Talk:Cassette single
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
Contents |
[edit] Quality issues
I remember reading somewhere that one reason why cassette singles flopped is that they were generally produced on inferior tape. But I don't want to add this to the article without a citation. Does anyone remember this controversy? 23skidoo 17:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Popularity
In the UK, cassingles seemed to be more common during the 1990s than the 1980s; I don't recall seeing any during the 1980s (not that I bought that many singles then, but I'd have thought they were pretty cool if I had seen them).
Perhaps this was because people had stopped widely using record decks by the 1990s; and it's notable that cassingles were much cheaper than CD equivalents (I bought several on the basis of price; £3.99 was quite average for a CD single after the first week of release, cassettes were typically £1.99 or £2.49).
At any rate, the "popular during the 1980s" comment isn't really accurate. Any thoughts?
Fourohfour 11:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
- Actually I'd contest that the cassingle -- in North American markets -- were never popular at all, and I don't think they were ever even counted in sales charts like Billboard. Of course the circumstance may have been different in other parts of the world, but all I know if cassingles were only available for a short time in North America until CD singles came along, and then cassingles disappeared almost overnight. 23skidoo 14:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] cassette singles popularity
I used to work in a UK record shop in the 80`s & 90`s the "first cassette single was by Bow wow wow in 1980, in the early 80`s this format was more a novelty, however cassette singles did sell very well however over time from the late 80`s but the type of music being sold on this format would define their poularity, Rock & Indie music sold very few quantitys however pop & childrens music could outsell other formats on a release.
U2,Queen, no, Mr Blobby, Take That yes I would also note that Snap-Rhythm is a dancer was one of our biggest cassette single sellers in the 90`s outselling the 7"
[edit] First Cassette Single
I believe the Bow Wow Wow cassette that is being referred to is called "Your Cassette Pet". Even though it was produced in a cardboard sleeve similar to the cassette singles, it was actually more of an EP containing eight songs.
I had always heard that The Go-Go's had the first cassette single with "Vacation" from 1982 as would this article suggest: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DEED91531F931A3575AC0A961948260&sec=&pagewanted=all
[edit] Vinyl more expensive to produce?
"They were popular during the 1990s, as record companies promoted their use to the detriment of the more expensive to produce vinyl singles."
Were pre-recorded cassettes really cheaper to produce than vinyl records? Does anyone have a source for this?
I would have thought vinyl was cheaper to produce in any sort of quantity, given that it's just a solid lump of plastic with the music moulded into its surface. Cassettes have multiple moving parts, and of course the music has to be recorded onto them before they can be sold. 217.155.20.163 23:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- Whilst it may be down to economies of scale, I agree that this statement is somewhat dubious and have tagged it as "citation needed". Fourohfour 14:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] History of the music cassette
- (Note: Dispute centres around this version (Encise's version) and this version (Fourohfour's version). Fourohfour 17:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
User 203.57.241.67 00:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)fourohfour seems to think that the history of music cassettes does not appear "relevant" to the article on cassette singles. A brief introduction of the format type is relevant to the introduction of the cassingle and frames the cassette single by explaining the history of the very format. The article in its prior state -sans the music cassette history- was lacking.
- Where exactly do you draw the conclusion that I didn't consider the material "relevant"? Your quotes imply that I used this word, when I didn't even imply it.
- This is effectively a sub-article, whose parents are Compact Cassette and Single (music). It covers material that is too specialised, detailed and/or inappropriate for the parents, but that does not mean that we have to duplicate all relevant content here- that's what links are for.
- The subject of this article, as indicated by its title is the "cassette single", not the cassette as a whole.
- Cut-and-paste duplication of vast swathes of material (which is what this dispute is centered around) is very bad style, both from a reader's and from an editor's point of view. Whilst minor overlap is desirable in a set of good articles, it should serve as a summary of (and pointer to) relevant facts in the main article.
- Anyway, I've said enough about this, and don't intend getting into a revert war. I'll bring up the matter at Compact Cassette so that we can get opinion from a neutral-but-interested cross-section of editors. Fourohfour 17:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree that there is no need to duplicate information that is already easily available elswhere. Perhaps a "see also" reference to the compact cassette article would suffice? Jud 18:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's probably okay; although it's already been linked at the start of the article, I don't mind it... Fourohfour 21:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Have re-considered and agree with your point regarding Cut-and-paste awatches of material. I also want to avert an edit-war and accept your valid points regarding links and minor overlap. The article does require expansion however, so I'll attempt to script a valid paragraph or two on the format itself - I'll post here (for your review) prior to editing the article. Thanks and regards for both of your input Encise 21:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Encise
