![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
With the mention of tape use in automobiles it should also be mentioned that it was a stupid idea because the machines were always getting buggered by dust. CD players don't have that problem. Anyone should remember how often you would find a tape player in a car and it wouldn't work or there'd be something wrong with it. And I'm not just talking old cars, I mean cars with tape decks only 5 years old or less wouldn't work. How many cars with CD players over 5 years old, still work?
"Some audiophiles believe that cassette deck technology, due to its analog nature, provides sound recordings superior to current digital technology, such as CDR and DAT."
Does anyone really believe cassettes are sonically superior to CDs and DAT tapes? I have heard many audiophiles extol the virtues of analogue tape, but they were talking about reel-to-reel tape, not cassettes. AdorableRuffian 01:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
"Cassette players pioneered the modern set of control buttons, play, pause, stop, record, fast forward and rewind. "
Who comes up with these sappy article titles? I worked as an engineer for four years at a video/data recorder company in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and we never called any tape recorders as "decks", either our own or those of other manufacturers. — Quicksilver T @ 16:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
What was the name of the auto next track feature? Wasn't the length of silence between songs patented? That probably deserves a mention here. I remeber it being called sps5 oor something similar on one tape deck I saw. Betterthanalemur ( talk) 19:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
At present, the article for Nakamichi claims *they* were the first... and the article for Technics claims *they* were the first... though neither article cites a source for that claim...
86.25.121.157 (
talk)
13:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The article says that by the late 2000s, the installation of tape decks in cars ceased. If so, what was the last car that had a cassette deck as a standard option and when was it rolled out? Thanks. ---Ransom (-- 67.91.216.67 ( talk) 17:09, 7 April 2011 (UTC))
thats not write — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.143.118 ( talk) 22:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cassette deck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Possibly the last significant development in cassette tape technology (mid 1990's) was the use of thin film ( Magnetoresistive) head technology used on all DCC decks and one standalone cassette deck (Technics RS-AZ7) [1] 86.166.75.243 ( talk) 10:14, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
In order that the small subsection on the introduction of "logic control" to cassette decks be freed from the hedged phrasing required by User:Jeh, I kindly request third-party sources on this particular topic. The time-frame of the invention and spread of the application of logic control to cassette decks and other hi-fi equipment means that such third-party sources would almost certainly be from the 1970s and 1980s, and are thus unlikely to be available on the Internet. I would be much impressed if such a source could be found on the web free of charge, as I have already searched quite exhaustively for it. I believe that the most likely accessible medium of such a source will take the form of microfiche film archives of contemporary magazines such as Consumer Reports. Personally, I have no desire to go to such lengths as spending hours at a microfiche station of a library to source such a minute detail of an obsolete technology, and so it is here that I draw the line and end my efforts. However, if you, dear reader and indefatigable Wikipedian, derive pleasure or fulfillment from such tedious tasks, then by all means please do embark on the search.
Given the wide regard for logic control as being a desirable feature for cassette decks, which I would regard as common-knowledge and which can be readily confirmed by a cursory glance at any hi-fi forum or vlog, I would argue that it would be unlikely in the extreme that these claims of increased reliability and convenience of logic-control would ultimately prove to be incorrect. Thus, by invoking the principle of WP:COMMON, I argue in this case that these first-party sources can and should stand as a reliable sources on their own.
Forgive me, but I must make bold by adding that I find it curious indeed that this small subsection in particular, which has grown to be arguably the best-cited portion of this entire article, should be held to a standard of citation of the utmost, nigh unattainable, rigor; whereas the vast majority of the remainder of this article, which is neither sourced at all nor consistently couched with careful qualifiers, is yet permitted to stand as-is. If the article as a whole should be held to such lofty requirements, then surely the vast majority should either be thoroughly pockmarked with citation-request tags, or should be immediately deleted with the same ruthlessness as was applied to the subsection in question. BirdValiant ( talk) 20:36, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. [...] All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. (emph. added - jeh)
Say... if you really want to improve this article, why don't you work on adding references for some of the long-standing uncited stuff? You obviously have the time and the inclination to do the research. Jeh ( talk) 17:41, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Erpert proposes deleting
Cassette deck § Decline in popularity because it is unsourced. The section has been marked as unsourced since 2019. We generally don't delete unsourced material unless the content is challenged. Erpert's first deletion rationale was I agree with most of that, but it was all unsourced
so it does not appear that everything is being challenged so everything in the section does not need to be deleted. ~
Kvng (
talk)
13:23, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
“ | We generally don't delete unsourced material unless the content is challenged. | ” |
I for one think that it's best to keep sincere efforts like this and avoid wholesale reverts or deletions. The latter behaviors make the Wikipedia community appear hostile, aggressive, and generally unwelcome to people who just want to make a decent contribution without going through the labor of learning citation rules, Wikipedia's bureaucracy, etc. I say this as someone for whom a disagreement over this very article years ago (in combination with several other experiences) caused me to largely abandon this website for years. One should also remember that these kinds of experiences are large drivers of the dearth of female editors on Wikipedia. My suggestion is to avoid the appearance of lording over articles and let this stuff go sometimes. BirdValiant ( talk) 03:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
With the mention of tape use in automobiles it should also be mentioned that it was a stupid idea because the machines were always getting buggered by dust. CD players don't have that problem. Anyone should remember how often you would find a tape player in a car and it wouldn't work or there'd be something wrong with it. And I'm not just talking old cars, I mean cars with tape decks only 5 years old or less wouldn't work. How many cars with CD players over 5 years old, still work?
"Some audiophiles believe that cassette deck technology, due to its analog nature, provides sound recordings superior to current digital technology, such as CDR and DAT."
Does anyone really believe cassettes are sonically superior to CDs and DAT tapes? I have heard many audiophiles extol the virtues of analogue tape, but they were talking about reel-to-reel tape, not cassettes. AdorableRuffian 01:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
"Cassette players pioneered the modern set of control buttons, play, pause, stop, record, fast forward and rewind. "
Who comes up with these sappy article titles? I worked as an engineer for four years at a video/data recorder company in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and we never called any tape recorders as "decks", either our own or those of other manufacturers. — Quicksilver T @ 16:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
What was the name of the auto next track feature? Wasn't the length of silence between songs patented? That probably deserves a mention here. I remeber it being called sps5 oor something similar on one tape deck I saw. Betterthanalemur ( talk) 19:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
At present, the article for Nakamichi claims *they* were the first... and the article for Technics claims *they* were the first... though neither article cites a source for that claim...
86.25.121.157 (
talk)
13:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The article says that by the late 2000s, the installation of tape decks in cars ceased. If so, what was the last car that had a cassette deck as a standard option and when was it rolled out? Thanks. ---Ransom (-- 67.91.216.67 ( talk) 17:09, 7 April 2011 (UTC))
thats not write — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.143.118 ( talk) 22:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cassette deck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Possibly the last significant development in cassette tape technology (mid 1990's) was the use of thin film ( Magnetoresistive) head technology used on all DCC decks and one standalone cassette deck (Technics RS-AZ7) [1] 86.166.75.243 ( talk) 10:14, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
In order that the small subsection on the introduction of "logic control" to cassette decks be freed from the hedged phrasing required by User:Jeh, I kindly request third-party sources on this particular topic. The time-frame of the invention and spread of the application of logic control to cassette decks and other hi-fi equipment means that such third-party sources would almost certainly be from the 1970s and 1980s, and are thus unlikely to be available on the Internet. I would be much impressed if such a source could be found on the web free of charge, as I have already searched quite exhaustively for it. I believe that the most likely accessible medium of such a source will take the form of microfiche film archives of contemporary magazines such as Consumer Reports. Personally, I have no desire to go to such lengths as spending hours at a microfiche station of a library to source such a minute detail of an obsolete technology, and so it is here that I draw the line and end my efforts. However, if you, dear reader and indefatigable Wikipedian, derive pleasure or fulfillment from such tedious tasks, then by all means please do embark on the search.
Given the wide regard for logic control as being a desirable feature for cassette decks, which I would regard as common-knowledge and which can be readily confirmed by a cursory glance at any hi-fi forum or vlog, I would argue that it would be unlikely in the extreme that these claims of increased reliability and convenience of logic-control would ultimately prove to be incorrect. Thus, by invoking the principle of WP:COMMON, I argue in this case that these first-party sources can and should stand as a reliable sources on their own.
Forgive me, but I must make bold by adding that I find it curious indeed that this small subsection in particular, which has grown to be arguably the best-cited portion of this entire article, should be held to a standard of citation of the utmost, nigh unattainable, rigor; whereas the vast majority of the remainder of this article, which is neither sourced at all nor consistently couched with careful qualifiers, is yet permitted to stand as-is. If the article as a whole should be held to such lofty requirements, then surely the vast majority should either be thoroughly pockmarked with citation-request tags, or should be immediately deleted with the same ruthlessness as was applied to the subsection in question. BirdValiant ( talk) 20:36, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. [...] All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. (emph. added - jeh)
Say... if you really want to improve this article, why don't you work on adding references for some of the long-standing uncited stuff? You obviously have the time and the inclination to do the research. Jeh ( talk) 17:41, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Erpert proposes deleting
Cassette deck § Decline in popularity because it is unsourced. The section has been marked as unsourced since 2019. We generally don't delete unsourced material unless the content is challenged. Erpert's first deletion rationale was I agree with most of that, but it was all unsourced
so it does not appear that everything is being challenged so everything in the section does not need to be deleted. ~
Kvng (
talk)
13:23, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
“ | We generally don't delete unsourced material unless the content is challenged. | ” |
I for one think that it's best to keep sincere efforts like this and avoid wholesale reverts or deletions. The latter behaviors make the Wikipedia community appear hostile, aggressive, and generally unwelcome to people who just want to make a decent contribution without going through the labor of learning citation rules, Wikipedia's bureaucracy, etc. I say this as someone for whom a disagreement over this very article years ago (in combination with several other experiences) caused me to largely abandon this website for years. One should also remember that these kinds of experiences are large drivers of the dearth of female editors on Wikipedia. My suggestion is to avoid the appearance of lording over articles and let this stuff go sometimes. BirdValiant ( talk) 03:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)