Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!icdoc!qmw-cs!gn!tmn
From: tmn@gn.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.music
Subject: Re: Portable CD revisited. . .
Message-ID: <1179000005@gn>
Date: 30 Aug 90 23:56:00 GMT
References: <6942372@15285.26d92aa0@levels.sait.edu.a>
Lines: 17
Nf-ID: #R:15285.26d92aa0@levels.sait.edu.a:-694237203:gn:1179000005:000:979
Nf-From: gn.UUCP!tmn    Aug 31 00:56:00 1990


You wish DAT were available? I wonder why? DAT is great for recording studios
when it comes to low-cost digital mastering, but for anything else it's a
waste of time and effort. It's still rusty plastic scraping against whizzer
heads, not a laser in sight. It's the 80's equivalent of an F1 and a Betamax
in a little box. As I say, great for studios (we wouldn't be without ours,
modded for 44.1k sampling so we don't need fs conversion to go to CD mastering)
but not worth it for anyone else. Especially at prices that make your CD
player and its fixes sound real cheap. Even a cheap nasty DAT is over
600 pounds here, while an entirely decent CD player is around 140. 
I would continue to support the more advanced technology if I were you. And
watch out for Recordable CDs -- and S-DAT (digital Compact Cassettes, probably
with machines that will also play analog ones...).

S-Dat is also ancient tech, but it might be fun...

-Richard Elen at The Music Network (tmn@gn.UUCP)