Daily Drop: 8-Track & LP
- Thread starter Graham_LRR
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yeah i have to agree the felt more real than other drops.Yal said:
Kinda wish they smashed it again though yo could still play the songs further in.
The 8-track should of been it's own drop, maybe with a crowbar as it seems to be well built.
Maybe drop the record on it's flat side? That what I was expecting when the extra testing came up.
Maybe drop the record on it's flat side? That what I was expecting when the extra testing came up.
I'm sort of surprised the 8-track held up as well as it did considering how fragile the tapes were. For those of you who have never taken apart an 8-track it containes a wide length of magnetic tape coiled in a circle in the middle of the tape. The tape is pulled from the middle of the circle and then wrapped up around the outside and the two ends are held together with a piece of foil tape that shorts the player head when it passes causing the head to skip to the next track. It's kind of a cool tech given that you don't have to turn it over or rewind it, but the mechanical wear on the tapes makes them wear out fast.
If you want to shatter a record use an "unbreakable" shellac 78, those things shatter like glass, just ask my cat the rotten little &§$!@.
If you want to shatter a record use an "unbreakable" shellac 78, those things shatter like glass, just ask my cat the rotten little &§$!@.
That looks somewhat dangerous at least without a good pair of goggles and bandana to keep from breathing in the baking soda.raxiv said:
In other news I do hope tomorrow's drop will be to the Fresh Prince theme!
(I agree today was a double dose of boring...record was off the mark...or off the record...for the record?)
That drop was very therapeutic for me. Take THAT, ZAMFIR.
And hey, for all the Grammys were, at least Esperanza Spalding beat Bieber.
And hey, for all the Grammys were, at least Esperanza Spalding beat Bieber.
The most disappointing thing here is that the Vinyl didn't properly "meet its end" 
... the bit that chipped off the 8-track may have been important enough to stop it working in the player, but at least 50% of the content of that LP would have survived in playable condition.
(regardless of anything else you can say about vinyl vs cd vs whatever, their biggest advantage? LONGEVITY and DURABILITY. Yes, they wear out in use, yes you can put a scratch on them fairly easily ... but they don't break without this kind of treatment, and kept in even fairly average storage, they'll easily last a human lifetime. Some of my mother's/grandmother's less often played ones still sound brilliant the best part of 50 years post-purchase (there are some early 60s ones complete with contemporary adverts on the dust jackets). I've got well-looked-after CDRs and DVDRs from less than a decade ago that are dying a swift death (and some late 80s pressed CDs also). Tape and VHS are sort of in-between. The tech level / recording quality / data density seems to be a factor in resilience)
Vinyl I believe was introduced not only as a more easily manufactured, higher fidelity alternative to shellac, but also BECAUSE it was so much more resistant to being smashed. I think I recall a TV programme (part of James May's 20th Century???) which demonstrated this... pre-1950s 78? It breaks like it's made out of ice. Even a late-1950s 78 (they continued making them with the new material) or a typical LP? Much more flexible, less brittle, took a considerably more forceful hit to even crack it.
Getting one of those would make for an interesting drop, unfortunately there's ever fewer originals about that aren't becoming insanely valuable.
It WILL have an advantage over CD in terms of headroom and sample aliasing (as signals between 11 and 22khz won't suffer any (hard to detect anyway) near-nyquist digital sampling effects) for the first couple of plays, particularly if played in a suboptimal listening environment where CD's 20-30 dB of extra dynamic range can't be easily appreciated, but once you've played it 5-10 times the rot starts to set in; reduced bandwidth as the smaller, higher frequency bumps in the grooves wear down (one of the reasons that quadraphonic and vinyl-based copy protection (and video!) never really caught on is that their key signals were contained in the ultrasonic range), i.e. reduced treble headroom, rapidly dropping through 20khz and down, down, down (ever hear the phrase "I wore the grooves out on that record"?), with all manner of quite unpleasant resonance and harmonic effects developing, particularly crashy symbols and very sssibilant essssesss.
Which even the most high-frequency-sampling-error affected CD won't display after a few hundred plays.
And this isn't even getting into issues of stereo crosstalk, scratches, dust and other dirt, having to clean the needle, having to replace the needle when it wears down (said bandwidth/harmonic effects getting even worse, AND a risk of damaging the discs), making sure everything's properly in adjustment (more disc damage risks as well as tracking and sound quality issues)
The "warm" sound that many associate with vinyl comes with imperfect matching of the EQ adjustment applied to stop bass frequencies creating enormous oscillations in the grooves and the compensatory circuit for such in the pre-amp. As well as not a little unbalancing of the overall EQ by the "bright" treble frequencies being physically worn away. A similar effect can be had by using a stereo with a 5-band or better EQ and raising the midbass whilst dipping the high treble. And stretching a set of drum snares across the speakers.
I like vinyl, I love the idea of it, the sound and feel of it and the whole experience and the way you can play with it. I've rescued a good quality 1970s deck and amp from going to the skip from work's AV dept and got them set up just-so at home, and as stated way up above the sonic quality of even some really ancient (but barely-ever-played, hence clean and not very worn) LPs can be very impressive. Similarly 12" singles. (7"s and EPs, far less so even when brand-new... and don't even *think* of suggesting 78s; vinyl ones played with a good mono needle can be scratch-free and pleasant to listen to, but still have poor bandwidth and dynamic range)
But I wouldn't ever be bowled over enough to claim that it's a higher fidelity recording than a CD, and certainly not any kind of higher-quality, professional, not-really-consumer-level recording (I currently have sat in front of me on the desk a 96khz, 24bit pro audio DIGITAL recorder, and it will blow almost anything else you bring to pit against it out of the water. Certainly consumer-grade CDs and any kind of vinyl will die an easy death). Because it's just not true. Digital recording can sound just as "warm" and "human", it all depends on how the sound engineering is done. Sadly these days, a lot of them just don't seem to care, and tailor their recordings for radio play (nasty little transistor sets and the like) or low-bitrate downloads that will be played on anaemic iPod docks. Volume is everything, particularly in the midrange, and to hell with everything else, even the golden rule of avoiding clipping (maybe they grew up recording tapes and didn't realise CDs/digital files can't be overdriven?). Hence digital recording gets a reputation as sounding like crap, when actually if properly approached it sounds gorgeous.
I know you probably won't listen to that as your views are likely as entrenched as mine, but hopefully other people who may be misled into parroting the same stuff won't immediately latch on without doing their own listening tests and research.
(Me? I work with AV quite a lot, both digital and a few analogue remnants. I can give you one horrendous example of poor setup ruining the output of a digital rig: DV cams being set up by default in 32khz 12-bit audio mode, which has a similar effect as setting a reel-to-reel tape recorder up to turn at 2/3rds speed with the record level set to about -30db compared to where it should be. Rubbish bandwidth and a godawful noise floor which makes recovering anything but the loudest speech impossible. Worse even than using compact cassette. Hence my routine use of the portable digital recorder these days... you can always downconvert if needed)
... the bit that chipped off the 8-track may have been important enough to stop it working in the player, but at least 50% of the content of that LP would have survived in playable condition.(regardless of anything else you can say about vinyl vs cd vs whatever, their biggest advantage? LONGEVITY and DURABILITY. Yes, they wear out in use, yes you can put a scratch on them fairly easily ... but they don't break without this kind of treatment, and kept in even fairly average storage, they'll easily last a human lifetime. Some of my mother's/grandmother's less often played ones still sound brilliant the best part of 50 years post-purchase (there are some early 60s ones complete with contemporary adverts on the dust jackets). I've got well-looked-after CDRs and DVDRs from less than a decade ago that are dying a swift death (and some late 80s pressed CDs also). Tape and VHS are sort of in-between. The tech level / recording quality / data density seems to be a factor in resilience)
DuelLadyS said:
For the inner workings of an 8-track, i'd suggest "google" or "wikipedia". Or getting some barely-playable cheap-ass compilation cartridge from a thrift store and taking a hammer (...or just a screwdriver?) to it.HvD said:
Vinyl I believe was introduced not only as a more easily manufactured, higher fidelity alternative to shellac, but also BECAUSE it was so much more resistant to being smashed. I think I recall a TV programme (part of James May's 20th Century???) which demonstrated this... pre-1950s 78? It breaks like it's made out of ice. Even a late-1950s 78 (they continued making them with the new material) or a typical LP? Much more flexible, less brittle, took a considerably more forceful hit to even crack it.
Getting one of those would make for an interesting drop, unfortunately there's ever fewer originals about that aren't becoming insanely valuable.
Nonsense, man. You're confusing the idea of an "analogue storage medium" with "magical device capable of infinite bandwidth and unlimited dynamic range". An absolutely fresh-from-the-factory poppin' fresh LP, on the most heavyweight resilient vinyl, played with a high quality needle on a perfectly adjusted deck may give you somewhere north of 25khz signal bandwidth (aka "slightly better than DAT") - not that anyone except your dog or newborn infant will appreciate that - and probably a -60 to -70db noise floor (aka, "slightly better than a chrome compact cassette with all the sophisticated noise reduction dolby can throw at it using one of Sony's last-of-the-line decks", "a really clean FM signal", or "a cheap and cruddy laptop or motherboard-integrated sound card").pacati said:
It WILL have an advantage over CD in terms of headroom and sample aliasing (as signals between 11 and 22khz won't suffer any (hard to detect anyway) near-nyquist digital sampling effects) for the first couple of plays, particularly if played in a suboptimal listening environment where CD's 20-30 dB of extra dynamic range can't be easily appreciated, but once you've played it 5-10 times the rot starts to set in; reduced bandwidth as the smaller, higher frequency bumps in the grooves wear down (one of the reasons that quadraphonic and vinyl-based copy protection (and video!) never really caught on is that their key signals were contained in the ultrasonic range), i.e. reduced treble headroom, rapidly dropping through 20khz and down, down, down (ever hear the phrase "I wore the grooves out on that record"?), with all manner of quite unpleasant resonance and harmonic effects developing, particularly crashy symbols and very sssibilant essssesss.
Which even the most high-frequency-sampling-error affected CD won't display after a few hundred plays.
And this isn't even getting into issues of stereo crosstalk, scratches, dust and other dirt, having to clean the needle, having to replace the needle when it wears down (said bandwidth/harmonic effects getting even worse, AND a risk of damaging the discs), making sure everything's properly in adjustment (more disc damage risks as well as tracking and sound quality issues)
The "warm" sound that many associate with vinyl comes with imperfect matching of the EQ adjustment applied to stop bass frequencies creating enormous oscillations in the grooves and the compensatory circuit for such in the pre-amp. As well as not a little unbalancing of the overall EQ by the "bright" treble frequencies being physically worn away. A similar effect can be had by using a stereo with a 5-band or better EQ and raising the midbass whilst dipping the high treble. And stretching a set of drum snares across the speakers.
I like vinyl, I love the idea of it, the sound and feel of it and the whole experience and the way you can play with it. I've rescued a good quality 1970s deck and amp from going to the skip from work's AV dept and got them set up just-so at home, and as stated way up above the sonic quality of even some really ancient (but barely-ever-played, hence clean and not very worn) LPs can be very impressive. Similarly 12" singles. (7"s and EPs, far less so even when brand-new... and don't even *think* of suggesting 78s; vinyl ones played with a good mono needle can be scratch-free and pleasant to listen to, but still have poor bandwidth and dynamic range)
But I wouldn't ever be bowled over enough to claim that it's a higher fidelity recording than a CD, and certainly not any kind of higher-quality, professional, not-really-consumer-level recording (I currently have sat in front of me on the desk a 96khz, 24bit pro audio DIGITAL recorder, and it will blow almost anything else you bring to pit against it out of the water. Certainly consumer-grade CDs and any kind of vinyl will die an easy death). Because it's just not true. Digital recording can sound just as "warm" and "human", it all depends on how the sound engineering is done. Sadly these days, a lot of them just don't seem to care, and tailor their recordings for radio play (nasty little transistor sets and the like) or low-bitrate downloads that will be played on anaemic iPod docks. Volume is everything, particularly in the midrange, and to hell with everything else, even the golden rule of avoiding clipping (maybe they grew up recording tapes and didn't realise CDs/digital files can't be overdriven?). Hence digital recording gets a reputation as sounding like crap, when actually if properly approached it sounds gorgeous.
I know you probably won't listen to that as your views are likely as entrenched as mine, but hopefully other people who may be misled into parroting the same stuff won't immediately latch on without doing their own listening tests and research.
(Me? I work with AV quite a lot, both digital and a few analogue remnants. I can give you one horrendous example of poor setup ruining the output of a digital rig: DV cams being set up by default in 32khz 12-bit audio mode, which has a similar effect as setting a reel-to-reel tape recorder up to turn at 2/3rds speed with the record level set to about -30db compared to where it should be. Rubbish bandwidth and a godawful noise floor which makes recovering anything but the loudest speech impossible. Worse even than using compact cassette. Hence my routine use of the portable digital recorder these days... you can always downconvert if needed)
Wow, that was the first time Paul actually threw the object instead of dropping it.
Paul have a secret hate for... LP?
Paul have a secret hate for... LP?
