In Reply to: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . posted by Chris from Lafayette on April 25, 2021 at 12:17:47:
That is THE definition of DR as far as I read. So these numbers may mean bupkis as far as this discussion goes. One of geoff's main contention is not really about technology but what was done or not done to cassettes. I'd like to see the real DR stats pre "loudness wars" of cassettes vs CDs. Either way, cassettes still suck unless you like hiss. I didn't see any cassettes on this list?? That recording "engineers") (aka, spawn of the devil) f up a yugggg number of recordings is pretty much a given.
So let us stop talkin' falsely now, the hour's getting late --
Robert Allen Zimmerman
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - tweaker456 13:08:23 04/25/21 (9)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - b.l.zeebub 13:21:48 04/25/21 (1)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - tweaker456 13:31:13 04/25/21 (0)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - geoffkait 13:13:58 04/25/21 (6)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - tweaker456 09:14:58 04/26/21 (5)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - geoffkait 09:41:09 04/26/21 (4)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - tweaker456 09:53:24 04/26/21 (3)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - geoffkait 13:47:18 04/27/21 (2)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - tweaker456 14:03:07 04/27/21 (1)
- RE: But wouldn't the true dynamic range be the difference. . . - geoffkait 05:09:56 04/28/21 (0)