Ranking of Audio Mediums?

[Audio Junkies 3]

Now I know this has a lot to do with individual preference so this will be very subjective.

I was thinking today about where cassette tapes rank as far as audio mediums. I have never seen a real list broken down anywhere, just someone saying "Vinyl is better than CD's" or something of that nature.

Let me know if I forgot anything, but this is what I could remember off of the top of my head (not in order obviously). How would most "audiophiles" arrange these from best sounding to worst?

DVD-A/SACD (possibly separate?)

Cassette Tape

Vinyl

Digital Storage (Flash/Hard Drive)

8-Track

Reel Tape

CD

[JimJ 11]

Reel to reel technically would be closest to the source, even before going to the vinyl cutter...I've never heard a R2R set up for hi-fi though so I can't say personally.

[audio-neon 34]

I would say the best realistic medium is vinyl followed by super audio cd. This is my opinion, but isn't dvd audio just a higher sampling rate than cd, but not as high as a SACD?

And the issue with digital storage would be if the file is uncompressed or compressed and what compression method was utilized.

Edited June 12, 2007 by audio-neon

[DevilDriver 28]

Perhaps this should be prefaced by saying these are all opinions. For whatever reason, this always ends up being very hotly debated topic.

I would say in general, you will here this most often:

Vinyl

DVD-A or SACD

CD

Cassette

8 Track

I can't put reel to reel in there because I've never heard it (and don't know anyone who has) and digitally stored media is too all encompassing (what is the audio codec? what is the bitrate? is it transcoded? etc.)

My personal preference, however, will always be vinyl or FLAC. Vinyl can be great if you're playing a well mastered recording for the first time. After 10-15 times, the experience might not be quite as enjoyable. With FLAC, I am guaranteed a "lossless" recording every single time. FLAC is easy to transport and widely available on oink.me.uk.

The argument always seems to arise in the concept of converting from one format to another. Jim made a great point when he said reel to reel, empirically speaking that is. However, many companies are using all digital recording (which is becoming increasingly popular) and this eliminates any losses from analog to digital conversion. As far as raw capabilities are concerned, DVD-A has to be near the top based simply on storage capabilities. Of course, we can always make an argument for audibility: can you really hear the difference between a v0 mp3 and vinyl? A lot of people have difficulty proving that they can.

To me, regardless of the medium, it comes down to who mastered that particular release. I know on a few occasions I have preferred a vinyl LP to the CD version or vice versa, only to find out that any differences could easily be attributed to the difference in mastering techniques.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Jim, my mother has an old Sony reel to reel. People often forget gold-cd's, DAT, DCC, and mini-disk. The push behind gold-cd's were that they had better lower frequency reproduction then standard cd's. I personally felt Mini-disk had a little clearer sound than a standard CD. But honestly, I had wanted to get into DAT but never had the money to convert and the market ended up forgetting it for the most part, much the way of the beta, as in cheaper formats. DCC, I don't know much about, but was told from a few audio heads that they felt it was a good bridge between DAT and CD in both clarity and price.

[JimJ 11]

Bottlehead has won some awards at audio shows for their open reel demos:

http://www.bottlehead.com/et/adobespc/Sedu...eheadpreamp.htm

It's pretty cool, but I just can't see the format being anything but a novelty. It's not like there are a lot of new releases coming out on it...unlike LPs.

[///M5 2,833]

It is going to depend on how the original was recorded, but I'd lump all digital together with obviously the highest bit rate the highest out of the digital world. If the original was digital this would be best, otherwise if it were analog I'd plop the R2R and Vinyl above the digital sources which eventually bleed to the other antiquated analog storage medias.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

I try to look for CD's that are DDD instead of AAD or ADD.

[tejcurrent 13]

I try to look for CD's that are DDD instead of AAD or ADD.

I'm sorry, I'm a little lost with some of the acronyms flying around I feel a little ADD^^ (I had to go there)

Edited June 13, 2007 by tejcurrent

[DevilDriver 28]

I try to look for CD's that are DDD instead of AAD or ADD.

I'm sorry, I'm a little lost with some of the acronyms flying around I feel a little ADD^^ (I had to go there)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARS_Code

[helotaxi 46]

Even going straight to digital, there has to be encoding. If the same encoding is used when transferring from the analog master, it *should* yield the same result as direct to digital.

With vinyl, you have to consider where the particular record was in the run of its master, how many times it's been played and a myriad other variables that a CD just doesn't have to worry about. Even R2R has issues with wear (my folk had a setup when I was a kid and a friend of ours had a setup even more recently, he converted some of my parents' old R2R recordings to cassette back in the day). Any medium where there is contact between the medium and a pickup is going to exhibit wear traits. You also have to consider portability.

I've never heard MiniDisc referred to as a hifi medium. Early mp3 style compression that was fairly readily audible on the high end. It was brought on as a recordable medium that was portable; convenient track access like a CD but recordable and small like a tape.

[JimJ 11]

I try to look for CD's that are DDD instead of AAD or ADD.

Bah, where'd the good music go by the time digital recording came around?

(Tongue only slightly in cheek )

[tejcurrent 13]

I try to look for CD's that are DDD instead of AAD or ADD.

I'm sorry, I'm a little lost with some of the acronyms flying around I feel a little ADD^^ (I had to go there)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARS_Code

[flakko 1]

hmmm my uncle has 4 cartons (round 400 hours) full of R2R chinese opera...might give it a listen....really test the tweets out lol.

[topgun 262]

Ewwww

*Begins to wonder howd that sound on the Maggies*

[sqguy 0]

I have some cassette tapes from the late 80s I think, they were made on very good home equipment and are metal tapes. I played them a lot in cars. So I was testing some speakers/amps this spring and got out my old cassette HU and had to find a tape....they still sound nice. They always sounded better than the ones you bought new, and the dolby C really worked nice. Not perfect maybe, but in the car audio environment they were pretty good, easier to handle than CDs, less prone to damage, only problem was waiting for it to wind to a particular place on the tape. The metal is on the opposite side the head reads, but yes a poor player can damage the tape. However if you made one you just tossed it and made another.

I don't like CDs, I don't like the cases and pita it is to open them from the store or the exposed nature of the medium. I've seen older ones break in half easily. And they are too big to easily one-hand handle in the car like a cassette. I blame the industry for playing CMA instead of serving its customers with a quality product. I would have thought we would have a durable enclosed disk maybe sized like a 3.5 PC disk long before today...but still don't. Right, something like a minidisk but don't get me started on sony. A DVD is cheaper than a CD with a much more expensive content, go figure, and they wonder why the industry is dead. A CD is just a new version of an old record IMO, maybe somewhat more durable but people didn't carry records out of the house either. And just how old is the CD today?

With data storage getting so big and cheap now certainly solid state is the way to go, or possibly a hard drive. Now you can fit high quality recordings on it and have great access. However there are many formats and equipment you have to change out, it is not a standard really and the industry comes up with the worst compromised junk that serves only themselves (IMO) so they are no help. This last decade or more is like living in yesteryear the way I see it; nothing has changed when it could be much better. You still have to be someone's pawn or buy an ancient CD and have the pita of make your own to get to a better medium. The only advantage today is when you rip it to a file you can move it around much easier...and I am sure they are trying to outlaw that every day.

I know people that used RTR and VHS as a great medium, sounded great...they used them for parties because of long run time.