iosiP wrote:

You wrote

Quote:

Here we go: no transformers, no capacitors, no big motors, full range transducers I.e., no crossovers in the earphone drivers, very lightweight transducers for lightning fast transient response, no cabling, no electronics boxes, no chassis, no house power, no ground so no ground issues, relative immunity to RFI/EMI, no room anomalies to worry Po me anymore, no thin, bass shy, tizzy synthetic CD sound due to a while raft of ills, including scattered laser light, out of round CDs, no seismic isolation, etc. etc., etc.

Now let me see:
1. A cassette deck has transformers, so it should sound worse than the walkman (FIY, a 3-motor deck requires a bigger transformer than your usual CD player).
2. A 3-motor deck has "more motor" than a CD player, so it should sound worse than the walkman.
3. Full-range transducers? For me, full range means 20Hz to 20kHz. How does an organ concert sound on the earphones, and what "dynamics" can you get from them??
4. Yes you are right about the rest but my argument still stands: if a cassette deck (with all the transformers, capacitors, motors, cabling, electronics boxes, chassis, house power, ground etc. etc., etc.) sounds better than the walkman what exactly remains valid from your arguments?

P.S. You can use the same headphones on a cassette deck (at least most of them).

There are a lot of variables when comparing these things just like in any audio comparison. You are making a lot of unfounded assumptions based on armchair theorizing. You completely forgot I am comparing ONLY a mid price Sony Walkman player with a FULLY MODDED OPPO and SET TUBE HEADPHONE AMP. And I'm using flimsy inexpensive Sony Sport Walkman earphones instead of Sennheiser HD600 headphones. You can't see the forest for the trees. If you wish to present evidence of your own how a tape deck compares to a Sony Walkman or how various tape decks compare to each other or how tape decks compare to reel to reel, or to vinyl, or any other comparison you dream up be my guest. Knock yourself out.

I realize you were probably sleeping one off but I already went into how the various audio performance characteristics of the Sony Walkman compared to the Oppo/Woo Audio rig, including the bass response. I suspect you might be suffering from the backfire effect, the more I repeat what I said in my OP on dynamics and the Sony Walkman the more I get these snarky "what about this" and "what about that" posts from you and Michael.

By the way the organ sounds fantastic on the Sony Walkan using the flimsy Sony Sport Walkman earphones. Very dynamic and low in frequency and coherent!! The quality of the bass is actually something I am pretty use you have never experienced, ever. I know what level of sound quality you have there in Romania and I don't have to see photos of your system.

Never give a sucker an even break. - Old audiophile expression.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green wrote:

Hi Geoff

I was asking so I could see how much experience you have had with tape and the sound of it. Since the topic is called "the audio code" I was trying to figure out where your posts were fitting in.

There are several levels of tape machines and tape itself, and I don't think we should be making general statements without understanding the scope of what we are talking about.

To answer the question of "me having a portable vs deck"? My answer was yes and a fairly good understanding of taping along the audio chain including being a tape runner. You asked "what does that have to do with anything". I assume you don't know what a tape runner does?

A runner controls the mastering machines and makes the copy masters. After this the masters are made into mastering slaves. The system (depending on how direct and speed and bias), is a few machines hooked up to each other pumping out the reel to reels or cassettes, or in my case those plus DAT, Beta, VHS, 8-trac (studio track), and 3/4". Every machine sounds slightly different from the next as well as every cassette does. My job was not only making the copies from start to finish but also referencing the sound quality of the tapes as they played on different take playback machines. My particular setup had several of the new models of tape machines from portables to home to car playbacks. We were an independent lab for Sony, JVC and a few others.

Your point being that you have a walkman and pro walkman now according to you, and I worked on the entire process, and feel like we need to be talking about what things really are and not making statements based on limited knowledge or doing. I notice that a lot of times guys come up here and make comments but they're not really based on much more than a couple of systems owned over the years. I ran into this a lot on the pro-side as well. I'm not sure why the pro-side and home playing side aren't closer in touch, it would save a bunch of guys throwing around guesses as if they were fact.

What I would like to see is us getting down to what really is instead of all these loosely written opinions and assumptions. There are people out there including myself who actual have done the work.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Your arguments fit in well with the definition of the famous logical fallacy, Appeal to Authority. Your knowledge of tape decks, as complete as that may be, is completely irrelevant to whether a Sony Walkman cassette player can sound better than a CD player, a Hot Rodded CD player at that. I could care less if you find my observation strange or preposterous. That's the same as Costin claiming "I'm a PhD in Information Theory so I am right in any discussion on the subject of audio or physics." See what I mean? What's next, comparing tape decks to vinyl, cassette players to reel to reel, portable CD players to portable turntables, car CD players to full range speaker systems? Do you see where I'm headed with this?

Argument from authority
Argument from authority (Latin: argumentum ab auctoritate), also authoritative argument and appeal to authority, is a common form of argument which leads to a logical fallacy when misused.[1]

In informal reasoning, the appeal to authority is a form of argument attempting to establish a statistical syllogism.[2] The appeal to authority relies on an argument of the form:[3]

A is an authority on a particular topic
A says something about that topic
A is probably correct

Fallacious examples of using the appeal include any appeal to authority used in the context of logical reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence,[2][4][5][6] as authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink. Thus, the appeal to authority is not a generally reliable argument for establishing facts.[7]. (Note especially the last sentence).

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance. ~ Old audiophile axiom

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

jgossman wrote:

geoffkait wrote:

jgossman wrote:

For it's faults, cassette is the most "immediate" and tactile format - including LP currently available. Little music is released on cassette anymore, but it is, especially if you get a good Nakamichi or Teac deck from the late 80's or 90's in most ways a superior format to CD. The one area where it is better, dynamic range, doesn't matter because no recording engineer takes advantage of it anyway. The siblance in most vocals especially.

That's precisely what they said about digital, all we need is a better mechanism, or better DAC, better, speakers, better sample rates, and all the rest of it. As Roger Miller put it so well, You Can't Roller Skate in a Buffalo Herd. A relatively cheap and relatively UN-technically advanced cassette player will kick an expensive CD player's ass any day of the week in most ways that matter. Digital was the single most obvious con job ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting naive public.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

So all the effort Sony, Nakamichi, JVC, etc. put into getting S/N ratio to levels exceeding that of most CDP's (around 89db - approaching that of the associated solid state electronics) and the effort Nakamichi put toward surpassing R2R wow and flutter numbers, which they had done on pretty much all decks by the mid 80's and were nearing unmeasurable by the 90's - that was all for naught? All that had nothing to do with the depth and width of the sound stage of say a Nakamichi LX-5 or the power and dynamics of a Tascam 122?

I'm happy you found the joy's of the "lowly" (said with a dose of irony) cassette, but this is an exercise in futility if you'd rather listen to tapes on your walkman than my old (and sold :( ) LX-5, the 480 I'm repairing, or my once mighty 581 which has unfortunately become a parts deck (it is nearly 40 years old). Or for that matter the lowly low end Sony now in my system or the Technics M7 I'm restoring.

I understand the joy of discovering something is better than it should be, but being skeptical of something that is clearly better? I don't get it.

I'm afraid you have once again had a reading comprehension fail. I am not doubting at all that some tape decks are superior to portables just as I'm not doubting some portables are superior to other portables. Let's try to keep things simple. I'm only comparing a mid price portable cassette player to a modded Oppo headphone CD system. All of your ranting about tape decks is irrelevant. however, I can certainly understand your anger and continued snarkiness. can I make a suggestion? take up your concerns regarding tape decks with someone who cares like Michael.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Hi, Micheal. You already know the answer to "why would the music industry make CD's that don't perform?" The answer is that they don't gave a damn about sound quality. You also must know that audiophiles like you and I make up a tiny fraction of music buyers. The vast majority of CD buyers have no concept about sound quality at all. And they have no interest in developing one. I was in best buy once trying to explain to a young salesman that MP3(which was all he listened to) music like shit. He looked at me like I was crazy. It wasn't that he disagreed. He wasn't intelligent enough for that.It was that he didn't have a clue what sound quality means. And he didn't care. This is where the music industry is at. Thats why LP's went away. They convinced people that CD's sound better. About the "revealing" thing. Maybe this will make sense to you. I'm nearsighted, so when I go to the health club, I might look across the gym and see a woman who looks real attractive. But when I put my glasses on and look again, I see that she isn't really attractive at all.( Sorry for the sexist example)

Michael wrote,

"actually Geoff, Costin is walking all over you."

I wouldn't say he's walking at all, more like staggering like a drunken sailor. Even his name calling ends a lot of work. He hasn't recovered from when I pointed out the audio signal was comprised of photons and still doesn't know the difference between magnetism and an electromagnetic wave. I grant you he's a likable old fart, though. By the way, I couldn't help but notice, it looks like you're completely out of ammo.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

geoffkait wrote:

I know what level of sound quality you have there in Romania and I don't have to see photos of your system.

You couldn't put Romania onj the map, so even less talk about the sound quality in this country. FYI, the latest DAC from Wadia was designed by a Romanian company and the same company programmed the digital filters in the MSB line. As for tube amps, the English branch of Audio Note is partly manufactured here, with heavy input from Romanian designers.

My system (sorry, no photos) is composed of an Esoteric UX-3Pi player/transport, Chord Electronics Indigo DAC/CPA 3000 pre/SPM 4000 power and Raidho C3.1 speakers, all wired with Siltech. And yes I have another (simpler) system in the work, consisting of a low-mass, completely separated MOS-FET power amp, passive pre and a stripped-down OPPO (with all video circuits removed and recased in Perspex/wood). Still have to find the matching speakers (that, BTW, I will transform in tunable items).

You see, dear moron, we here like to do and listen instead of just disparaging others... but this is something you cannot understand, can you?

iosiP wrote:

geoffkait wrote:

I know what level of sound quality you have there in Romania and I don't have to see photos of your system.

You couldn't put Romania onj the map, so even less talk about the sound quality in this country. FYI, the latest DAC from Wadia was designed by a Romanian company and the same company programmed the digital filters in the MSB line. As for tube amps, the English branch of Audio Note is partly manufactured here, with heavy input from Romanian designers.

My system (sorry, no photos) is composed of an Esoteric UX-3Pi player/transport, Chord Electronics Indigo DAC/CPA 3000 pre/SPM 4000 power and Raidho C3.1 speakers, all wired with Siltech. And yes I have another (simpler) system in the work, consisting of a low-mass, completely separated MOS-FET power amp, passive pre and a stripped-down OPPO (with all video circuits removed and recased in Perspex/wood). Still have to find the matching speakers (that, BTW, I will transform in tunable items).

You see, dear moron, we here like to do and listen instead of just disparaging others... but this is something you cannot understand, can you?

I just replaced my fully modded Oppo with the cheap little cassette player and cheap CD player and am glad I did. My video functions on the Oppo were always OFF. So, yes, I actually can well imagine what kind of sound quality you have there in Romania. You probably don't know it but you're a perfect candidate for a Sony Walkman cassette player. ;-)

"An ordinary man has no means of deliverance."

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

I've made a list of parts but they are hard to obtain. The power amp will be of a variable gain sort, with the gain set by a passive attenuator based on photocells (so I can electrically isolate the pre from the power). Since the photocells are not linear I have to write all settings in an EPROM, which is not simple.
Anyhow, the whole shebang will be powered by a couple of truck batteries (at +/- 48V) without any transformers. Yes an ambitious plan but still feasible... wish me good luck!

michael green wrote:

Geoff said

"I just replaced my fully modded Oppo with the cheap little cassette player and cheap CD player and am glad I did."

Just wanted to be clear that Geoff indeed did replace his reference with the Sony Walkman. So moving forward, we should note that Geoff is giving advice based on his replacement portables "and am glad I did" as his point of reference.

So as your reading Geoff putting down the listeners on this forum, I would recommend looking at his point of reference.

According to Geoff the SoundStage is not important, as you can read on several of his postings.

So Geoff's reference is a Sony Walkman, and here is his quote about that. Geoff said "can I make a suggestion? take up your concerns regarding tape decks with someone who cares like Michael"

I think as music lovers read these threads they should put things in context. That context is what you should be judging someones abilities by. For example my context is based here http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

And you describe waveforms that look like this as good sound and performances the best you've heard.

Bob Dylan, Modern Times, Thunder on the Mountain

Hat tip: http://floweringtoilet.blogspot.com/2008/07/mountain-on-thunder.html

michael green wrote:

Geoff said

"I just replaced my fully modded Oppo with the cheap little cassette player and cheap CD player and am glad I did."

Just wanted to be clear that Geoff indeed did replace his reference with the Sony Walkman. So moving forward, we should note that Geoff is giving advice based on his replacement portables "and am glad I did" as his point of reference.

So as your reading Geoff putting down the listeners on this forum, I would recommend looking at his point of reference.

According to Geoff the SoundStage is not important, as you can read on several of his postings.

So Geoff's reference is a Sony Walkman, and here is his quote about that. Geoff said "can I make a suggestion? take up your concerns regarding tape decks with someone who cares like Michael"

I think as music lovers read these threads they should put things in context. That context is what you should be judging someones abilities by. For example my context is based here http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

So sayeth the man who can't tell the difference between tape and digital. Hel-loo!

;-)

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

What are the frequency limits of the walkman? Now I am sure you cannot hear anything above 5kHz (at best) but still... if those headphones can reproduce 20Hz I'll eat a pair of them.

P.S. Better leave audiophile talkings to people who can hear!

iosiP wrote:

any decent bar has bodyguards throwing out old incontinent drunkards. But looks like this forum has no moderators...

I believe in a very light hand on the moderating tiller. In this thread, all seem to be giving ads good as they are getting and I haven't yet seen postings that are merely flames.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

iosiP wrote:

What are the frequency limits of the walkman? Now I am sure you cannot hear anything above 5kHz (at best) but still... if those headphones can reproduce 20Hz I'll eat a pair of them.

P.S. Better leave audiophile talkings to people who can hear!

From somewhere in cyberspace:

"Cassette Frequency Response
The frequency response of cassettes varies greatly depending on the quality of the equipment used to play them back. The Nakamichi CR-7A tape deck, regarded as one of the finest tape decks ever made, was able to achieve almost perfectly flat response from 20 to 20,000Hz, generally considered to be the entire range of human hearing, albeit with high-end components and high-quality metal cassette tapes. For comparison, a Sony Professional Walkman, which is a higher-quality version of the popular personal cassette player, was essentially flat from 40 to 15,000Hz. This would roll off the lowest bass frequencies and the highest frequencies generated by cymbals and their first harmonics. Lower-quality cassette tapes will have even more attenuation."

Having said all that my little sport cassette player will kick your system's ass.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

No text

michael green wrote:

Geoff said

"I just replaced my fully modded Oppo with the cheap little cassette player and cheap CD player and am glad I did."

Just wanted to be clear that Geoff indeed did replace his reference with the Sony Walkman. So moving forward, we should note that Geoff is giving advice based on his replacement portables "and am glad I did" as his point of reference.

So as your reading Geoff putting down the listeners on this forum, I would recommend looking at his point of reference.

According to Geoff the SoundStage is not important, as you can read on several of his postings.

So Geoff's reference is a Sony Walkman, and here is his quote about that. Geoff said "can I make a suggestion? take up your concerns regarding tape decks with someone who cares like Michael"

I think as music lovers read these threads they should put things in context. That context is what you should be judging someones abilities by. For example my context is based here http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Geez, I've only been saying it for more than a month, now, and you're just catching on? Of course I would replace anything if I felt the new thing was superior. Who wouldn't? It's called progress. We're going back. Back to the future! By the way, and I kind of hate to be the one to point this out, but by attacking me aren't you really attacking your own low mass system concept? Talk about shooting oneself in the foot.

You wrote,

"According to Geoff the soundstage is not important."

I never said any such thing. I'm beginning to suspect dishonesty is in your nature. And you're grasping at straws again. What I said was that soundstage is not the end all do all that you claim it is. It's not the end all do all any more than frequency response is. There are other important parameters we audiophiles like to obtain with our systems, you know, things like proper pitch, liquidity, realism, frequency response, musicality, timbre, rhythm, air (and lots of it), bass slam, blattiness, low distortion, am I missing some? Probably. Actually, truth be told, the cassette portable places the listener right where he wants to be in the soundfield. Just how you would hear the performance if you were right there. Without the congealed paper mâché sound of digital to contend with. Plus you don't have to be jumping up and down tuning everything every time you put a record on like some groundhog on crack.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Don't tell me about the Naka or the Walkman Pro, these aren't the devices you are touting to be better than the CD player (as you said, you're just comparing the Sony thingie to your modded Oppo). So what are the frequency response and THD+N of the Sony Walkman?
Now this is a clear question - please give me a clear answer!

geoffkait wrote:

iosiP wrote:

What are the frequency limits of the walkman? Now I am sure you cannot hear anything above 5kHz (at best) but still... if those headphones can reproduce 20Hz I'll eat a pair of them.

P.S. Better leave audiophile talkings to people who can hear!

From somewhere in cyberspace:

"Cassette Frequency Response
The frequency response of cassettes varies greatly depending on the quality of the equipment used to play them back. The Nakamichi CR-7A tape deck, regarded as one of the finest tape decks ever made, was able to achieve almost perfectly flat response from 20 to 20,000Hz, generally considered to be the entire range of human hearing, albeit with high-end components and high-quality metal cassette tapes. For comparison, a Sony Professional Walkman, which is a higher-quality version of the popular personal cassette player, was essentially flat from 40 to 15,000Hz. This would roll off the lowest bass frequencies and the highest frequencies generated by cymbals and their first harmonics. Lower-quality cassette tapes will have even more attenuation."

Having said all that my little sport cassette player will kick your system's ass.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Using a frequency generator (I don't have any prerecorded stuff to test these numbers, musically) I was able to record from about 15hz to just under 25khz, sine wave, on my Nakamichi 581 - dead flat using metal tapes, without increasing take up speed. If you increase motor speed, you can get even better measured response. I was able to achieve pretty flat recordings from 20 hz to about 15-20 using regular type 2 120u tapes. Of course your tapes will suck on any machine without pitch control increasing motor speed.

The point is of all the measurements we in the subjectivist world like to say DON'T matter, frequency response BEFORE distortion sets in is very important, and it's one thing that set high end cassette apart from it's contemporary digital storage. Factor in needing absolutely flat recording capabilities to 10 or 15khz for Dolby to work without adding distortion and they are especially importany. Post 20+ bit PCM is another story. MLP (DVD Audio) is especially fantastic digital.

So far as you saying that your Walkman is worlds better than said high end players when you are discussing it with a guy who has owned his share of painstakenly maintained and tuned Nakamichi's and even low end Onkyo and JVC and Technics players and on the other hand a recording professional who, I'm guessing, knows his way around a Tascam/Teac deck blind folded. Well, I don't even know how to respond to that. Even decks like the Tascams and Sony's not known for thier studio recording capabilities like the Naks are undeniably wonderful and often far better than contemporary CD players at playback.

Again, don't get me wrong, I'm glad you are enjoying it but, eh, really? Are you kidding me? And don't get me started on comparing an Arcam Alpha 7 and Diva CD72 much less the DCS Dac'd CD92 or Alpha 9 CDP to your portable disk player. You just can't be serious.

When you hear me say "Sony sucks" as I have in the past and may in the future, you have to keep in mind my frame of reference. I hate, no matter how detailed and otherwise "audiophile perfect" wide flat and plastic-y sound. And that, in my experience, is the "Sony sound". And I've never been disuaded of it. I want warmth, timbre, and realistic depth. I don't care if the soundstage extends far beyond the speakers (while it's nice if it does, while also being musically "right"). Depth and timbral accuracy is far more important that Sony "perfection".

That is all, for now. :)

iosiP wrote:

What would you listen to on those excellent cassette decks? AFAIQ there is no offer for pre-recorded cassettes (and anyhow most of the old ones were dubbed on high-speed machines with horrible results).
BTW, I am shopping for a R2R machine but this will be just for fun, to make my own selections from my CD collection (yes, I could easily do this on my computer but then there is the magic of the spinning reels).

I, being born in 1978, lived through the day when MOST of what I bought as a kid and my parents bought was on cassette. And you'd be surprised, especially when you have a Nakamichi and all it takes is a quarter turn with a screwdriver on the azimuth to dial it in, just how good those old commercial tapes are. Also I used to record allot of Jazz off radio on the 581 and the recordings are absolutely wonderful. I tried to do the same on my computer at the time and the results were dreadful.

iosiP wrote:

Don't tell me about the Naka or the Walkman Pro, these aren't the devices you are touting to be better than the CD player (as you said, you're just comparing the Sony thingie to your modded Oppo). So what are the frequency response and THD+N of the Sony Walkman?
Now this is a clear question - please give me a clear answer!

I reckon the Sport Model is most likely in worse shape than the Pro which comes in a 40-15K. I suspect you could have figured that out, but who knows for sure. Frankly who gives a crap what the frequency response is? That's kind of my whole point, really. That's why a cheap little old Sony Walkman beats an expensive set up, becaue the specs DONT MATTER. See the irony? CDs have GREAT SPECS, really really great specs, on paper. What are they, theoretically 100 times higher dynamic range than cassettes? Do you see where I'm going with this? But a cheap little cassette player kills it in most ways audiophiles care about. Musicality, air, realism, pitch to name a few.

Is that clear enough?

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

jgossman wrote:

When you hear me say "Sony sucks" as I have in the past and may in the future, you have to keep in mind my frame of reference. I hate, no matter how detailed and otherwise "audiophile perfect" wide flat and plastic-y sound. And that, in my experience, is the "Sony sound". And I've never been disuaded of it. I want warmth, timbre, and realistic depth. I don't care if the soundstage extends far beyond the speakers (while it's nice if it does, while also being musically "right"). Depth and timbral accuracy is far more important that Sony "perfection".

That is all, for now. :)

The "plastic" sound that you mention is a good way to describe a lot of stuff that bothers me as well. The quest for high resolution often leaves the texture of notes and their inner structure lean and it's far too common with many components that proclaim to be audiophile approved. Approved by who? Who are these audiophiles?

As for soundstage depth vs width. I'm in agreement there as well. To a certain degree it's a personal preference. However, much of perceived soundstaging is accomplished through reflected sound bouncing around. I'm reminded of the Bose Direct Reflecting speakers from 25 years ago. While fun for a bit, especially in conjunction with the advent of surround sound, it's an artifact created rather than on the recordings of most music.

Q Sound is another attempt at screwing around with phase shifts and reflections. For those who really place a lot of importance on the surround sound type of experience, it's usually a favorite, though only a few artists used the technique in their mastering/engineering.

jgossman wrote:

geoffkait wrote:

iosiP wrote:

What are the frequency limits of the walkman? Now I am sure you cannot hear anything above 5kHz (at best) but still... if those headphones can reproduce 20Hz I'll eat a pair of them.

P.S. Better leave audiophile talkings to people who can hear!

From somewhere in cyberspace:

"Cassette Frequency Response
The frequency response of cassettes varies greatly depending on the quality of the equipment used to play them back. The Nakamichi CR-7A tape deck, regarded as one of the finest tape decks ever made, was able to achieve almost perfectly flat response from 20 to 20,000Hz, generally considered to be the entire range of human hearing, albeit with high-end components and high-quality metal cassette tapes. For comparison, a Sony Professional Walkman, which is a higher-quality version of the popular personal cassette player, was essentially flat from 40 to 15,000Hz. This would roll off the lowest bass frequencies and the highest frequencies generated by cymbals and their first harmonics. Lower-quality cassette tapes will have even more attenuation."

Having said all that my little sport cassette player will kick your system's ass.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Using a frequency generator (I don't have any prerecorded stuff to test these numbers, musically) I was able to record from about 15hz to just under 25khz, sine wave, on my Nakamichi 581 - dead flat using metal tapes, without increasing take up speed. If you increase motor speed, you can get even better measured response. I was able to achieve pretty flat recordings from 20 hz to about 15-20 using regular type 2 120u tapes. Of course your tapes will suck on any machine without pitch control increasing motor speed.

The point is of all the measurements we in the subjectivist world like to say DON'T matter, frequency response BEFORE distortion sets in is very important, and it's one thing that set high end cassette apart from it's contemporary digital storage. Factor in needing absolutely flat recording capabilities to 10 or 15khz for Dolby to work without adding distortion and they are especially importany. Post 20+ bit PCM is another story. MLP (DVD Audio) is especially fantastic digital.

So far as you saying that your Walkman is worlds better than said high end players when you are discussing it with a guy who has owned his share of painstakenly maintained and tuned Nakamichi's and even low end Onkyo and JVC and Technics players and on the other hand a recording professional who, I'm guessing, knows his way around a Tascam/Teac deck blind folded. Well, I don't even know how to respond to that. Even decks like the Tascams and Sony's not known for thier studio recording capabilities like the Naks are undeniably wonderful and often far better than contemporary CD players at playback.

Again, don't get me wrong, I'm glad you are enjoying it but, eh, really? Are you kidding me? And don't get me started on comparing an Arcam Alpha 7 and Diva CD72 much less the DCS Dac'd CD92 or Alpha 9 CDP to your portable disk player. You just can't be serious.

I am not kidding you. As I just stated to someone else, who cares about the specs? Of course you can find plenty of examples where a high end component has great specs. Duh. I am not saying at all the Sony Sport Cassette has better specs than high end components, you silly goose. Quite the contrary. I'm saying that specs are meaningless. I'm talking only about the sound. Now do you get it?

I would also appreciate it if you didnt put words in my mouth. I did not say the Sony cassette player was world's better than high end players. What I actually said was my Sony cassette player was better in certain important respects than my modded Oppo and SET tube headphone amp set up. And guess what? None of the respects had anything to do with specs. Save the drama for your mama.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

jgossman wrote:

I, being born in 1978, lived through the day when MOST of what I bought as a kid and my parents bought was on cassette. And you'd be surprised, especially when you have a Nakamichi and all it takes is a quarter turn with a screwdriver on the azimuth to dial it in, just how good those old commercial tapes are.

I cannot disagree, however I'd lke to point out that I used to live in a commie country where prerecorded tapes were as rare as hen's teeth, so I have no way to replace mu 2000+ CD collection with the equivalent cassettes. BTW, could you do this, even in the USA? I'm asking because most modern recordings were never issued on cassette (think of all ECM or FIM nice jazz as well as others). And if you tape them from CD you miss the point of a full analog recording/mixing/mastering/distribution chain.

geoffkait wrote:

As I just stated to someone else, who cares about the specs? Of course you can find plenty of examples where a high end component has great specs. Duh. I am not saying at all the Sony Sport Cassette has better specs than high end components, you silly goose. Quite the contrary. I'm saying that specs are meaningless. I'm talking only about the sound.

Wow! The same mantra: no matter if the toy cannot reproduce anything below 50-60Hz, the organ sounds great to my ears, no matter if it cannot pull out anything above 12kHz, there is "air" in (or rather between) my ears. Geoff, I heard this crap so many times I'm tired: specs don't matter, it's how it sounds! Yes I agree: specs don't matter when talking about a power amp with 0.01% THD and one with 0.001% THD (since you cannot hear any of them) but when a thingie has a flawed frequency response and audible wow and flutter then stating it's the best you ever heard is only a matter of personal taste and you're in no position to ask others to share your option. So let's make it clear: you are enjoying a poorly measuring plastic portable... well, that's your option, just stop stating it sounds better than history-making cassette decks or top-shelf CD-based systems. Just sit down and enjoy your music, as we all do, without trying to teach others how to live their lives.

iosiP wrote:

geoffkait wrote:

As I just stated to someone else, who cares about the specs? Of course you can find plenty of examples where a high end component has great specs. Duh. I am not saying at all the Sony Sport Cassette has better specs than high end components, you silly goose. Quite the contrary. I'm saying that specs are meaningless. I'm talking only about the sound.

Wow! The same mantra: no matter if the toy cannot reproduce anything below 50-60Hz, the organ sounds great to my ears, no matter if it cannot pull out anything above 12kHz, there is "air" in (or rather between) my ears. Geoff, I heard this crap so many times I'm tired: specs don't matter, it's how it sounds! Yes I agree: specs don't matter when talking about a power amp with 0.01% THD and one with 0.001% THD (since you cannot hear any of them) but when a thingie has a flawed frequency response and audible wow and flutter then stating it's the best you ever heard is only a matter of personal taste and you're in no position to ask others to share your option. So let's make it clear: you are enjoying a poorly measuring plastic portable... well, that's your option, just stop stating it sounds better than history-making cassette decks or top-shelf CD-based systems. Just sit down and enjoy your music, as we all do, without trying to teach others how to live their lives.

I see you've been brainwashed into believing that specs are everything. Of course if it really were true that 20 to 20 KHz were the entire story then everyone with high end equipment would be enjoying 20 Hz bass performance and tons of AIR and a soundstage as big as Kansas. Unfortunately audiophiles have been conditioned to believe they are hearing air when they aren't, because they think that since the frequency response is stated as 20-20Hz they MUST have air. As for bass performance most big high end systems would be happy if they get solid 40 Hz bass. Not to mention all the other characteristics that are frequently missing in action in high end systems: coherence, detail, pitch, bloom, slam, etc. Even if the components actually perform as stated the room anomalies and all the problems I've been talking about change the outcome entirely. I suspect you cannot hear anything over 15Hz anyways. Sorry to burst your bubble.

The AIR and BASS PERFORMANCE of high end systems are destroyed, evicerated and attenuated by the very things I've been railing about lo these past four months. To whit, magnetic fields induced by transformers and wires and cables, distortion produced by wires and cables and fuses installed backwards, background scattered laser light inside the CD transport (the mods on MY Oppo addressed the magnetic fields on the large aftermarket OPPOMODS Linear Power Supply with huge toroidal transformer, EMI/RFI and vibration produced by the building structure and large toroidal transformer and transmitted to the circuit boards. I bet your Oppo mods did not address these issues. The modded Oppo is OK I suppose but not the ultimate player at all. In fact, as I've been trying to say lo these past couple of months, a ridiculously inexpensive cassette player outperforms the modded Oppo in terms of musicality, presence, and yes, even AIR and coherence of the bass. You seem to be consumed by frequency response, but there are of course, as I've also been saying all along, other performance parameters that are just as important such as coherence, resolution, presence, etc.

On cassettes one can hear the original tape hiss of the analog recording. On a CD of the same recording you cannot hear the tape hiss. That's gotta tell ya something. I know what you're thinking, CDs have better frequency response. Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynmica

michael green wrote:

Geoff, I'm right with you on the low mass. Where I'm not with you is one saying phones are better than the room when it comes to revealing the real space and size of a recording. And I'm also unfortunately not with you on the sony walkman as a high end audio reference. But that shouldn't be of any surprise, I also don't like over massed systems.

At the same time I'm enjoying reading the guys on this thread who are making adjustments. One thing that I have noticed as time goes on is the fact that once a listener hears the real size and space the audiophile hobby is changed for them. They start spending their time opening up recordings instead of only being able to listen to a piece of them.

I'm looking forward to the talking going from fixed to variable.

I am a little surprised that very few people on this thread are talking about the topic though. Knowing how to tune in the audio code is crucial to successful listening and I'm reading people talking about fixed comparisons and a little adjusting but no one talking about how to tune in the recording.

I'm seeing people talk, but waiting for someone to pickup a particular recording and say "lets listen to this" and compare soundstages. Do you guys not realize how much we would learn about each others systems and views on recording if we spent time listening together. Honestly it's almost like a fear that I see on these forums. Jgossman adjusting his tape head and Costin adjusting his drivers is as close as we have gotten to the threads topic.

Why the fear over tuning?

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

I say yes, you say no. That's what makes this hobby so interesting. If everyone had the same opinions, results, experience, there would be nothing left to talk about, no? My comparison of the Sony Walkman to the MODDED OPPO HEADPHONE SYSTEM is what it is. You can disagree with my methods, my observations, my results and my conclusions until the cows come home, mix nix to me. This is not a peer review.

Because it's what I choose to believe. - Dr. Elizabeth Shaw in the movie, Prometheus

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green wrote:

Catch says

"The "plastic" sound that you mention is a good way to describe a lot of stuff that bothers me as well." quoting Jgossman.

This is why I can't listen to these audiophile type stages. To me they sound plastic. If a stage doesn't go in an equal dispersion similar to the original mic patterns my ears tweak. If the sound is only between the speakers or only frontal I'm looking for the door, cause when I'm in the studio live room this is not the way sound works. Audiophiles make their own rules and much of the time it doesn't match the real recordings.

I guess I just don't get why people say they are in a hobby yet don't want to follow the rules of that hobby.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

++++++++++++++

I think a lot of listeners place a high degree of importance on staging and many have embraced multi-channel recordings. Kal, for instance.

JGH was an early proponent of multi-channel and very much appreciated the potential for capturing the natural reflections of the venue where the recording took place. I read Kal's stuff as someone who is carrying on what Gordon would most likely have found to be the most interesting. The fact that they both prefer classical music almost exclusively and recognize good quality recordings has always commanded my attention when they describe sound.

Attempting to recreate the stage of a live performance in an auditorium is a lot different than piecing together a heavily processed collection of electric rock performers and vocals that often times aren't even playing at the same time. The stage is created out of thin air by the mixing and engineering and so the best you can hope for is to hear what the engineer wanted you to hear that was finally created out of all the sound tracks and layering and mixing. In other words, how big the stage is will be up to the engineer. Whether or not the speakers can disappear is often up to the engineer as well.

I don't think people are afraid of tuning, as you put it, but would take you more seriously if you had any appreciation for the multitude of other important aspects of sound reproduction. When John Atkinson says Santana's Supernatural is a poor recording and you say it's fantastic...that should tell you something.

I have accumulated quite a few cassettes of the prerecorded variety by now, stop me before I Palpal again. Here are a few observations. Keep in mind what I value most of all is realism. That certain in definable something that is entertaining, relaxing and awe inspiring all at the same time. You know what I'm talking about. Even if you don't keep that in mind as I briefly list my observations regarding cassettes. Also keep on mind these observations apply to my slightly modded Sony Sport Cassette Walkman using the original Sport Walkman earphones, which are the type that fit close to the entry into the ear canal but are not inserted into the ear canal like earbuds.

Observations

1. Cassettes are generally more real sounding than CDs. Period. Thre are some CDs that approach cassettes in this regard but none reach the level of most cassettes. Of course when I say CD I'm referring to my modded Oppo and WOO Audio SET all tube headphone amp with modded Sennheiser headphones.

2. Cassettes do not, as I suppose has been imagined by a lot of folks, loose their magnetism over the years. I have quite a number of cassettes from thirty years ago and they sound as fresh as the day they were made.

3. Cassettes are more coherent sounding than CDs, generally speaking. As if Something is lost or transmorgified during the digital process somewhere along the line.

4. Cassettes generally speaking have great air, and what I mean by that is that there is space or air around the instruments and around the singers.

5. Cassettes generally sound more like the real thing. Case in point the RCA Living Stereo CD of Brahms violin concerto by Heifetz just doesn't have the air and bite and real violin sound of the same recording on a standard cassette.

6. The bass performance is absolutely spectacular on cassette. No, I do not have Mega Bass on the Sport Walkman. The bass may not be the absolute lowest possible but it is very satisfying, deep detailed with plenty of snap and whollup. Most important the bass is pitch correct and since there are no crossovers in the system totally integrated into the music, which is rather critical to bass performance, no?

7. Cassettes that are digitally remastered while they actually generally sound quite good, better than I would have thought by far, being very dynamic, smooth and having some air, are not as real sounding as analog recordings on cassette. There are some digitally remastered cassettes here like AC/DC Live (got Blood if you want it) that are simply terrific, I cannot tell what it's heritage is. Another surprise was Kind of Blue the remastered warhorse, very good rendition of Miles Davis' trumpet, Coltrane's sax, et al.

8. I just bough a bunch of Jimmy Smith cassettes, like new, Blue Notes and others, that are really terrific musically, with Stanley Turrentine and others playing with him. Some of these Jimmy Smith cassettes are digitally remastered and some are not. While the remastered cassettes are interesting and don't sound bad at all, the analog cassettes are notably superior in the category of realism. The analog cassettes are able to play things that squeak, things that have glissandro, things that squeal, things with complex harmonics, things that have a lot of vibrato. Things like organ, trumpet, sax, bells, vibes, timpani, violin, cello, etc. Music soothes the savage breast. Know what I mean, jelly bean?

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica