Re: [AV Media Matters] Microcassette

[smolians@erols.com]

This is far too confusing, involving either some cross-licensing or
parallel development.  I have a ggrourp of cassettes that hols 2
ordinary 5" reels within, the whole fiitting into a player.  These
are the software for the Permoflux Scriber Dictating Machine.  It
lays flat.  The parts for the RCA are different inside and outside
and are not interchangeable.

There seem to have been a great number of variations on this theme,
worldwide.  Phillips, often marketed as Norelco or DeJour, is
responsible for having marketed many "not ready for prime time"
products of this nature.

Steve Smolian

-----Original Message-----
From: midshires@cix.co.uk <midshires@cix.co.uk>
To: AV-Media-Matters@topica.com <AV-Media-Matters@topica.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 11:21 AM
Subject: RE: [AV Media Matters] Microcassette

>>Now, what pray tell is a Garrard cassette?
>
>It was a bulky affair made of clear plastic (polystyrene) that held two
>small reels of 1/4" tape that dropped onto locating pins on the tape
>recorder. The latter sort of "stood up and begged"; in other words, the
>recorder stood upright on a narrow end, with the spindles on the narrow top.
>
>>Would it happen to be the quarter inch tape cartridge designed and
>>introduced by RCA in
>>the U.S. in 1958, and perhaps was also marketed in England by Garrard?
>
>Could well have been licensed from RCA; it came out here in 1960 and people
>weren't sure what to name this device; some called it a cassette, whilst
>others used the expression cartridge or tape magazine. Regardless of its
>name, you dropped the whole caboodle on top of an otherwise standard tape
>recorder and whilst it worked, it wasn't particularly flexible. With no
>support from other manufacturers, it was doomed to failure.
>
>>I hadn't know that Garrard was into tape recorders at all.
>
>Oh yes.
>
>>And if we are doing a genealogy, don't forget the Revere/3M
>>cartridge which used .150 inch tape at 1 7/8 ips.  Combine that with
>>the RCA cartridge and you have the Philips Compact Cassette.
>
>I guess so. On the European continent both Grundig and Philips had the idea
>to  make the cassettes smaller and offer a choice of tape lengths (recording
>times). Launched in Berlin in 1963, their rival cassette systems appeared in
>the shops during 1964 and achieved the smaller size by halving the tape
>width from 1/4" to 1/8". Philips also halved the conventional tape speed to
>1 7/8 inches per second, whilst Grundig opted for a 'new' tape speed of 2
>inches per second. In dimensions, too, the two new cassettes diverged
>slightly, so there was no hope of compatibility.
>
>'Serious' hi-fi enthusiasts treated these cassette systems with disdain but
>of course these new tapes were intended for normal people, not dedicated
>audio buffs. Grundig called theirs the International System, the tapes being
>labelled DC, whilst Philips called their the compact cassette and for a
>while the odds were even as to which system would succeed (pre-recorded
>musicassettes were announced for both formats). Then Philips played their
>master card by offering to license their design to all comers; at a stroke
>they had created a universal, compatible system which with improvements, is
>still in use throughout the world. Cynics argue that Philips never made any
>money from the compact cassette (unlikely tale!) but they certainly made a
>lot of friends, a lot of money for other manufacturers as well.... and who
>remembers the Grundig DC cassette now?
>
>Sorry if I'm going on a bit... I was just quoting from a magazine article I
>wrote some years back.
>
>>Minisette (note trademark spelling)
>
>I presume this name was used in North America; it has never been used here.
>Many European products have different names in the USA, e.g.  Philips
>(Europe)/Norelco (USA), Volkswagen Golf (Europe)/Volkswagen Rabbit (USA). I
>seem to think that Philips invented a snappy name for their first compact
>cassette machine in the States (Carrycorder?), that was not used here. In
>all cases it appears to be Madison Avenue deciding they must create an
>all-American image and identity for the products that's more in tune with
>American sensibilities. Of course there's nothing wrong in that and it makes
>a lot of sense; a lot of US products don't go down very well in their 'raw'
>state here in Europe.
>
>>these are all radically different designs although they are all derivative.
>"Designed" might be a better word than "invented",
>
>OK, we agree then!
>
>Andrew Emmerson.