[Dixielandjazz] Cassette vs. open-reel quality

[Stan Brager]

All you state is true, Bud. The major problem for me was that tape was
subject to stretching, the movement over the tape head damaged the heads as
well as the tape, and Dolby compression meant that some sound information
was lost. On the other hand, for most people in most applications, tape met
their sound requirements.

Initially, CD recordings met and exceeded the needs of most people. Later
advances in digital processing techniques improved sound quality to the
point where imperfections in the sound reproduction equipment, especially
speakers, are now the limiting factors (not to mention our ears).

Still, I continue to be impressed with the abilities of some sound engineers
to be able to extract hitherto "lost" sound from the grooves recorded from
the dawn of the recording age through the early 40s. I'm referring to the
engineers at Archeophone, John R. T. Davies, Björn Almstedt, Dave Bennett,
and others.

Stan
Stan Brager 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roy (Bud) Taylor [mailto:budtuba at gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2010 10:44 AM
> To: Dick Baker; dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
> Cc: Dixieland Jazz Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Dixielandjazz] Cassettte vs. open-reel quality
> 
> The bigger issue is the tape hiss problem.  The slower speed cassette
> tape
> speed will generate more than the reel to reel. Reel to Reel ran faster
> and
> had wider tape so had more sound signal making tape hiss less.  Also,
> Dolby
> compression helps a lot, so look for that I you are buying a reel to
> reel
> tape recorder.  Dolby compression may also be available online to
> process
> recordings after transfer to digital.  I don't think the tape head
> technology ever reached 20,000 Hz for home units, but that is far more
> than
> the human ear can hear and not a real issue.
> 
> --
> Roy (Bud) Taylor
> Smugtown Stompers Jazz Band
> Traditional Jazz since 1958
> "we ain't just whistling dixie!"