[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: TAPE VS CD
I tend to listen to a lot of jazz, and a lot of r&b from when I was a kid. There are a lot of songs that I wish to hear that just aren't available on CD. That's why I dropped $1600.00 on a good cassette deck so that I could enjoy these songs with as much cd-like sound as I could.
From: Mein, Twain[SMTP:Twain.Mein@wellsfargo.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 1997 11:52 AM
Subject: TAPE VS CD
Ok, I can't stand it any longer. Technologically speaking, CD is better
than tape. Economically speaking, there is no reason to buy a tape deck instead of a CD
player any more. Even your local Good Guys/Circuit City has good quality,
solid performing Sony's, Panasonic's and Clarion CD players for $250.
Signal to noise ratio is measured in decibels. The human ear can barely
detect a difference of 3 db. But a difference of 10 db is a heard as twice
as loud. The average FM reception on a car deck is around 50 db. Tapes are
to 60 db, up to 65 with dolby b and the very best decks with dolby c
approach 80 db.
The average $300 cd player has a S/N ratio of 90 db. That means the quality
of "musical material" is 800% cleaner or purer sounding than the background
noise/unmusical material of radio. And it is 200% better sounding than THE
BEST AVAILABLE TAPE DECK. The better Clarion and Kenwood CD players have a
100db s/n ratio.
Frequency response: The human being can feel/hear from 20HZ-20KHZ on a good
day, probably when they are first born. Men can't hear much past 15Khz
(somehow women can...). Only the very best and tape decks can reproduce this
entire range, but they are very expensive. The average cd player can play
this entire range. And azimuth adjustment simply isn't an issue.