🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1jov32INN53@uwm.edu> ken@isgtec.com (Ken Newman) writes:
>
>1) Why are there no pre-recorded metal cassettes, or no pre-recorded
>   Dolby C cassettes? Every decent cassette deck for many years
>   (even car decks, for crying out loud) has had metal and Dolby C
>   capability. There must be some demand? Sure metal tape is expensive
>   but so are CD's.

Probably because:

	a) Most people buying cassettes don't care about audio quality.
	b) Metal tapes probably peak out the cost/quality factors
	c) More players have Dolby B than Dolby C
	d) There's less alignment tolerance in Dolby C than there is
	   in B.

>2) Why do they not "record" or "press" or "download" :) or whatever
>   the appropriate term is, on both sides of a CD? Again, this would
>   be more expensive, sure, but probably much less than two CD's?
>   I certainly wouldn't mind flipping a CD over if I could save 
>   several bucks and obtain the several other obvious advantages
>   of this.

	a) It would essentially be made the way a laser disc is made,
	   that is, two CD's glued together.
	b) It would be too thick for most players, especially high-end
	   players with special transport designs.
	c) The quality control problems would make it more expensive than
	   two CD's.
	d) Where would you put the "label" ??


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877

In article <1jov32INN53@uwm.edu>, ken@isgtec.com (Ken Newman) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> Two things I've been wondering about or been annoyed by:
|> 
|> 1) Why are there no pre-recorded metal cassettes, or no pre-recorded
|>    Dolby C cassettes? Every decent cassette deck for many years
|>    (even car decks, for crying out loud) has had metal and Dolby C
|>    capability. There must be some demand? Sure metal tape is expensive
|>    but so are CD's.
|

Mainly because not EVERYONE has a Dolby C deck, and commercially available
material needs to be downwardly compatible.  As for metal, I don't know.  
Most new cassettes are recorded on chrome; maybe the record distributors
have decided that the quality of the media doesn't justify more expensive
tape than that, or, more likely, that most people just don't care, so why
bother?  They are in this to make a profit, for the most part, and not 
because they are idealistic about preserving art for future generations.
 
|> 2) Why do they not "record" or "press" or "download" :) or whatever
|>    the appropriate term is, on both sides of a CD? Again, this would
|>    be more expensive, sure, but probably much less than two CD's?
|>    I certainly wouldn't mind flipping a CD over if I could save 
|>    several bucks and obtain the several other obvious advantages
|>    of this.
|
Because there would be no place for a label.

Chris Caudle           
caudle@owlnet.rice.edu 

ken@isgtec.com (Ken Newman) writes:



>Two things I've been wondering about or been annoyed by:

>1) Why are there no pre-recorded metal cassettes, or no pre-recorded
>   Dolby C cassettes? Every decent cassette deck for many years
>   (even car decks, for crying out loud) has had metal and Dolby C
>   capability. There must be some demand? Sure metal tape is expensive
>   but so are CD's.

	A&M does (or used to, at least) pre-record on chrome cassettes.
I know of no company that uses Dolby C.

	One reason why companies are largely unconcerned with analog
cassette quality is because the principal consumers of that format are
largely unconcerned with quality. The companies will continue to sell
them as long as it is profitable.

>2) Why do they not "record" or "press" or "download" :) or whatever
>   the appropriate term is, on both sides of a CD? Again, this would
>   be more expensive, sure, but probably much less than two CD's?
>   I certainly wouldn't mind flipping a CD over if I could save 
>   several bucks and obtain the several other obvious advantages
>   of this.

	I don't have a lot of ideas on this one. It may be due to
quality control reasons. (At least, that could have been an issue in
the early days of the medium that has been held over for historical
reasons.) I doubt any pressing plants are set up to manufacture two-
sided CD's, so why bother to develop the technology when there is no
pressing (no pun intended) need for it?

							-Cal
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cal Lott          "Oh, I see-- I thought 'no' meant 'spoon'!" --Dan
Email me, baby!   cal@gsbux1.uchicago.edu   cjl1@midway.uchicago.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In article <1jov32INN53@uwm.edu> ken@isgtec.com (Ken Newman) writes:
>
>
>Two things I've been wondering about or been annoyed by:
>
>1) Why are there no pre-recorded metal cassettes, or no pre-recorded
>   Dolby C cassettes? Every decent cassette deck for many years
>   (even car decks, for crying out loud) has had metal and Dolby C
>   capability. There must be some demand? Sure metal tape is expensive
>   but so are CD's.
>
>2) Why do they not "record" or "press" or "download" :) or whatever
>   the appropriate term is, on both sides of a CD? Again, this would
>   be more expensive, sure, but probably much less than two CD's?
>   I certainly wouldn't mind flipping a CD over if I could save 
>   several bucks and obtain the several other obvious advantages
>   of this.
>
>--
This debate raged on alt.cd-rom...The upshot was that because of two
factors, this would not be feasible.  The first and probably most
damning in this situation is that the laser in a drive is focused
to the actual depth in the substrate that the vapor deposited aluminum
layer is found.  The tolerances are very close.  The thicknes of a CD 
is critical to proper operation.  One benefit to this is that scratches
on the plastic side are less likely to cause problems.  However, it is
important to note that scratches on the label side that penetrate to 
the aluminum layer (just under the painted label and the layer of 
laquer) are usually terminal.  

The second factor related to a scenario where one would use both
sides at the same time, much like the multiple heads and platters in
a hard drive.  The killer here is the fact that the CD standard
calls for a constant velocity no matter where the head is.  As a
result, the r.p.m. of the disk is completely dependent on the position of
the head.  To see this, find one of those boom-boxes that have a CD 
drive in them that has a window through which the cd is visible.  Watch
how the much slower the disk spins as you quickly step from the first 
to the last track.  The only way I can see a way to use both sides 
of a CD is to rewrite the entire standard thus obsoleting every CD-
audio, CD-ROM, CD-I, CD-WORM, etc.... drive out there.  If you
are interested in the exact specifications used for several of the
different types, try looking in MIX magazine a couple of years
back.  MIX is a high end type publication for the recording industry.
I know they had an article once that described the details right down
to the use of each bit in a packet.  BTW, did you know that for each
stereo sample used on a CD (and we're talking 44,100 of'em per second!)
a total of 59 bits are allocated?  2x16 for each channel audio, the rest
are used or reserved for future expansion by such things as cut #, time
remaining, time elapsed, stuff like that.  There is even a subsection
that is solely dedicated to carrying video information.  I am not
making this up!  GRP came out with a jazz sampler that had the lyrics
and bio notes on the artists.  Only catch is that you have to have
a CD player that can decode this info and send it to your TV set
via an NTSC output.  It was called CD+G I think.  
Hope this provides some insite for you

Rock on
T



>
>ken@isgtec.com   [ ...!uunet.ca!isgtec!ken ]  Ken Newman
>

In article <1jusfpINNl6p@uwm.edu> caudle@owlnet.rice.edu (Chris Aaron Caudle) writes:
>In article <1jov32INN53@uwm.edu>, ken@isgtec.com (Ken Newman) writes:
>|> Two things I've been wondering about or been annoyed by:
>|> 
>|> 1) Why are there no pre-recorded metal cassettes, or no pre-recorded
>|>    Dolby C cassettes?

I would assume it is:
1) Standard money-grubbing; no one has asked for it.
2) We are talking high speed dubbing and mass production.  Is metal
   going to make a difference?

I don't buy prerecorded tapes if I can help it, but do receive them as
gifts every so often.  I usually listen to them in the car until they
get intollerable (sometimes this does not take much) then borrow, rent,
purchase the CD and tape over the original tape.  It sounds much better.

Therefore I would assume that the problem is with the process not the
materials...

>Mainly because not EVERYONE has a Dolby C deck, and commercially available
>material needs to be downwardly compatible.  As for metal, I don't know.  
>Most new cassettes are recorded on chrome; maybe the record distributors
>have decided that the quality of the media doesn't justify more expensive
>tape than that, or, more likely, that most people just don't care, so why
>bother?  They are in this to make a profit, for the most part, and not 
>because they are idealistic about preserving art for future generations.

I would agree here.

>|> 2) Why do they not "record" or "press" or "download" :) or whatever
>|>    the appropriate term is, on both sides of a CD?

>Because there would be no place for a label.

Do we need labels?  I for one _love_ to pay an extra $.25 or whatever
for the silk screening.  Put the extra art / info into liner notes, I
say.

- Iain -
-- 
Iain McVey (mcvey@mpr.ca)      | "It's all smoke and mirrors until someone
Software Designer              |  loses an eye - then its special effects"
MPR Teltech Ltd.               | "This bottle of whisky is awful.  I'll be
8999 Nelson Way, Burnaby, BC   |  glad when it's done" - One Scot to another

   In article <1jov32INN53@uwm.edu> ken@isgtec.com (Ken Newman) writes:
   >2) Why do they not "record" or "press" or "download" :) or whatever
   >   the appropriate term is, on both sides of a CD? Again, this would
   >   be more expensive, sure, but probably much less than two CD's?
   >   I certainly wouldn't mind flipping a CD over if I could save 
   >   several bucks and obtain the several other obvious advantages
   >   of this.

	   a) It would essentially be made the way a laser disc is made,
	      that is, two CD's glued together.
	   b) It would be too thick for most players, especially high-end
	      players with special transport designs.
	   c) The quality control problems would make it more expensive than
	      two CD's.
	   d) Where would you put the "label" ??

Not only this, but record companies seem to have a hard time filling
up the 70 odd minutes of music that you can cram into a CD today.
What would they put on double sided discs?  We'd probably just see 42
minute discs with 21 minutes on each side for 1.6 times the current
price of a CD, rather than (as we have today) 42 minutes of music on
one side.  I don't see any advantage.

/mvH



--
Programming isn't a science,        | Foo:    mvh@lysator.liu.se
it's an art.                        | Bar:    d89marho@und.ida.liu.se
Why is it called common sense,      | Who:    Martin V. Howard
when so few possess it ?            | Voice:  Int +46 (0)13 261 283 (GMT + 1h)

In article <1jusfmINNl6l@uwm.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
> >1) Why are there no pre-recorded metal cassettes, or no pre-recorded
> >   Dolby C cassettes?
> Probably because:
> 	a) Most people buying cassettes don't care about audio quality.

"Most people" buying CDs don't care about audio quality. What's your point?
"Most people" don't know what audio quality is. :) I didn't advocate
replacing all cassettes with metal ones - just noting that AFAIK there
are *no* pre-recorded metal tapes anywhere.

> 	c) More players have Dolby B than Dolby C

Is this true? Not counting Walkmans for example.

> 	d) Where would you put the "label" ??

Couldn't a very small label be put around the center hole sort of like
LP's? Some CD's go a little nuts on the label issue, with the whole 
cover art etc. You make some good points however.

--

ken@isgtec.com   [ ...!uunet.ca!isgtec!ken ]  Ken Newman