Talk:Compact Cassette/Archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Contents |
Data rates
Data rates for cassettes as data storage are from Slashdot. Not verified. Hotlorp 05:09, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC) http://slashdot.org/articles/03/09/18/1857204.shtml?tid=126
- 4k bps was a typical data rate for digital cassette tape storage in the 1980s. --Blainster 08:56, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
MC
The name "musicassette" or MC refers ONLY to pre-recorded cassette albums, not recordable cassettes. Lee M 01:57, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Dubious dimensions
Is it just me, or do the metric measurements in the article seem overly precise? Is the width of a single track really specified down to tenths of a micrometre? To help visualise it, a single human hair is about 100 micrometres thick. This means that the track width is specified to thousandths of a hair's width.
Conversions from imperial to metric shouldn't just be mechanic calculations based on conversion factors taught by rote in school. They should actually have some perspective to the real-life things that are actually being measured.
Or to put it another way, how would you feel if I (being approximately 186 cm tall) expressed my height as 6 feet, 1.228346457 inches? — JIP | Talk 10:08, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The dimensions currently given in the article look not very plausible:
- As a Dutch company, Philips is unlikely to use foreign, archaic units in their designs. The inch values appear to be crudely rounded versions of the original metric dimensions. The millimetre values given in the article are merely exact back conversions of the incorrect inch values. They contradict other sources that give the width of the tape as 3.8 mm, for example.
- The tape speed is variable. Since the pulling reel is driven with constant angular velocity, the tape speed at the head will increase as the pulling reel fills up. The tape speed therefore must be a wide interval, not the currently given value "17⁄8 inches per second (47.625 mm/s)", which has ridiculous accuracy anyway.
If someone has access to the standards that I added to the reference section, could you please look up the real dimensions and replace the current inch mess? Markus Kuhn 21:04, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
- The takeup reel does not pull the tape, it only takes up the slack. The tape speed is controlled by the capstan speed, not the reel motor (if any). Thus the tape speed is constant (within margin). If it wasn't, cassettes could not be used for music. --Blainster 08:49, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Here is an online example of cassette tape specifications. --Blainster 10:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
It's very notable that 1/8 inch is far closer to 3.18cm than 3.81cm. Is the latter really correct? Perhaps it was typed in wrongly. Multiple sources don't necessarily mean much if they all got their wrong information from the same place. Fourohfour 10:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- This looks like a typo, as is should be 3.175 mm. The tape width is 1/8", despite Philips being a European (and hence probably metricated) company, because at the time, tape widths were already standardised at fractional inch widths, with 1/4" tape being the most common. Therefore they almost certainly simply halved it which would have required minimal tooling changes for tape manufacturers to adopt. This is only speculation on my part, but as evidence to support this, I just measured a few cassettes with a vernier caliper, and it looks as if they are indeed a fraction under 3.18mm, which is accurate as my gauge can measure (and bearing in mind tape is too bendy to get a very accurate measurement on with calipers). GRAHAMUK 19 December 2005
-
- Good work. The 3.81 mm dimension I copied without measuring is clearly a typo, all though in my defense I note that this number has proliferated across a number of websites. Thanks for checking and correcting it. Isn't Wikipedia great? --Blainster 17:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
BASF
The article's second sentence reads: "It consists of a length of magnetic tape from BASF inside a protective plastic shell." This could be interpreted to mean that all cassetes - sold by all companies - contain tape made by BASF. I'm pretty sure that's not the case, and the intended meaning may have been simply that BASF invented the type of tape used in cassetes, but it needs to be clarified.
--4.245.5.118 23:46, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- What they meant to say was that the first tape cassette was made by Philips using BASF tape.
External Links
I removed a link that was essentially an ad. I saw the person who added it said it was a good example of the cassette in today's market, but it seems irrelevant. Anyone who feels different, feel free to explain why... methelfilms 03:00, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Endless loop?
Can somebody with more technical expertise that what I have write a section that talks about endless-loop cassettes? Although I think they've fallen out of favor, they were popular in answering machines and in music-on-hold systems. Some had a metalic piece of tape that served as a "marker" for the equipment to know when the tape had made a complete cycle. Any takers to write such a section? Joe 19:49, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
C15?
Am I right in thinking C15 tapes were widely available for a period? I seem to remember using them for ZX Spectrum data.--bodnotbod 12:39, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- They certainly were, as I have several. I also have some C46 (ie. LP-sized) ones. Bastie 14:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Thanks. I'll add them into the article. --bodnotbod 16:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Coleco ADAM
The Coleco_Adam computer used two high-speed drives based on compact cassette technology.
- I remember reading an article about that; apparently the cassettes were not "normal" audio cassettes, although I don't know what the difference was (I assume it was in the tape formulation and not the shell, as it mentioned the possibility that "normal" cassettes could be inappropriately used) Fourohfour 00:49, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
