RE: TAPE VS CD

[merlin <merlin@ameritech.net>]

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
To:  qlist
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.

-Twain