side.
Today I have a generic Android cellphone, LG PREMIER PRO LTE (L414DL), $39.99 new but I paid $25 refurbished. "Simple?" is find app, find red button, check that numbers increment. It is more reliable (gear and user-screwup) than the old tape machine. It gives 84 *hours* of recording
. On a recent flash-session of my two dogs howling, the S/N is better than slow tape (near 66dB), and it is recording howl-harmonics to 10kHz. I'd have no shame playing over school PA. Or radio or now YouToobe.Attachments
Last edited:
Some VHS HiFi VCRs were good audio recorders; as easy to use as an audio cassette, but with audio quality comparable to CD or DAT, and 6 hours or more on a single tape.
I'm unclear just how good the audio performance of consumer mini-DV camcorders is; I know they can record at 16b/48k, but the spec pages I've looked at don't say much more. MiniDV tapes are getting harder to find (though not as rare as Hi8/Digital8), but every so often I find a pack of new sealed tapes at a thrift store.
I'm unclear just how good the audio performance of consumer mini-DV camcorders is; I know they can record at 16b/48k, but the spec pages I've looked at don't say much more. MiniDV tapes are getting harder to find (though not as rare as Hi8/Digital8), but every so often I find a pack of new sealed tapes at a thrift store.
Hi.
I record sound bytes and short events on my phone but for free music i use my sony digital recorder through an analogue input.
I am itching to get one or both of my denon decks hooked up to listen to my cassette tapes of my youth. I have a multitude of tapes that I've occasionally tried and they still have good sounds on them.
I record sound bytes and short events on my phone but for free music i use my sony digital recorder through an analogue input.
I am itching to get one or both of my denon decks hooked up to listen to my cassette tapes of my youth. I have a multitude of tapes that I've occasionally tried and they still have good sounds on them.
Zoom and others make fairly simple digital recorders, and not all cassette recorders are simple to use..
On the nostalgia front I realized that we had several hundred pre-recorded cassettes we have no means to listen to currently, so....
Witness these two that changed hands recently and will be arriving here in the next few weeks... Pioneer CT-F900 and CT-F1000.. (3 head dual capstan) The pictures are of the actual decks (minus the rack mounts unfortunately).
Somewhere on the planet there is also a 3 head Nakamichi with my name on it, model tbd...
And I own 3 modified Otari MX series R2R all in regular use.
On the nostalgia front I realized that we had several hundred pre-recorded cassettes we have no means to listen to currently, so....
Witness these two that changed hands recently and will be arriving here in the next few weeks... Pioneer CT-F900 and CT-F1000.. (3 head dual capstan) The pictures are of the actual decks (minus the rack mounts unfortunately).
Somewhere on the planet there is also a 3 head Nakamichi with my name on it, model tbd...
And I own 3 modified Otari MX series R2R all in regular use.
Attachments
Well and good, having real options to choose from is a good thing. I cannot argue against having choice. My concern is whether the quality is enough to record, for instance, a radio broadcast or a TV broadcast. These were possible with a tape recorder and the quality was good. Mobile phones cannot possibly have very good microphones and high quality signal processing as their purpose is definitely not aimed at high quality recording. With a radio cassette recorder costing around Euro 430 in 1994 I could get very high quality recordings and with the press of a single button. I could snatch a good song from the radio and record it, but these days, this is not possible. These blessed blessed days of microcontrollers, apps and digital trash, this is made not possible.
I am afraid to circumvent this limitation the costs would not even have the slightest of chances to justify the goal. You would need an AD converter, a preamplifier and an interface to a computer. You would need to write a hardware device driver, and you would need to write an application, if not also dynamic libraries, .so in Linux and .sys and .dll in Windows. Having to create hardware, to write a device driver, libraries and an application, is not an easy task that can be taken by everybody.
If the last paragraph amounts to a strawman argument, I will be more than happy. That would mean, there is a way out of this blind alley. I remember several years ago, I read that to make good recordings using a computer one could use a preamplifier to feed audio signals into a computer. The aim, was argued, was to reduce the gain that would be required from low quality sound cards. However, does it work, is it safe to inject a computer with audio signals from a preamplifier?
I am afraid to circumvent this limitation the costs would not even have the slightest of chances to justify the goal. You would need an AD converter, a preamplifier and an interface to a computer. You would need to write a hardware device driver, and you would need to write an application, if not also dynamic libraries, .so in Linux and .sys and .dll in Windows. Having to create hardware, to write a device driver, libraries and an application, is not an easy task that can be taken by everybody.
If the last paragraph amounts to a strawman argument, I will be more than happy. That would mean, there is a way out of this blind alley. I remember several years ago, I read that to make good recordings using a computer one could use a preamplifier to feed audio signals into a computer. The aim, was argued, was to reduce the gain that would be required from low quality sound cards. However, does it work, is it safe to inject a computer with audio signals from a preamplifier?
Why should citizens be refused the right to record audio just because a wealthy lobby wants everyone NOT having recording equipment?!russc said:
There is no need for this apart from economic paranoia. If people infringe upon your content rights, prosecute. There is no need of blocking technology or twisting it the way you want.
Are you sure that is the truth? There are powerful and wealthy lobbies of artists and their representatives who pressure manufacturers and governments to 'protect' their interests. One way that 'happens' to 'protect' artists' interests is to stream content to users without the possibility of capture or record. While artists are entitled to own their work, their rights should not infringe on other peoples' rights. This is being violated.russc said:
The market share was progressively killed by a progressively reduced supply. Without supply buyers don't buy and eventually lose any motivation to buy.
... and low quality that makes you reject whatever you record.
High quality digital recording is not available to the masses. What the masses are presented with are highly inferior tracks only suitable for the trash bin. Why are not audio computer peripherals supplied with a decent quality AD conversion rather than 'fit for a chat' chips?
These artists' lobby groups have too much power. I have to add, they are not the only lobby having disproportionate power over 'democratically elected' people representatives.
A Tascam DR40 for example isn't very complicated to master. Integrated mic, mic and stereo line in inputs (with phantom power if needed). Sound quality is certainly better than what the average customer had access to in the past. And it's only 150€ or so.
Edit: We are actually living in a golden age when it comes to audio recording. Online podcasting first and then video blogging have created a big market for recording equipment.
Last edited:
There are the courts for that, prosecute.russc said:
Denying people technology because of sector interests infringes on the individual's rights. This is a politically dangerous precedent. No-one should have such power to prevent thirdparty freedoms one deems the consequences of which are not in their interest. This is what is happening.
Every pc motherboard has both microphone and line-level input.
Lots of people record - digitising their vinyl collections for example.
It's not rocket science.
If you were to ask how to do this rather than going off on a rant you would get answers. There are already threads devoted to digitally recording.
