[cellularmitosis]

> but it is really hard to make a good sounding cassette

It is unfortunate that cassettes are the lowest fidelity consumer medium (of modern times). But there is some room to optimize within that space. If you are curious:

The cassettes available today are Type I, Type II ("high bias") and Type IV ("metal"), each being higher fidelity than the last, but not all portable players supported these types of tape.

Dolby B/C noise reduction could improve the dynamic range of tapes a bit, but again not all portable players supported this.

The ultimate was "dbx", which dramatically improved noise reduction and dynamic range ("tape hiss" was essentially inaudible), but now you're in the territory of needing dedicated rack-mount equipment to record and play your tapes.

My dad was a bit of an audio buff, so I got to experience these things as a kid.

Edit: according to gemini AI:

* Type I had a dynamic range of about 50bB (roughly 8 bits)

* High quality tape with Dolby B, C and dbx yielded roughly 65, 75, and 85dB SNR (about 11, 12.5, and 14 bits)

So you could get pretty close to CD quality, but not quite.

[bondarchuk]

>Edit: according to gemini AI:

>* Type I had a dynamic range of about 50bB (roughly 8 bits)

>* High quality tape with Dolby B, C and dbx yielded roughly 65, 75, and 85dB SNR (about 11, 12.5, and 14 bits)

>So you could get pretty close to CD quality, but not quite.

Source? AI content without it is less than worthless.

[cellularmitosis]

Did you actually try any searches? Or is this just an excuse to broadcast your feelings about AI?

The author of the Ogg format claims a bit more pessimistic range of bit depth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM

Here are some measurements of type I, II and IV:

http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Measurements/HD3_v...

http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Measurements/HD3_v...

http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Measurements/HD3_v...

Here are the specifications of a typical dbx unit: https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/dbx/222.shtml

[bayindirh]

Recording with Dolby-B on a Sony consumer level integrated Hi-Fi produced pretty solid sounding cassettes back in the day, given you have used TDK's chrome or metal blanks.

Some gotchas:

    - Loudness wars were just beginning.
    - Many CDs had some analog stages in its recording/mastering stages, so none of them was sounding "razor sharp" anyway. 

Yesterday, I have listened Depeche Mode's Best of album on an Mechen M-30 with a good but not exquisite pair of Philips neck headphones, encoded as FLAC, and it sound superbly enjoyable. While I love vinyl, no, I won't return back to cassette (even though I have a nice deck), thank you.

[Aldipower]

I just produced an album release on Type I cassette. High quality Type I (ferro oxid) is almost comparable to Type II, but you need the correct bias settings while recording. Practically the 8bits/50db is non-sense. Really. Maybe on a very bad tape deck you have a signal-noise-ratio of 8bit from silence to the first noticeable noise? But the actual music you are playing has much more dynamic range possibilities. Tbh my recordings on tape sound more dynamic then on Spotify.

[lb1lf]

Do keep in mind 96 dB is only the theoretical dynamic range of the CD medium, 99% of recordings utilize way less. (Besides, you'd be in pain if you cranked up the volume until you had 96dB of range above your hearing threshold, anyway)

CDs also eliminate wow & flutter (which ought to be pretty much inaudible on a decent deck, probably less so on an el cheapo grande walkman), which probably does more for (experienced) audio quality than high dynamic range.

Oh, and better high frequency response, for the young ones. :D

[Hackbraten]

> The cassettes available today are Type I, Type II ("high bias") and Type IV ("metal")

That statement feels a litle misleading. The only type of cassettes produced today is Type I.

Everything else is new old stock, where you might end up with a decades-old, chemically degraded cassette.

[baobun]

> decades-old, chemically degraded cassette

Somehow it never occurred to me. I wonder how all the C64 games in the basement are doing...

[Ringz]

I have sealed TDK MA-XG in mint condition. Stored in a dry, dark place. Do you say that they are degraded now?

[nemo8551]

I wish the comeback was minidisc. I was just the right age to think this was the future of portable music.

Mostly because I could record radio, other cds and cassettes onto them.

[kgwxd]

I had a 4 track mini disc recorder, and dreams of becoming the go-to "audio engineer" for all the bands in my school :)

[j45]

It's less about fidelity, more about portability and customizability.

Today we can hear all the hifi we want, it's a trip to see what the imagination can fill in as well.

If you're really into walkmans, check out the Panasonic ultra small ranges.

[prmoustache]

The point about fidelity/quality is moot anyway when most people are listening to overcompressed[1] music on crappy bluetooth speakers and/or in a noisy environment.

[1] as in dynamic range compression, not encoding

[ErroneousBosh]

Chances are you're not listening to it in an environment that's quiet enough for 65dB SNR to be even noticeable.

[jackdoe]

> Type IV

also they are 20$ per cassette :)

[cellularmitosis]

Wow! And Type I are about $2.80 on amazon. That's quite the span!

[embedding-shape]

> It is unfortunate that cassettes are the lowest fidelity consumer medium

So what? The quality of music and enjoyment of it isn't depending on fidelity. I have Adam A7X monitors I mostly use day-to-day, but when I listen to lo-fi, I change the output to the output of my monitor which are absolutely horrible, but fits the mood better.

[mrob]

>The quality of music and enjoyment of it isn't depending on fidelity

It depends somewhat on personal preference, but also on genre. Classical music often has very high dynamic range, so analog recordings can have obnoxiously loud hiss in the quiet sections. This is probably a big reason why classical music labels were early adopters of digital recording, and why classical recordings often have a SPARS code [0] prominently displayed. Classical music was also much less affected by the loudness war, removing one incentive for buying on vinyl. You rarely see any preference for analog among classical listeners.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARS_code