Видео

It’s not anymore a technics sl1200mk2 as you exchange the original fabulous S tonearm so this comparaison is irelevant…sorry. Thank you for sharing

The vinyl sounds like I'm literally in the recording studio room. The reel-to-reel has a fuller, more dynamic range.

I am late to the party but duh! We were supposed to make a comparison via a RUclips video likely played on a computer or cell phone?

Sound of the tape is more bass and deeper and the LP is more richer sounding with the drums and guitars! I like the LP sound!

VINAL IS GARBAGE,TAPE IS BEST.BUT WITH THE BIG MAGNET HIGH POWERED SPEAKERS TAPE WILL MESS UP.UNLESS STORED AND USED IN ZERO MAGNETIC FEILDS.

La prise de son est très mauvaise, j'ose espérer qu'à l'écoute en réel, le son soit nettement meilleur que cela, car c'est une catastrophe vu le prix des appareils, cela n'a aucune présence, des infra grave inexistant, un grave lointain, peu de dynamique... si c'est reproduit sur des JBL 4349, cela ne donne pas envie d'acheter le moindre appareils présentés, faite une prise de son en stéréo avec un appareil placé au point d'écoute dans l'axe des oreilles, un enregistreur numérique de type Zoom au minimum pour le son, c'est franchement une vidéo d'amateur débutant pour présenter du matériel bas de gamme acheté en supermarché !😡

Reel to reel for me. More dynamics, punchy sound on snare. The vinyl less dynamics and more low ends

Most realístico is pioneer, most equilibrium WD , most musicality 3 grátis speaker

I wonder, why didn’t you record from an AUX output? Because there is no low end at all.

Sansui best sound to my ear, followed by Marantz then Pioneer. All good amps though.

What was the source of the tape machine?

One should have a master tape copy to truly compare.

All that good equipment deserves better than those crap JBL speakers. Hopefully whatever pair is next to them is to which is actually listened.

Neither. Both sound wooden and lifeless. Sorry

...there might be a difference and someone might be able to hear it some place, but not equally compressed on RUclips 😅

Ma continuo a preferire Klipsch Heresy II

Warf 1

The RTM 911 tape is the best tape available.

Why are we hearing both recordings in mono?

Nice turntable! What is that on the record apart from the stylus? Is it for extra stability or is it cleaning as it plays to remove any dust/static? PS I have just dug out my original 1993 cassette of In Utero. I don’t have an original CD but I do have the 20th anniversary CD with the original remastered plus Albini’s 2013 remix. That cassette was played to death so has drop outs in places abs has lost some treble from years of playing. BUT! I was really surprised with how much warmer it sounded and natural. No of course it’s not vinyl but it’s still analogue. I had bass boost off and recommended bass and treble (+2 bass +5 treble) and Krists bass came through nice warm and audible at volume of 5. On the CD I’m not hearing the bass until volume over 10. I know bass is always more audible at lower volumes on tape than CD but it wasn’t just that, the distortion on the guitars sounded a lot more natural and warmer on the tape. First time in over ten years I played the tape I always played CD or download/stream but I was surprised just how good the tape sounded, allowing for its wear and tear. I was watching a video about how the dynamic quality of remastered vinyl drops due to loudness wars. Even if it says “vinyl remastered using original master tape” what often happens is it gets sent off to be digitally remastered and then gets cut to vinyl, it was a Talking Heads re record I believe but basically each re-issue the actual musical fidelity and quality was dropping. It gave me the idea to compare the remastered In Utero CD versus the original cassette. Wish I had an original 1993 CD to do like for like comparison but yeah although the CD sound is clean even with its age and wear and imperfection the tape sounded really good. Like I was hearing the original sound for the first time in years. I know it’s all subjective but yeah just my take!

I would only use test equipment to make this comparison. Everyone’s hearing is unique and can be subjective..

Beautiful, natural, this set-up is perfect!

The dynavector is more natural, equilibrate on all the spectre, for me the number one.

Sono tutti belli! Difficile capire in cuffia, Il Sansui sembra piu dinamico, piu dettagliato. 👏

Were not vinyls engineered from tape sources? Doesn't a stylus cartridge have inductive reactance that changes through different frequencies are better at the higher frequencies than low ones And of course a valve preamp very hard to beat

hi records are a pain to deal with been there sold them all (cats i love them) so why i sold the records reel to reel tape decks home ones the akai models are very good still have them for play record reel to reel pro decks like (otari mtr 12 ACE decks ) for editing fixing repairing tapes tascam pro decks 44 80-8 tascam 38 34 love them the best decks for the money is a soundcraft 381-8 have one down to it it's what the deck is used for and who's going to service it i am a tec so i am ok beware there's alot of money pits out there the best format for my money is betacam liner audio for mastering the tapes are now very low price and decks to i have alot of them working

Une véritable merde le son faire écoute une ambiance de pièce ne veux absolument rien dire ne prouve rien. ....

🔢🙄

Hola amigo pintasteis los subwofers verde ? En los pioneer hpm 100? me podrías decir que material usastes o que tipo de pintura porque me imagino que debió alguna en especial saludos y gracias por los vídeos

For some reason your turntable reminds me of the Michaelson Morley experiment.

The quadraphonic is real nice. I have this one record too

What a bullshit !!! Yo recorded your Vinyl to tape and then you compare the sound quality. What a stupid idea. Are you kidding us? You might use a original master tape copy and then you'll see or hear the difference. Vinyl against tape is like steam loco against high speed trains.

The pioneers should play a lot better, I think there is sommething wrong with the cross over or a bad connection. I have 5 pair of speakers connected on my amps and for sure the HPM-100 sounds the most warm of them all. So in my opinion and conclusion, the pioneers are bad connected ore the cross overs are damaged.

In the late 1970's prior to the advent of digital home formats including the Technics VHS based digital home recorder; a good many classical albums had DIGITAL RECORDING emblazoned across the dust jacket indicating that the music contained on the LP was in fact digitally recorded. It was a bit of a deal then much like half speed masters of the time.

Wszystkie ładnie brzmią. Trudno wybrać.

Thanks this was fun! This is what getting out the toys and playing with them is all about. I have an Otari 5050 tape deck that needs servicing. In the 90's they were all over the place in radio stations as a "professional studio deck". I spent a lot of time recording and editing tape on them and am now wondering if it's worth the trouble to get mine back in operation. I'm assuming the tape was recorded from your vinyl copy to tape on that machine. If so I'd consider that the comparison is not only about the formats but the sound of the playback section of this tape deck. It's seems fuller but also darker. Could be by design, but also could be aging electronics (capacitors?). Just some appreciative notes from someone who spent years doing broadcast studio work on various gear in the age of analog. Good stuff. Thanks again!

Shound sheit - both compared to the ambition and money spent.

The jazz was shrill with o bass. Supertramp was muddled and lifeless. Neither was engaging. Imho

I have the hole pioneer system and is the best I been able to comper it with a high end systems nope for the price I will put a RUclips video on my system so you can listen thanks

I feel like anything Albini engendered would sound far better on tape

A record player with a separate arm for a brush should be standard

not a fair comparison, Accuphase V Revox B77 = Shark V Dory, try a Tascam 32 2b or another double capstan recently re capped serviced and calibrated machine. that tape is far too hot for the akai, distorted af.

no bass on the vinyl, sounds like there was a bass cut. Tape sound far better. and if I compare with the CD the CD sound better than both, but is close to the tape.

Both are cool in different way . Love your comparison and thank you for that.

Would have been a scosche better if you were running a 1/2 track 15IPS deck too. ;-) Beautiful signal path BTW.

worth noting that the 1st pressing you have is an import or international release, the true first US press of In Utero was the clear vinyl press.

You compare a high end TT with a low end R2R deck. This Pioneer R2R deck is a consumer level deck as it is a slow speed 4 track and not a 15ips high speed 2 track professional deck which would blow this R2R away.

Love your system. I also noticed that you were using RTM 911. Best out there. Thanks for sharing.😊

I enjoyed this a lot thank you. For me I preferred the Hana it just seemed to punch through more and bring the song more alive. These are subtle differences but for me that is my choice.

This is BS. While both formats are high fidelity, particularly open reel at 15 ips or higher, neither can match a CD in terms of high fidelity. I noticed you haven't backed up your claim of them being "the best sounding format" with any objective measurements which is not surprising as there is none. Neither, particularly the vinyl, matches let alone exceeds a CD on any measure of fidelity to the original signal, after all there is no magic as all the R2R, vinyls and digital formats and devices do is record and replay an electrical signal. Of course what actually sounds better depends on the recording, mastering and so on but largely it is subjective to any individual and some people do prefer lower fidelity sound which you get from vinyl in particular. The ultimate irony here is that you have chosen to demonstrate sound quality differences between the two analogue formats on You Tube which is a digital format, and lossy digital format at that. All you have really demonstrated is that even a lossy digital codec is transparent enough to hear the sound differences in your comparisons. I listen to all formats and have the half speed master Abbey Road LP in my collection. I prefer the sound of the 1987 CD to that record.