What's wrong with dbx?
Comments on this video
You can comment on this video at YouTube
You can comment on this video at YouTube
Thursday April 20, 2023
David Mellor
David Mellor is CEO and Course Director of Audio Masterclass. David has designed courses in audio education and training since 1986 and is the publisher and principal writer of Adventures In Audio.
If you think Piano exposes the shortcomings of dbx, you should try recording hi-hats.
@drumstudio1: Opinions are quite subjective, and surely mine in particular ;-) In former years (decades) I had lots of tapedecks. Like a posession or close to a "fetish" ;-). Dolby B recorded and activated via playback even on the same! deck sounded always like a cut of higher frequencies. It was (to my younger ears then) not subtle, the high-cut was quite obvious and annoying. Especially when you are a fan of Hihat- and cymbal-sounds. I had Technics RMS250, Marantz SD602, Akai G75, Sony K61, Sony K55 & also K55 II, Sankyo STD-1650 and several more of Pioneer, Wega, Philips etc. On all decks I ever owned Dolby B sounded in my ears quite weak to bad to horrible and always cut the high frequencies.
Some years it was rumored "Dolby B is good when the system is perfect adjusted to dolby and equipped with better electronic circuitry & parts like the dolby laboratories advices and many manufacturers maybe did not follow these Dolby regulations".
But to me this sounds not that likely. It seems not that likely that all decks, and also all tapedecks of friends with their cassettes, I never experienced one deck with good Dolby B results. I personally think it is also not likely that of so many tapedecks of my peers, not one did follow the dolby laboratories standards. To me this is maybe? a myth to hide the hard truth, that Dolby B was not that convincing as promised in theory or printed on technical data sheets ;-). In my ears: yes it reduced Tape-hiss, but also the higher music timbre/frequencies as a brutal collateral damage.
Aside this personal subjective view, in fact I like your channel a lot. Best wishes.
@skullstjohn: I bought a 244 brand new in 1983 and learned a lot about the recording process and it was tons of fun. Question for you: your outtro is very clean. Did you do and bouncing of tracks? Is that the original master? If so, it held up quite well over the years.
@julianmorrisco: Noise never bothered me on cassette. I used Dolby C on 2 track, and Dolby or dbx on four track with double speed. I could hear it, sure, but it never interfered with the music unless it was about the third or fourth bounce.
No, what used to bother me were dropouts, occasional tape eating (usually with poor cassettes but I didn’t anyways have the choice) and most egregiously, pitch problems like wow and flutter. I was/am quite sensitive to wow, and it almost always bothered me, even on high quality tape machines.
@edwardbalowski6572: Dynamic Expander.....Thats what i have been using since the early 80s,Not only for lps but cds,tapes.
@Rich-h4k: Thanks for the video, I know this is an older one but I figured I’d chime in anyway.
I use a dbx 224 (all lowercase haha) outboard unit, and I think the trick to getting no modulation as you say, or pumping or breathing sounds is to record at the proper levels, and I will add that I record a decent chrome tape with peaks at 0 to + 2 dB but no higher. I also use it with HX Pro (caps allowed) with great results. In fact it sounds so close to the source that I doubt anyone would ever know that it’s a cassette playing. I think dbx needs to be used on a quality deck, because everything that’s wrong before the processing gets amplified double. These are my experiences anyway. Thanks again.
@doctorrobin3040: Nice.
@larryhazelwood1962: I have a Technics RS-B965 cassette deck with dbx.I hear no modulation or pumping.Just clear sounds equal or better than a cd.
@RobertSuttonOfAnacortes: I remember some hifi cassette decks, in the "late years" of the format, emerging with dbx NR built-in. Having abandoned Dolby B/C NR for my purposes (portable copies of purchased vinyl) I always wondered if the dbx was really useful as a practical matter, or was it being pushed as a gimmick.
@railgap: I wonder if anyone ever shipped a deck with both dBx and Dolby. And I marvel how Dolby can come up with "improvements", given the limitations of the format. I note with interest that my Nak.582 came with Dolby, but my TEAC X-1000R came with (single band, argh) DbX apparently as an afterthought; the notoriously flimsy switch is in a strange position and has a strange 'feel' to it unlike all other controls on the deck. Weird. :)
@railgap: So it needed multiple bands to be inaudible, and dBx themselves acknowledged this and brought out multi-band units.
If the battle were made today, when you can put whatever functions on an ASIC, dBx would have won out over Dolby.
But back then, doing the job at all required PCBs full of big clunky discretes, and in terms of implementation, Dolby was cheaper to
implement, for a given quality level, so that's what we consumers received. Single-band dBX sounded terrible tho.
@jamesisaac7684 replies to @railgap: Dolby won because it was better. That's how Capitalism works. Only the best of the best wins
@MrSlipstreem: Thanks for the explanation of how Dolby B did actually work well on a correctly calibrated and maintained cassette deck. Many of the decks I've bought in the past weren't even calibrated correctly straight from the factory, so it's not hard to understand how Dolby B got such a poor reputation in folk lore. It performed transparently (as far as my ears could tell) once properly calibrated, particularly if I stuck to the brand and flavour of cassette I'd calibrated it to.
I designed and built my own stereo DBX (I refuse to use lowercase) system some time around 1990 using a pair of NE571 ICs to use with a hi-fi cassette deck. The electronics had a dynamic range of around 110dB and a frequency response flat to within 0.2dB from 20Hz to 20kHz, so performance was actually pretty good. As you say, the pumping noise effect from a cassette deck that only had a signal-to-noise ratio of around 56dB was completely unbearable.
Using it in combination with a correctly calibrated Dolby B improved it significantly, but it was still audible. I tried it in combination with Dolby C a few years later and the problem all but disappeared giving a noise floor down around -100dB using a TDK D cassette tape. I didn't use it in the end as it would have made my recordings incompatible for anyone else to listen to, but it was still a fun exercise in what could be achieved with a budget tape and a ~£20 project.
@oupahens9219: Smooth.
@adaboy4z: I made a recording using Dolby C for the first time using NOS Maxell II and it was so quiet on playback, Yamaha K-980 cassette deck. I used my dbx unit and it didnt sound as clear especially the Highs.
@miller1520: Amazing how many high end hardware came with DBX anyway. There must have been big money behind it. I agree, DBX reduces noise but introduces its own problems which are far worse than tape hiss. Cheers!
@revokdaryl1: This whole analogue noise reduction thing has me going down a rabbit hole and experimenting with it myself. After all, it's the noise inherent in analogue tape that turned people to digital. Well, part of the reason, anyhow. I understand that Dolby SR (Spectral Recording) which was released in 1986 is probably THE best noise reduction system, even better than DBX according to professionals that have worked with both. Even in 2024, I've heard that Dolby SR is still used with 35mm film prints released to theaters. I think it's included on the optical soundtrack on the film strip itself and accompanies a Dolby Digital track. To my knowledge, Dolby SR doesn't have a software plugin. I have UHe Satin and it does emulate both DBX Type I and Dolby A, but alas, no Dolby SR. I looked on eBay at some Dolby SR hardware units and, wow, I was not expecting them to be so expensive. Some people are listing them for $1600 USD or more. I know for a fact these same units were going for maybe between $100-300 about 10 to 15 years ago. Seems like these units are getting scarce. Does anyone know of a software plugin that has Dolby SR? I've heard that, in addition to it being the best of all the Dolby NR systems, it's also the most complex and thus the most difficult to emulate. Also, I suspect Dolby Laboratories is probably keeping a tight lid on the Dolby SR algorithms as it's still being used today in a professional capacity.
@nancy4don: Type I or II? I have used both. Type II works well for both open reel (my Tandberg does 15 or 7.5 IPS) and cassette; cassettes sound better with type II. The secret to avoiding artifacts is to push the recording levels to 0 db or even a little higher. Any distortion from saturation gets greatly reduced by the expansion during playback. A cassette deck using metal tape will work best since there won’t be much if any high-frequency loss. I’ve done some live recordings that rival digital with my Tandberg at 15 IPS.
@audiononsense1611: I used a 128 and while it took loads of experimenting to understand how it worked ( I used it to make tape copies of LP's only used Maxell UD-90 on c3-X). I thought it sounded better than no expansion...
@dandinhofer9240: Nope! Few of the dbx points mentioned here (by the presenter) have any real validity. Quite meritless actually. Why? Simply because he's not done his homework. They say, "a little education is a dangerous thing". The missing blank spaces are typically filled in with techno garbage. Folks, the dbx system was designed to be a stand alone noise reducing format that was COMPLETELY incompatible with any other, be it Dolby A, B, C , HX, S , etc etc etc (including ) ANRS. Additionally the system was assuming that 70's open reel format was being used exclusively. Alternatively cassette tape speed, or dictation design engineering, plus physical fomat was woefully inadequate for dbx and rightful shows this impediment. It wasn't untill the early 80's revamping was completed that the dbx system became a consumer marketing practicality. Then Technics, Teac et all incorporated the dbx NR system with a new fangled circuit board - and it works magnificently. End of story. These click baiters are soo annoying. ARGHHH 😮
@AudioMasterclass replies to @dandinhofer9240: Aha you seem to have a case of arrogant arsehole-itis. 1. Tell me where I said dbx was compatible with Dolby. You can't because I didn't. 2. There was dbx Type I and Type II. You don't seem to know the difference and I won't bother telling you. 3. If you want to experience clickbait, I suggest my video here - https://youtu.be/cxoRcsmb2Ww
@RogerBrenon: Well, it's 2024. Go digital and stop worrying about it. Makes life a lot easier. You can screw up your sound with as many great tape emulation plugins as you want LOL
@stevebodner3729: Let's do one on Dolby S with metal cassettes. The sound from my old Sony deck almost rivals a CD player to my ears in many instances ... well, for most casual, practical listening.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @stevebodner3729: There's nothing wrong with Dolby S. If and when someone lends me a deck (in good condition), I'll make a video.
@jamesisaac7684 replies to @stevebodner3729: Techmoan already demonstrated it
@fredashay: I bought a dbx 3bx DS way back in the 80s, and I still have it in my retro stereo system. You can't buy them any more. I don't use it for noise reduction, but just for dynamic expansion.
@ambientstereorecordings3528: I have two dbx boxes that I have collected over the years, they are the ones that go inline with the ins/outs to the tape deck. I have a number of recordings I have made over the years using dbx, and I have to say that it is superior to Dolby B or C in just about every way. The only problem is that sometimes I want to listen to a dbx tape and I can't be bothered to connect the dbx box in order to hear it properly! I have found that dbx works the best with BAD cassette tapes.. the so-called "type zero", cheap ferro cassettes, and cheaper cro2 tapes. That is where you get the biggest boost in sound quality. Not so much with metal tapes.
@idtubenod: ❤ dbx on TDK MRXGs
@multicyclist: There also was a dbx vinyl record format that failed. Many years ago I had a dbx record/tape adapter and a dbx test record. I remember hearing literary nothing when the music stopped. Even back then, it was hard to find dbx recorded vinyl records. Apparently, dbx encoded records had to be mail ordered. Local record stores did not carry them or even know what they were. I made some home recordings with the dbx adapter on a Pioneer cassette deck. It had the same nearly dead silence on it when the music stopped. I also heard that modulated noise. Particularly on a dbx recorded cassette of someone talking. I still have a Tascam 4 track in a box somewhere. It was the digital version that recored 16 bit 44.1 to an internal hard drive. You could transfer separate WAV files to a PC over a USB v1.1 cable. Each track was its own file I recall.
@dubdoodle7191: 99% of music masters during 1970's, 80's, and early 90's utilized either DBX II or Dolby A. An experienced recording engineer could EQ the master for slight compensation of NR deployed. These are the only 2 NR's that offer the best noise elimination for tape repro's.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @dubdoodle7191: If Dolby Type A is aligned correctly, no further compensation is needed.
@dubdoodle7191 replies to @dubdoodle7191: @@AudioMasterclassAll depends on the decade timeline, tape type, and repro unit used. Not all machines had EQ compensation like Studers.
Alot of record mfg'ing co's didn't have D.A. hence DBX inexpensive viability over D.A.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @dubdoodle7191: @AudioMasterclass
2 hours ago
If Dolby Type A is aligned correctly, no further compensation is needed. One would assume that anyone who knows how to align Dolby already knows how to align a tape recorder.@@dubdoodle7191
@dubdoodle7191 replies to @dubdoodle7191: @@AudioMasterclassGeneral opinions of "should's" do not imply any experience on your behalf. Nor do you know how the music manufacturing industry worked when you were still on mummy's titty
@RWmHII: Good explanation. Thanks. Tasteful shaker.
@57too: Subscribed! Song at the end could've been in the Napolean Dynamite film, for sure!
@AudioMasterclass replies to @57too: I need to watch that film.
@DavidBrown-zp5br: I run an Aiwa cassette deck with dbx, Dolby B and C. I find the dbx nr to be fantastic given the right tape and music. Tends to preform really well with “loud” music; modern hip hop and pop seems to preform FLAWLESSLY. I don’t notice any of the “breathing” I find with some of the prerecorded dbx cassettes I’ve come across or with other genres I’ve recorded. Also, Type II or “better” is a must. I don’t know enough to say why but from my experience in using Type I tapes and dbx, you’re better off with Dolby B.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @DavidBrown-zp5br: If the music is loud all the way through you don't need noise reduction.
@kathychild2104: I stil have two DBX Technicss decks both work very well apart fro. Pumping on certain types of Music back in th 80s I also had a reel to reel Deck Phillips N** 10 inch reel 3 heads , I modified my Technics deck to give me and output that was DBX encoded , this was fed to the reel to reel to record, It could then be played back through the Vinal disk position on the Technics to play it back , it worked extremely well, if you recorded live music it was great, or CDs
@marcusmagellan: Sounds great, your “demo” at the end sounds clean.
@LeeBergerMediaProd: Back in the day a friend gave me that type II unit. I was excited as I hooked it up to my Akai GX625 and recorded a CD of Cats. I too experienced that modulation noise and never used it again. I still kept hooked up in my hifi cabinet because it looked cool. One thing I would have liked to have heard is a dbx encoded record which that unit could decode but never did. Finally are you familiar with the Steely Dan alleged dbx debacle? It happened during the production of Katie Lied.
@yc-tai: This brings back memory, the good olde 1970s....
@ralphlauwaert2245: DBX was always a bit hampered by beeing a single band compander. Nakamichi's HighComII, a dual-band compander, or Telcom C4, a quad-band 1:1.5 compander, do a much better job in terms of modulation noise. But even single-band companders that work well exsist. Sanyo SuperD and, best of all, Toshiba's A.D.R.E.S. are notable examples. Personally, I own 14 different noise reduction systems, and having tested them all thouroughly, the best ones are Dolby SR, with TelcomC4 as a close runner-up. And both these are also usable with cassette if the levels are kept moderately!
@Theoobovril: Nice piece of music at the end of your video.
@johndextersantos9541: You can eliminate noise from Tape but not for the so called superior Vinyl (mic drop)
@brianmoore581: I guess this came late, but Dolby S was really good on consumer cassette decks. The pro version was called Dolby SR.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @brianmoore581: I used SR professionally and it was good but I was already pretty satisfied with A. I never got beyond C with my own 16-track Fostex E16, but considering the limitations of the technology the results were excellent.
@MrJeroendemuzikant: Well, you're surely selling yourself short... If that's the right expression. That outro music sounded great. 👍 Part of it could be used as an intro. If there's more like that, then yes, please let us 'suffer' with you. 😊 Also: Agreed, I could really hear that 'pumping' when I tried out dbx back in the day. For me it was not useable.... Greetings from a musician from the Netherlands.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @MrJeroendemuzikant: Ideally I would prefer not to use my own music as there is probably only a 5% chance my channel viewers will like it. However the combination of copyright and cost make using my own music a no-brainer.
@MrJeroendemuzikant replies to @MrJeroendemuzikant: @@AudioMasterclass I could be totally wrong, but I think that chance is a lot bigger. I think your viewers would appreciate it. I know I did. And it sounded better than what some channels actually use as their intro or outro. Maybe you should do a poll about that. 😎 And yeah, there's that too. No money to pay to use a piece of music. And no bullshit with copyright claims and all that to deal with. If and when I'll get my act together and start my channel up for real, I'll try to do my own music trhoughout the video's. We'll see how that goes. Anyway... I really like the subjects you'tre talking about. There is so much BS on these subjects on other channels. Sooo... Keep up the great content. 👍
@robfriedrich2822: I had it on a multitracker and the crosstalk from the neighbor track triggered dbx, that it opened, when it shouldn't.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @robfriedrich2822: I never noticed that on my Tascam 244 but it doesn't surprise me.
@enp82003: I like dbz dbx is too adult for me
@ksnstechtopics8650: What about VHS Hi-Fi? This uses a 2:1 compander similar to dbx. Were lessons learned or is pumping/modulation noise still evident in this format? A lot of Analogue radio microphones also use a dbx like compander and can sound really bad with certain sources.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @ksnstechtopics8650: I think that with hi-fi VHS, people were so pleased to have it compared to previously that its imperfections could be mostly ignored.
@colindeer9657: Great presentation. You’re demo was good ! I still run my dbx118 in line. Set at around 1:2 and above threshold.
@PhilipvanderMatten replies to @colindeer9657: that is not the same principle as the noise reduction in the video
@m80116: I believe perfect azimuth alignment played a pivotal role in these NR systems and unfortunately it was easier said than done.
It's easy today with digital scopes to get a perfect waveform collimation with decks recording real time, but it wasn't back then with vacuum tube volt meters and the production pumping millions on cassettes recorded at high speed.
Also factory alignment I believe wasn't that accurate either, quality control issues.
@salmorreale7900: Thank you for posting.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @salmorreale7900: You're welcome
@Hunter-NG: Can anyone help please. I have a 286s and I have an AT 2020 MIC. When I launch a game on Steam, I get horrible static like humming noise for the people I talk to on Discord. I have tried many solutions to no avail. I have 5800X3D cpu so this is not being overloaded. I have had a few different gpu's but still the same problem. I was using a sound card and even with motherboard sound, it is still a problem. Do I need to run the 286s through a dac?
@michaelvaleone: I use a focusrite 18i20 and I'm looking to build a vocal chain using analog hardware I'm stuck between choosing dbx or art can anyone guide me in the right direction please
@Primeanaloggourmet: Ive used dox units for 40 years and love them. Maybe it's because you bought the least expensive model! I have a 224(monitors 3 head deck) and also have a 3bx! Love them both! Have you ever heard any dox discs? They are wonderful and must be decoded though a 222 or 224 with a disc button! Check it out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMSq-8-_Iks&t=241s
@shiznitmufu: Love the recording. The quintessential portrait of the foundation of the decades long,and ongoing, evolution of home studio development. @ 54 yrs of age,many things have escaped the grasp of my memories.However,carved in granite are recollections of sitting in front my Grandmother's beloved floor model RCA,AM/FM/8 Track/Phono console,clutching her Panasonic portable MONO cassette recorder, impatiently waiting for the distant FM rock n roll radio station to play my favorite tunes.With a fresh set of C cell Rayovacs and a crisp new Memorex or TDK blank cassette tape loaded
(Rec.+Play+Pause)and on the ready,I captured many hours of my guitar heroes and they,in essence became my guitar instructors.Nearly hAlf century later,with EVH,SRV, Hendrix,Rhoades,Clapton and Dimebag Darrell's stolen licks,leads and tones oozing from my fingers and broadcastimg from my vintage Fender Sratocastor and vintage Fender Tweed tube amp, I'm still amused by the look on my 4 sons(all grown and musicians) faces when they repeat in unison as I'm still proclaiming,"Son,back in my day we didn't need WiFi.WE HAD HI-FI!! Love the channel. I've learned so much.Thank you.🙏. 🤘🏻🤘🏻
@bagman7709: Dolby was switched on once for about one minute. I felt like I was wearing Gaffa tape covered cotton wool earmuffs.
Dolby - off (ever since)
I'll take a higher floor of noise, over a reduced quality of program any day.
In summary, I suppose Dolby was the "fix" for a problem I personally didn't have. 😉
@carlingtonme: 🤦♀ What is that image at the end of the video??
Dolby HX pro was a massive help with the noise problem
@johnmarchington3146: I'm going to ask the obvious question. When dbx was being developed, was modulation noise never experienced during all the testing etc? Maybe it wasn't considered serious enough to bother about?
@spacemissing: I like the 'song'.
@scottstrang1583: Hifi vcrs have that same modulation issue only instead of tape hiss it’s head switching noise.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @scottstrang1583: This is true. In the early days of VHS Hi-Fi there were ads that claimed the sound was CD quality. Obviously this is not so and the ads were taken down. A useful system for its time though. DM
@lenimbery7038: I had that identical Tuscan 244....great fun!
@lenimbery7038: I always thought that people left the Dolby B switch off on playback because it left the extra bright sound which people equated with a more pleasing sound. You give great explanations to all things audio. Thank you
@DID70Sworkedoutforyou replies to @lenimbery7038: it does to saturates the high´s but listened without it increases hiss, in good decks there´s no reason to use it, only to create hiss
@sbbinahee: Love the outro original...sounds great!
@goodtimejohnny8972: The music track reminds me of a Wurlitzer organ demo in the mall.
@SO_DIGITAL: I had a dbx deck. Mindblowing!
@laika25: I enjoyed your composition very much
@cars654: dbx problems used to be called the picked fence or pumping of the sound. The same thing can happen with Dolby C if the tape bias is not spot on. Both dbx and Dolby C work fine on music with a constant level but they are horrible with piano or jazz music. If you were recording heavy metal or rock music noise reduction was not necessary if you were using quality tape.
@joejurneke9576: Dbx is terrific, specifically 150 series. It works well with the exception of fast attack times like drums. One can DBX almost every other source without issues. Dbx supports about 120 db per second attack time. Achieving 30 to 40 db noise reduction can be achieved on open reel. With drums you can hear the compressor pumping…..
@tracyblair3064: Fleetwood Mac “Rumors” multitracks were recorded at -8 dB peak (IIRC) using dbx noise reduction. I know the engineer wanted zero tape compression, hence the low recording level.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @tracyblair3064: I can get that. Analogue tape is always a compromise between noise and distortion. Rumors sounds great to me and I seem to remember there's a 'Classic Albums' vid on the making-of. DM
@tori8380: I used to work as an online video editor in the ‘80s. All the audio came in on 1/4” two track. The audio guys used dbx, but I don’t think the Otari MX 5050 2 track in the video suite was setup right and we had the weird pumping audio.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @tori8380: This doesn't surprise me. DM
@timothystockman7533: NPR's first satellite system used 3:1 dbx to clean up the 40 dB range satellite channels to give 120 dB range, in theory. They never go there in practice because the output of their studios was far less than 120 dB, and even the electronics in the satellite modulators and demodulators couldn't achieve 120 dB. A few years later I used dbx Type II to clean up a noisy stereo broadcast loop from the phone company from 60 dB to 120 dB (in theory). That seemed to work really well.
@platterjockey: The video seems to have been censored by YouTube at this moment, so I can't watch it, but, the problem with dbx NR in MY experience is the difficulty in calibration across decoders, and decoders can slip out of spec.
@SPINNINGMYWHEELS777: My DBX 162 stereo compressor is the secret ingredient for getting the best drum sound in multitrack recordings... :) . oh you're talking about cassettes? DBX is the cats meow. I never think of cassette as hi-fi - so I don't mind the beautiful boost it gives a cassette recording.. opposite of dolby - which is the sparkle reducer - sure takes away some noise but also some of the musical content. I know you said set up is everything.. marginal improvements when the boxes are checked.. You're accurate in this video but there's something wrong with cassette in general.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @SPINNINGMYWHEELS777: Just to be clear for anyone else reading this, the video is about dbx noise reduction, not dbx compressors. DM
@hamishthecat4370: VHS hi-fi video recorders used dbx to produce their quality audio. Just saying.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @hamishthecat4370: I don't know of any VHS machines that used dbx but hi-fi VHS was similar. If you go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHS and scroll down to 'Hi-Fi audio system' you can read all about it. DM
@chaoticsystem2211: I really don't miss the hiss...
@mjstow: Great to hear your track at the end.
@TheKillogicEffect: Back when I was a teenager I had a pretty nice Yamaha four track we used to record with and learned the hard way about dbx / Dolby Noise Reduction
@sonicsatsuma1256: Late to this one, but, if anyone is interested: hi-fi tape recording of CD or even Virgin vinyl through decent 90s stack, e.g. B&W, spkrs. + NAD amp VERSUS same sound source / album / recorded stream I.e. standard Spotify, Apple etc. on comparable Sonos set up, even at 24bit??? Also, considering source being ADD or DDD, AAD etc? Personally, I’ve found post Loudness Wars stuff is better reproduction in digital domain at any rubbish quality, whilst analogue recorded material always sounds better through older kit, irrespective of downsampling?. To be honest, older recordings and ‘re-masters’ sound harsh in any digital format even if no ‘up sampling’ has happened?…. I just trust my ears even though I know my 20KHz is now more 10 or less lol😢
@leekumiega9268: The drum machine got rather monotonous after a while but other than that I liked your composition .
@AudioMasterclass replies to @leekumiega9268: That's what drum machines were in those days. It didn't hold George Michael back https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8gmARGvPlI DM
@josephkosak1675: I personally like dbx for what, when, and why it represented in the history of music recording. Yes, it was not perfect, but without it, you could never have something from the mid 1980's to the mid 1990's that was listenable. And if you bounced tracks or mixed 4 to stereo then sent it back to first 2 tracks on a 4 track machine - FORGET IT! I could only afford a Teac A-3440, so dbx type II was indispensable to me. I would never have made music with dolby and its measly 62 to 65 db range, or noise floor. Two passes of dolby would be like a wind tunnel.
Not perfect, but made a lot of music possible than otherwise wouldn't be...
@rcary: My "Roxy Music" cd from the 80s always annoyed me. It had hiss on it like a type 1 cassette! I played different copies of it and they were all the same. What was that all about?? Poor mastering??
@AudioMasterclass replies to @rcary: Which one? I might take a listen. DM
@rcary replies to @rcary: @@AudioMasterclass Think it was Avalon. You can hear the background hiss as the track is cued in. I had a mid 80s cd. Always did my head in because I'd just bought my first cd player and was expecting better. 😄
@AudioMasterclass replies to @rcary: @@rcary I don't hear any more noise than I expect on Spotify. But this album is from 1982, the first year of CD. It has been widely reported that in the rush to release material on CD, many CDs were mastered from tapes which were already copies or copies of copies. This could be an explanation for what you heard. DM
@rcary replies to @rcary: @@AudioMasterclass Yeah, maybe. I listened on YT and it sounds clean. I don't have the disk anymore but I remember the silence and then obvious hiss before the tune started. Still a great album but I'll never forget that hiss. I think they cleaned it up later on. I record onto my Tascam 133 and I get almost CD quality playback , so perhaps that Roxy was just a crappy batch I happened upon.
@MrAdopado replies to @rcary: Many commercial CDs had small print with a warning that the CD format may allow the listener to hear noise that was from the original analogue recording master tape.
@peterdavies5358: If only you'd used a Les Paul instead, it'd all be so different for you. On topic though, I loved dbx on an SA90 but give it a few years and come back to them and the pumping is unbearable. I'm not privvy to the adjustments that can be made with a good servicing and I expect the mech consistancies of keeping the same deck in good order would have done but Technics would keep on bringing out new toys to entice a young man with a paycheck.
@paulroberts8706: At EMI Music we throw demo tapes in the bin on a regular basis, tip for people outside, don't come and play your music outside outside these offices, you have seen Simon cowle that's nothing,he's kind . Your tapes end up in landfill as unsolicited mail and we did that all the time in Hammersmith. 🐺
@muyeikasamurabi1602: Love the song at the end. Great vid, very informative for this nerd. Edit, I had to listen to the song twice in a row. Subscribed.
@garyrandall3059: Cool groove!!
@ScottGrammer: Compander noise reduction systems are often thrown for a loop by the nonlinearities of the tape decks involved. And the more noise reduction they aim for, the more problems they have. It's possible to align, say, Dolby B to be nearly transparent when a tape is played back on the same machine it was recorded on, but usually not when recording on one machine to play back on another. Today, working as a vintage audio service tech, I tend to align Dolby systems for best subjective results, not the best measurements, and my clients are usually amazed with the results. Of course, this is after aligning the tape deck in the usual manner without noise reduction.
In the early 80's, I engineered in a home studio that used a Teac 80-8 multitrack machine with its associated dbx noise reduction box. I quickly learned that even when I had the machine carefully aligned, it was better to record drum tracks with the dbx turned off. It just could not follow the transients of say, a snare drum by itself. It seemed that dbx did much better with a full mix, and definitely did better with continuous midrange tones, like strings or backup singers. Didn't work well on bass guitar, either.
@Erwinhooi: It all has to do with the slew rate of the amplification of the dbx system. It’s personal but with my Technics M255X the breathing was barely noticable and listening to those old 80’s tapes I’m surprised with the quality left on them.☺️ I used Maxell XL2 and XL2S tapes as the TDK tapes had too many drop-outs for my taste. (That was my main irritation!)
@Erwinhooi replies to @Erwinhooi: Ow and so using a separate dbx2 unit is asking for trouble☺️(cables introduce more side affects where build-in units have short signal paths)
@alanmusicman3385 replies to @Erwinhooi: BASF cassette tapes for me always. Agree about TDK - quality was very variable from batch to batch.
@anonymouscoward9643: Consumer grade equipment get consumer grade components...to do the things that dbx has to do well i.e. eliminate things like breathing, you need high slew rate op-amps, precision voltage references, etc. which are prohibitively expensive for the home “prosumer” use case.
@analogkid4557: I had a Yamaha MT100 with DBX in the 80s as well. I recorded mostly my band but a few other bands along the way until I upgraded to ADAT machines.
@colloidalsilverwater15ppm88: Well, I've made COMPANDER, which is same thing as dbx. It was revelation in those days, because on my Pioneer deck was only dolby B and C.
@DID70Sworkedoutforyou: not afordable to most of the people ,all companies had to change the way they recorded in vinyl and new cartridges were to be used , after bspending a lot of money one could hear the Police regatta de blanc with a perfect sound, but not much more than that, their professional equipment sold to studios is very good ,i have an equalizer that is so long that i don´t even remenber how much frequencies they have but also works as a noidse reducer, which in my opinion is much more perfect than Dolby
@richiereyn: I've never used dbx noise reduction with cassettes. dbx type II was developed for cassettes but also open reel machines running at 7.5 and 3.75ips, so type II was always considered the domestic version of dbx. Type I was used mostly on open reel recorders running at 15ips, though you could get good results at 7.5ips if the machine was electronically and mechanically aligned correctly. At 15ips, type I was a revelation. I could never really notice any noise pumping issues, but the criteria was always flatness of frequency response and a properly aligned machine. If you could hear obvious noise issues with dbx on an open reel at 15ips, usually the problem was the machine, not the noise reduction unit.
@ReasonablySane: I still have a dozen or so dbx vinyl records as well as a matching DBX decoder. They were a nice stop gap before CDs came out.
@zumazmusic: I dig your instrumental! 😎🤘🎶🍻
@dobermanguy9437: I have a Yamaha 3head cassette deck with dbx I'm very happy with it one thing you failed to mention sir dbx came out a lot later after Dolby did and by the time dbx started getting a little popular cassette decks started to fade out but cassette decks an hour coming back but it's a fact dbx came out after Dolby on cassette decks
@AudioMasterclass replies to @dobermanguy9437: Dolby definitely had a head-start advantage but I'd also say that Dolby was better at licensing. It has happened elsewhere that the format that was more widely licensed (VHS) was the one that won (Betamax). DM
@jtavegia5845: A little bit late to have this discussion.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @jtavegia5845: You could say that, but there's so much old technology still in use or being revived I wouldn't rule out a return. DM
@scottlowell493: I had a DBX "Compander" in the 80's. DBX NR was pretty extreme. It didn't always sound better.
@runepedersenDK: I have some old cassette-recordings from the start of the 80's, the non-dolby ones sound quite good, the dolby ones sound muffled.
As mentioned in this video, it's tracking errors - lower output from the tape makes the dolby circuit reduce the treble level more than they should be.
It would be nice with a variable gain between the playback-head and the dolby circuits, restoring the correct playback level, without having to re-adjust the trimmers in the deck, only to adjust them back to their former position, once finished listening to the old tapes.
Some NAD decks had "Play Trim" knobs - don't know if that took care of this problem - AFAIK it was more a treble adjustment than a gain control.
@DeanPickersgill: Like listening to my granny over-explaining something incredibly simple.
@RudeRecording: From the 80's through the mid 90's my studio had a 1" 16 track Tascam 85-16B with dbx. Did a few releases for JSP and a few other labels. I was always VERY careful to maintain that machine. The results were quite acceptable, we were always reviewed against 24 track studios with much better gear.
@rEdf196: In the early 1980's I always heard a lot of complaints about DBX mostly due to compatibility and the poor sound quality on conventional stereos . Unlike Dolby NR , which was everywhere, there were just not enough DBX players, or the will, by me or others to commit to this rather obscure format, unlike the "all new" emerging digital new compact disc which the general public was very exited about back then and did take off in popularity. I put DBX alongside quadraphonic vinyl, Edison disc, Elcasset, CED video, Beta, Lased disc, and other failed formats.
@bwithrow011: If a cassette starts at 45db SNR, dbx type II will improve SNR by 30db hence yielding a total SNR or 75db. It's known as noise modulation not modulation noise. IMHO, the best reel to reel format is 2 track 15IPS with IEC/CCIR EQ.
@AudioMasterclass replies to @bwithrow011: I don't mind you calling it noise modulation, but other people have it differently https://www.google.com/search?q=noise%20modulation+site:aes.org DM
@bwithrow011 replies to @bwithrow011: I worked for Julius Konins at Cassette Productions in New Jersey in the 80s. We made high end chrome Dolby B 0:26 classical music cassettes utilizing type I 120us premephasis instead of the usual type II setting of 70us. Julius told Ray Dolby that Dolby B produced noise modulation on certain percussion instruments. We had to have golden ears to serve the customers we had
@philshifley4731: Pop music has become as simple and shallow as the majority of people who make it their audio diet. Junk food for the ears that is written by a few for overconsumption by the masses.
@MrGhostown81: When you mentioned about how the CD was mastered. I have two commercial albums I bought on CD where the cassette version sounds better. Anthrax's "Armed and Dangerous" and Megadeth's original version of "Killing Is My Business...". Especially with the Anthrax CD. It sounds like it was mastered through a soup can.
@searchiemusic: what's wrong with dbx? someone didn't calibrate the machine, that's what
@DID70Sworkedoutforyou replies to @searchiemusic: what DBX feature are you refering to , there are a lot of devices , but if talking about encoders didn´t was acepted well for it´s costs , allthough it sounded incredible good, is the same of saying what´s wrong with the Mercedes, but there are a lot of models, should especify what DBX device are you refering to
@thomosburn8740: I really loved your instrumental!
Great video here, the one thing you didn't address is that if you bought once deck and recorded music (with built-in dbx)
and then tried to play the tape on a different built-in dbx deck, the signal would pump up and down like crazy.
So you had to pray that your cassette deck wouldn't die.
@MankyFrilla: Loved this one.. 👍🏽