4 ms·

I saw an estimate a while ago that cassettes have like 3-5 bit depth equivalent on average.

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
https://youtu.be/UqiBJbREUgU?t=628 https://youtu.be/UqiBJbREUgU?t=628 Digital Show & Tell from Monty at Xiph > Those of you who have used analog recording equipment may have just thought to yourselves, "My goodness! That sounds like tape hiss!" Well, it doesn't just sound like tape hiss, it acts like it, too. And if we use a Gaussian dither, then it's mathematically equivalent in every way. It _is_ tape hiss! > Intuitively, that means we can measure tape hiss, and thus the noise floor of magnetic audio tape, in bits, instead of decibels, in order to put things in a digital perspective. Compact cassettes... (Monty holds up a tape, then glares at it and flips it over in his hand) ... for those of you who are old enough to remember them, could reach as deep as nine bits in perfect conditions, though five to six bits was more typical, especially if it was a recording made on a tape deck. > That's right - Your mixtapes were only about six bits deep, if you were lucky. The very best professional open-reel tape used in studios could barely hit - any guesses? - 13 bits _with_ advanced noise reduction.
miunau 2y ago
It's not an apples to apples comparison, really. Tape is desirable for its nonlinear (read: saturation) characteristics, and those can't really be measured in a very comparable manner by taking a regular digital domain bit depth analysis and dropping it in the tape world using the background hiss and 0dB as a clamp. It's an OK talking point, but it's easily oversimplified. Hiss is variable, too. When calculating the low end of the range from the background hiss, do we consider a -80dB hiss above ~2000Hz affecting the "bit depth" more than -80dB hiss below it? The hiss is nowhere near white noise either, so some frequency ranges are more affected than others.
- Mistletoe 2y ago
  I have to agree that sometimes I do like how tape sounds. A Hearts of Space recording playing in the car with Stephen Hill's mellow voice going as I drive sounds so right. Something about the low fidelity of tape and how everything is kind of smashed together is quite soothing.
exitb 2y ago
This can’t be right. Tape decks with a separate record head allow you to listen to the currently recorded track and quickly switch between the track and source feed. Apart from the hiss, the difference in quality is rather subtle for most people. Now, whether the store-bought tape from the 90s was recorded well, that’s a different story.

https://youtu.be/UqiBJbREUgU?t=628 https://youtu.be/UqiBJbREUgU?t=628 Digital Show & Tell from Monty at Xiph > Those of you who have used analog recording equipment may have just thought to yourselves, "My goodness! That sounds like tape hiss!" Well, it doesn't just sound like tape hiss, it acts like it, too. And if we use a Gaussian dither, then it's mathematically equivalent in every way. It _is_ tape hiss! > Intuitively, that means we can measure tape hiss, and thus the noise floor of magnetic audio tape, in bits, instead of decibels, in order to put things in a digital perspective. Compact cassettes... (Monty holds up a tape, then glares at it and flips it over in his hand) ... for those of you who are old enough to remember them, could reach as deep as nine bits in perfect conditions, though five to six bits was more typical, especially if it was a recording made on a tape deck. > That's right - Your mixtapes were only about six bits deep, if you were lucky. The very best professional open-reel tape used in studios could barely hit - any guesses? - 13 bits _with_ advanced noise reduction.

miunau 2y ago

It's not an apples to apples comparison, really. Tape is desirable for its nonlinear (read: saturation) characteristics, and those can't really be measured in a very comparable manner by taking a regular digital domain bit depth analysis and dropping it in the tape world using the background hiss and 0dB as a clamp. It's an OK talking point, but it's easily oversimplified. Hiss is variable, too. When calculating the low end of the range from the background hiss, do we consider a -80dB hiss above ~2000Hz affecting the "bit depth" more than -80dB hiss below it? The hiss is nowhere near white noise either, so some frequency ranges are more affected than others.

Mistletoe 2y ago
I have to agree that sometimes I do like how tape sounds. A Hearts of Space recording playing in the car with Stephen Hill's mellow voice going as I drive sounds so right. Something about the low fidelity of tape and how everything is kind of smashed together is quite soothing.

exitb 2y ago

This can’t be right. Tape decks with a separate record head allow you to listen to the currently recorded track and quickly switch between the track and source feed. Apart from the hiss, the difference in quality is rather subtle for most people. Now, whether the store-bought tape from the 90s was recorded well, that’s a different story.