Cassettes and CDs rely on analog electromagnetic prints on their surface, which are then read by hardware and transformed in voltage signals that pass through circuits up to the speakers. It's easy to damage that information and therefore lose it, even by the mere contact with daylight exposure (on prolonged times, of course). Digitally converted sounds, on the other hand, are digital representations (i.e. binary data) of music codified into a specific format, and (technically) shouldn't be modified or lost by corruption, unless you're messing with them (i.e. writing and not reading). The problem of quality relies on whether the format is lossy or loseless. Not to mention that you don't need to fabricate a physical object to hold that information, since it can be saved in virtually any hardware partitioned with modern formats, and it can be copied in mere seconds without the danger of destroying it in the process.
There's a reason cassettes were surpassed by CD, and why we let them die. Unless you're a hipster or a sucker for old technology, there's simply no reason why they could be considered superior to digital.
>>1411>Unless you're a hipster or a sucker for old technology, there's simply no reason why they could be considered superior to digital.
If you want to listen to music on your computer you have to turn it on, log in and move your mouse around to find the file or open up a browser and search for it. On a cd player though you can just put the cd in and push a button. Cassettes are totally outdated though; I agree with that. One advantage of physical data storage is that you have total control of that data while anybody could easily copy a file. If you want you to be the only person to have access to something, that's harder to do with digital files.
You can listen to digital music on anything with external audio output and a USB port. Meaning: TVs, home audio systems, radios, ipads/mp3 devices (if they still exist, or whatever their equivalent is), you name it. On the other hand, if you want to listen to a CD you either need a radio with the appropriate hardware (still on the market), a walkman (DEAD), or a computer (you may as well digitalize to preserve the CD), so you're even more limited there than with digital files.
>One advantage of physical data storage is that you have total control of that data while anybody could easily copy a file. If you want you to be the only person to have access to something, that's harder to do with digital files.
Well that's why I said "hipster".
>>1413>Well that's why I said "hipster".
I was talking more about security. Anyway, I personally like to physically posses music and really, "own it". I like to pick it up and touch it and lick that shit. You can't lick files anon. You can't TASTE THE MUSIC.
CD is digital audio. Cassette is analog, and really shoddy analog at that. CD will be a perfect copy so long as the physical disc itself isn't damaged, which the same goes for any other storage medium (hd, flash media, etc). Damage the media, lose the file.
CDDA standard is raw (uncompressed wav), 2 channel (stereo), 16-bit, 44.1khz digital audio. There are alternate standards out there with higher fidelity (sacd, dvd-a, etc) but by the time they came out digital distribution had already surpassed physical media so they didn't really catch on.
The tl;dr is that cd *is* a digital file, and higher quality than most mp3s out there. Cassette however, no benefit at all unless you really like lowfi tape noise.
On the other hand, vinyl has a higher signal-to-noise ratio and higher fidelity than cd, so that is still a medium worth trying out if you're really into sound quality. When it comes to vinyl, the quality of the turntable and needle are just as important as the quality of the media. You get what you pay for.