OT: analogue recording uncovered at a jumble sale

[Jim Lesurf]

Perhaps because Uncle Clive only bought 'offcuts' that had dropped into the 'reject' bins. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

[tony sayer]

Umm .. some years ago I attended a hi-fi exhibition where Angus Mackenzie facilities had a Nakamichi machine with Dolby, which version on bu**ered if a can remember the name now up against a Studer A80 at

15 IPS.

There was absolutely sod all difference between them!.

Maybe not a typical setup for domestic tho;!...

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I disliked cassette - true it could be OK at best, but that best was very rare. So grabbed MiniDisc with both hands when it came out. That's in the same sort of position as cassette now - no-one wants it. But sadly, few cars were equipped with it.

[Dr Zoidberg]

10 SA-90s for £12 would probably be my choice. is also a damn fine tape, but just one. someone has some 80's TDKs for sale.

[Max Demian]

You're forgetting 46 minutes, 23 minutes a side, useful for recording from most LPs:

180 minutes, 1.5 hours a side: with dire warnings as to their use:

[Dr Zoidberg]

Yep, 120 and 180 minute tapes were longer than I'd ever have trusted.

The urge to go in the loft is rising :0)

[Richard Tobin]

Reading that immediately after an article mentioning Clive Sinclair had me rather confused for a moment!

-- Richard

[charles]

Don't think so - it was Sinclair designed ones that I was commenting on.

[Lee]

I rather liked MD*, but it was always going to lose out to MP3 :( I used to use a Sharp portable MD with the nifty lcd display/remote velcroed to the front of the car radio. That one had a line in though, better than the cc adapter or cheap fm transmitter.

*Still got an MD boombox as well ;) Though it hasn't been used in ages..

Lee

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Wonder what tape was in use on the A80? Like being like, the tape width determines noise performance. And pro 1/4" machines didn't use Dolby B. But can use either Dolby A or SR. The main difference though is an A80 will work well all day every day. Cassettes need careful nurturing.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Well yes. Most of these things do lose out to newer technology. MD was designed as a replacement for cassette - and as such worked very well.

[tony sayer]

In article , Dave Plowman (News) scribeth thus

This was Quarter inch tape and deffo not Dolby B!.

Indeed, there was no suggestion of daily use I rather doubt the machine would stand what a Studer could, it was just interesting to hear what could be done with some assistance!....

[davidrobinson]

Yes, there's some fun to be had getting things you couldn't afford 20 years ago and playing with them. Fun too to see how much technology has changed, and to get hands on with the old stuff.

But don't try and tell me any of this stuff is actually _useful_ compared with the modern equivalent. Where the job at hand is enjoying the music, rather than the vintage technology, give me my PC, CDs, and mp3 player any day!

Cheers, David.

[tony sayer]

Dunno.. The olde Studer B67 and Spendor speakers here are very olde but sure make rather nice sounds:)...

[tony sayer]

In article , Dave Plowman (News) scribeth thus

Yeah suppose so..

One could ask what you mean but I can Gauss;)...

[Dave Plowman (News)]

That's the point I was making. For a fair comparison, you'd have switched off the Dolby on the cassette too.

It's no surprise that domestic gear can meet the spec of pro stuff in some ways. But an A80 is designed to do more than just record and replay audio.

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember " [e-mail]" saying something like:

Everything still has a place and I'd not thank you for a radio cassette car deck nowadays, no matter how good it was in its day. However, some of the old kit is still excellent and stands up well in comparison to most of the modern cheaply-made s**te. Take SLR lenses, for example. For years now I've been able to buy Zeiss glass (and others) for a fraction of its true worth, simply because it's manual focus. Here's the rub - most times, AF isn't worth a f*ck, anyway. So, for a fraction of the cost of a modern plastic piece of shit I get to play with lenses (many of them) that excel some of the much-vaunted top-level glass of today. Many modern lightweight lenses are good, no doubt, but they will eventually break, wear out, lose calibration, just reach the end of their road and not be worth repairing, unlike a 40 or 50 year old manual focus lens.

[Bill Wright]

Fifty years ago lens design was primitive compared with today. I still have my Contax and Rollei equipment (bought second hand in the early

70s) and the lens performance is not in the same league as modern kit. Zooms, in particular, were unusably bad forty or even thirty years ago. And the weight! I still have a groove in the back of my neck!

Bill

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Bill Wright saying something like:

Fifty years ago, the only zooms were s**te, true. Prime glass was excellent, if from a decent maker.

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember " [e-mail]" saying something like:

The 3080s sound fine to me. They even sounded fine twenty years ago when my hearing was considerably better than it is now. However, they now need new surround rings at considerable refurbishment cost, so it's a diy job for that.