Late Boomer
Super Member
No instrumental tests. The obligatory note of analog warmth and digital sterility. The same old bias towards analog distortions. Yawn.After flipping back from Cassette Tape to Spotify I have to say the Cassette held it's own, the sound was warm and engaging. The Spotify source was clear and detailed but lacked warmth. Sounded sterile. The source was no doubt a CD or digital remastered version of the album... After all that, my conclusions are that the analog cassette can still sound amazing and compete with the latest technology.
Cassettes are OK if you already have them. No reason to get into them if you have never used them or got rid of them long time ago.
Not on paper, these are real numbers. Although I do agree that 65 dB is usually good enough.However, even though the digital source can have better numbers on paper. Analog sound even at 65db can sound more engaging and dynamically pleasing to the my ears....
320 kbps is perceptually lossless. Lower bitrates may lose some fine details (which most people do not hear anyway), but still have no wow & flutter. Funny how people defend cassettes against digital, yet knock down lossy digital compared to CD. Well, it could be worse. At least you did not say that CD quality sucks, and that 24-bit Hi-Res is the only real deal.BushmasterM4 said:While streaming Spotify you were listening to an mp3. At the most 320kbps. Which is great, but not CD quality.
I always have hated skeuomorphism. Yet, I like something like this:I don't mean to stray off topic, but I've always wondered why someone doesn't create a music player software that would simply look like a cassette deck, or R2R, or maybe even a TT. You could select from a library of deck front ends so to speak. If I knew how to write software, I'd do it myself.
Last edited:
