From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Who dat say dey gonna buy dat DAT?
Date: 20 Aug 92 13:44:01 GMT
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Aug19.164701.11755@wdl.loral.com> trw@spl1.spl.loral.com (Tim R Witort) writes:
>
>|> Excuse me for my naivete, TIm.  I meant the ability to make digital
>|> copies of my CD's -- by usinga DAT deck and a blank tape.  I wonder when
>|> the consumer pricing of DAT decks will come down and flatten as did
>|> the cassette deck price structure years ago.  (Computer prices 
>|> have not yet flattened!  They still continue to yield more bang for the
>|> buck yr after yr!)

Probably never.  DAT has proved to be an abysmal failure in the consumer
market.  Its cost to manufacture is way too high to sell well in mass
quantities, and digital recording isn't something that the mass-market has
flocked to, at least not yet.

DAT will likely remain a professional format (it has been eagerly embraced
by the recording industry), and the consumer market will likely be dominated
by either DCC or MD (my bet goes to DCC, but we'll see).  

>   One of the reasons that DAT prices are not plummeting like other
>audio developments is the complexity of the mechanism. The DAT
>technology requires very tight tolerances to squeeze 6 gigabytes of
>data onto a 2" by 3" cassette. The technology is modeled on the
>rotating drum head technology used in VCRs but the rest of the
>technology took a lot of R&D that the consumers will have to pay for.

Well, that professionals have to pay for.  Most consumers aren't buying
DAT's.

>  The thing still makes better recordings than any analog deck in the
>world. And those babys can go for $2000+!

....NOT!

Sorry, but your $600 home DAT machine does not make better recordings
than any analog deck in the world.  First of all, I don't know any
good analog deck that can be had for $2,000.  The least expensive
analog machine that I would use for a professional job would be an
Otari MX-5050 or more likely, an MX-55, which last I checked sells for
around $5,500 for a 2-track machine.  The bigger Studers and Sonys
sell for even more than that.  Good sound does not come cheap.

Your $600 DAT machine sounds good for what it is.  And it sounds good
in the bass.  Bass is easy to record with digital.  Your machine's
shortcomings will become more noticeable the farther up the spectrum
you go.  In a $600 DAT machine has most of its manufacturing cost
spent on the mechanics, and less concern is given to things like the
ADC and amplification circuitry, none of which comes anywhere even
close to professional standards.

So, enjoy your machine, but don't be fooled into thinking that it's the
best-sounding device there is, or that because it's digital, it outdoes
everything analog.  Not so.  There are many, many analog machines that
would easily outperform a $600 consumer DAT.  

When you get into professional digital machines that cost at leat an
order of magnitude more than consumer models, then the question gets
a little harder to answer conclusively.


--
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
Newsgroups: rec.audio