ERRATA CORRIGE: At 29:50 I made a mistake in the caption. High-Com II is ONLY Nakamichi. The other names are other secondary types of noise reduction systems: Toshiba - Adres; Sanyo - Super-D; EMT NoiseEX; CBS CX and CXTV; Burwen Noise Eliminator. Finally I forgot to talk about Dolby SR (Spectral Recording, introduced in 1986)!
Hey uhhhh i could use some advice...i have some downloaded unofficial FZ tapes and id like to back it blank cassette, i just bought a telefunken 450 tape deck with High Com 1 Now some of these tapes have hiss, for one reason or another, but i wanna back up a show that has a lot of Amp Hiss/Wind Do you think high com would bring the noise down while keeping the mix intact Usually on some of these bootlegs, anything past 10Khz is usually a lot of noise
Companders or noise reduction systems as High Com are designed to reduce the inherent tape hiss of the cassette you are recording, it will not affect, or at least not that much, hiss present and recorded on another cassette. Sorry about that.
I may just have solved my noise problem. I found a 1995 Denon DN -790 R. It has dolby b, c and S! and hx pro plus a bias control. This may be rare find. Hope it works out. This is touted as the best type of noise reduction. Hx pro is a must.Denon has a good quality turntable allthough some are a little skeptical, but its brand new. its a little pricey at $2500, but, its of good enough quality I think. The old ones have their problems, I had to send one back. We certainly need turntable and cassette decks to be made again. Hopefully they will have a comeback.
I got the Nakamichi HiCom II and I did copy the motherboard (in CAD) and repopulated it with all the same components. Then mounted it inside HiCom II and setting one PCB to permanently REC and one PCB to permanently to PLAY. This makes my unit probably very unique and the only Nakamichi HiCom II in the world that codes and decodes simultaneously within. 👌🏻 😃
@@FTube77Hi and thanks. Yes it is a little odd unit. I do no longer have access to neither parts nor cad designs, but I would consider selling it on eBay preferably with the Nakamichi 680ZX Discrete Head Cassette Deck w half speed option. Please let me know if you would be interested. I think 110/230 VAC /Claes
Wow - excellent - knowledge is power. I had long ago bought a TEAC A 3440 11" reel recorder with the dbx unit. When I made a recording without it, you could hear the hiss. I tolerated the hiss, but it bugged me - I mean a heck of a good recorder should not have hiss. But when the dbx unit was hooked up, all 4 channels that would automatically switch between record and playback, the hiss was all but gone - you really had to listen hard to detect it, if you could. The dynamic range was amazing, the quality of the sound simply superb. It made all the difference in the world. Actually I think the playback sounded a bit better somehow - it was like 3D sound. After that, no going back. Try to play back a dbx recording without the decoder - noooooooo! turn it on and suddenly, you are transported to heaven. Ya, that good. Of course today, it is all digital and noise is absent. Is the sound quality as good as analogue? Debatable. Does anyone care? When you go to a theatre, the digital silence is dead quiet - but then again it should be with a $100,000 system. Loud is crazy loud, like in real life. Can a tape equal that? I doubt it. But it comes pretty darned close. Now then, does it matter. We are all caught up in a world of perfection. Perfect what? I have a 1930 Knabe 9' grand piano. It is not perfect, but incredible nonetheless. I have had some people state that this piano is the best sounding piano they have ever played. It is the minute imperfections that made it so human, warm, comfortable. When compared to a so called perfect Bosendorfer Imperial at $250,000, I don't like it. Too clinically pure. Cold perhaps. Like a perfect woman who flaunts her clinical beauty with an attitude of 'the great ME'. No thanks. I see digital as clinically pure. Ya, unrealistic. You never hear sound that way ever. The world has its hisses, pops, scratches, jet noise, traffic and wind in that sound. Do I like the clinically pure digital sound? Honestly - tolerate it but it does not give me warm and fuzzy feelings. It does not hug you. The Teac with dbx does however. Can't explain it. So at the end of the day, what is perfect. Clinically pure or a bit of imperfection from that? Noise reduction is needed for sure, and digital gets it right, but at what cost? What advantage is it to have a great 4 channel reel deck and dbx unit, outside of bragging rights? And to watch big reels go round and round? I will tell you. It is warm, inviting, gives you a hug and makes you say 'oh my , does that sound nice. It does have its place in our hearts. I like it. They got it right.
Just like a travel back in time... I came in here just by accident but stayed tuned: Half of my age age at the beginning of the 1980s where computers were not existing I built a NR system from Telefunken HighCom boards attached to a (if I remember correctly) Sony Taperecorder. It was a great enhancement but in the first version there was some breathing effects in the recordings. That was fixed (of course by me - it was the age of the electronic hobbyists) with about 5 to 10 passive components and it worked quite well. Thet was the time of buying 30cm vionyl LP records, recording them to tape and putting them back into my shelf to keep them pristine for the rare occasions of playing them on the turntable. All those treasures still standing in my other flat and unused since 20 years or so.. just relics of a nice time of life.
I really like DBX. I started using it in 80/81 for my cassettes and reel to reel tapes and I still use my DBX 224 unit to this day. I even had a DBX unit in my car in the day to play my cassettes. I also have some DBX encoded albums and they're pretty amazing, if you haven't heard them : )
Agreed, dbx was a great advantage in analog tape recording and playback assuming you can afford to obtain that technology in all of your tape playback equipment.
Excellent presentation and explanation on all the main tape noise reduction systems. As a matter of fact, IEC Type II (CrO2) has the lowest noise floor of all tape formulations, even lower than Type IV (Metal particle). But with Metal, you can (must) record hotter, hence the "perceived" lower noise.
What I’ve heard is that the 70microsecond EQ curve was developed to serve as an impromptu noise reduction as it boosts frequencies on record and cuts them on playback. As tape formulations improved, the need for the difference in EQ was lessened, but it was kept in place. Wasn’t explained to me why it was kept, but I assume it was more nuanced than just a difference in formulation.
Thank you very much for the very informative videos you share with us, Great Videos! With your permition, I would like to add some more important points related to NR systems : 1) Reference Level Calibration: All NR methods (except DBX) require to be recorded and playback at specific magnetic level, other wise they would suffer from improper operation. The "better" the NR system in terms of NR improvement, the more sensitive it would be to changes in gain levels. also depend on media, the higher the basic noise level is (i.e. standard cassette vs Metal one) the more sensitive to gain changes is the system.| There for, the Dolby C system for cassettes, though it has an excellent performance at time of recording, would suffer from normal ti,e cassette degradation, from azimuth changes, from comparability to other cassette deck playback etc. while the simple dolby B recorded cassette would not be so delicate. What is Great about dBX is that the system encoding emphasis and convert a linear signal level into a logarithmic scale and the decoding works exactly the opposite way, thus dBX system eliminate the need for a reference level calibration, it can be perfectly decoded and played back at many different gears, no need to generate calibration tone prior to playback of a dBX decoded material. 2) Machine compatibility To my memory, Dolby B noise reduction was effective on frequencies above 4 KHz, and 10dB of reduction, Dolby C on frequencies above 1kHz 20 DB reduction on the mid range frequencies and "only 10dB" on the high frequency (to avoid Recording head saturation) 3) Recording Bias Control: Since Dolby recording involves with elevating the recording of the high frequencies close to saturation levels, the Dolby C introduced a method (developed years earlier by Tandberg for RTR machines) that was controlling the BIAS of the magnetic recording head, where each time a high energy of high frequency was recorded, the bias level of the head was reduced to keep total signal to the recording head out of saturation. This method increase the dynamic range of the very high frequency which normally could not be recorded at level higher than -20db (Normal Cassette) and -10dB (Metal Cassette). Dolby C noise reduction was actually reducing the actual level of very high frequencies at recording and amplify back at playback 4) Tandberg TD20A Real to Real: Tandberg RTR model TD20A SE (from 1985) is the only machine I know that was able to reach A weighted 80dB SNR without using a NR system, they have used a special magnetic heads. the Actyliner system (Bias control for high frequency recording) and "special Equalization (Not NAB or IEC) which utilized the extra high frequency headroom thus had stronger emphasis on recording and stronger the emphasis on play back. in my opinion (and experience) the Tandberg RTR TD20A and TD20A SE are at the top of home (4 track low speed version) and Semi pro (2 track High speed) machines I know.
I’ve been making music since 1990, released music on major labels and have been obsessed with sound since I was a kid. But this is the first time someone has explained noise reduction in such a passionate and fantastic way. I’ve really learned a few things here. I often abuse noise reduction systems in a way to create nice artefacts in my work even today. But you’ve basically shown me why I love noise! Thanks for an ace video! You’ve explained it in a way that casual listeners and nerds alike can appreciate and understand. +1 follower! ✨ Edit: excited typo 😂
I was a reel-to-reel junkie when I was in high school. As soon as I had the money I ran out and purchased the original Advent 101a outboard Dolby-B add-on device. A year later I purchased the 100A for a whopping $270.00 ! Since then I have "recycled" the case from that unit for a DIY audio project. (So I got my $$ worth off of that item..) I used Dolby to transcribe my "new" records to open-reel tape even at 7 1/2. Still have most of the tapes. Ray Dolby was an electronic genius..thinking and designing years ahead of his time. RIP Dr. Dolby.
Vangelis preferred DBX noise reduction when recording to his Lyrec 24 track machine. He used it on almost all of his albums recorded at Nemo Studio. I believe he then used Dolby A when mixing down to the Ampex 2 track machine.
Not surprising to me. From what an audio engineer friend of mine has said, DBX was technically better, but between lack of market saturation and the recordings sounding awful without the decoder in comparison to Dolby B, it was difficult to get consumers to adopt a new system.
Thank You for interesting video ! I used all these systems in my live (also Dolby A and Telcom C4 in my job in a TV-station) My cassettdeck (Technics RS-B965) also has Dolby B and C and also dbx. My TEAC X1000R has dbx I, but for me the best system is Super D Plus N 55 from Sanyo ! 40dB noisreduction in 2 bands. No "breathing" or "bumping" I ever could hear, it was not so popular in this time (1980) but for the consumersection it was the best solution because it was not sooo expensive and worked really great, till now ! I could adjust the signallevel under the noisfloor so that You could not hear it, and if I switched Super D on, signal came clear and without any hiss back without any breathing ! ! For me much better like dbx ! 👍
I agree. I also have the Sanyo Super D and at first I simply couldn't believe it. It is phenomenal. Purely in terms of sound, it is quite capable of upgrading a few hundred dollar deck into a several thousand dollar deck, and I am really not kidding! It was also manufactured by Fisher, and prices are now going up and up for these units on the used market as more people are realising just how good they are.
I always use Dolby with great effect Even Dolby B sounds great on my deck,Dolby C gets most of my tapes Then again my deck is high end so it's understandable that it has a very good decoding and encoding of Dolby Also bad Dolby on a Walkman for example can be the head azimuth not adjusted
Hi from France ! Very good video. Can I just add that most of people will buy second hand tape decks and after servicing around 250 of them, the noise reduction chips are almost the last of the problem. To obtain a good quality sound there is so much more to do before ! A single dust or hardened grease into the capstan will bring deviation in the speed, the same for a slightly worn pinch. More over the heads calibration will be as important. I won't list all the requested deep servicing that you need to do before thinking even playing with noise reduction ! Best
Hello I love your channel I’ve subscribed a while ago it’s lovely to see and hear about cassettes I love cassettes and cassette decks I’m an ex audiophile and owed over 40 decks I really hope you try your best to tell new companies to remake new decks and tapes it would be amazing it’s a niche market really but I’m 53 and grew up with cassettes since I was four please try and keep the info of new decks up to date Tony
Great video, Guido. My first and best cassette deck I owned was an Akai GXF-90 with 3 heads, dual direct drive capstan motors, manual tape calibration (built-in test tone generator), etc........ It had Dolby B and sounded great, as long as you played a tape that was recorded on this same machine. Eventually I stopped using Dolby, and the tapes sounded great to me on their own.
Thanks for your explanation, of this complex subject. It has helped me to get an understanding of the theory. I only knew about noise reduction systems, mainly Dolby , but was unaware of the process.
@@anadialog always thought it had something to do with noise reduction because the logo would be found near NR &/or S logo. Thanks a lot. Just miss those beautiful looking racks and decks. Sadly today audio is 'seen' as an association with video.
Excellent overview, but you miss Dolby SR, the pinacle of noise reduction system that kill digital audio multitrack market in the late eighties. Dolby SR provide up to 106dB of SNR.
@@anadialog It was used a lot in for 2 trks recording and multitracks recording. The studio where I was working in the eighties got about more than one hundred cards of Dolby SR. We even put a set on our Sony 1Inch videotape. BTW the Dolby SR was the pinacle of audio analog treatment before the introduction of DSP. His son David, tell me that this Dolby SR was is last project as an engineer, apparemtly he develop the concept and the final product from start to the beginning.
I see. Thanks for your input. Maybe my perception was wrong to exclude it but in my master tape roaming I have rarely seen it and also online it is rarely discussed.
A lot of people are saying this. I guess my perception is different plus I did wanted to give space to Telefunken, which obviously includes telcom and high-com eating all the time up. The video in fact is just too long. As mentioned in other comments, I will do a second part with the other missing ones...there are quite a number that need to be mentioned!
Ciao, ho acquistato un deck Teac c-3x, volevo sapere se posso collegare il mio dbx 150 esterno sul Teac. Hai qualche informazione? Ne sarei grato😊 complimenti per il canale!
@@anadialog ciao grazie per la risposta, di solito lo uso con un revox a77 la cosa che non capisco è che dietro il trac ci stanno 4 rca per dbx esterno secondo te posso collegarle in quelle o semplicemente negli ingressi in e out del registratore?
Great vid as usual. I always hated the Dolby NR systems, they removed so much of the high end, that I always turned it off. I personally think it's incredible they could make it that far with such a useless system. You can almost do the same thing with an equalizer. At least that's my opinion. A good example of what it sounds like I think many will agree - In this video intro it sounds like 0.18 with Dolby 0.28 without.
Dude Thank you so much for explaining everything about DNRS and tape stuff. I've recently been tying to put all my digital music onto cassette tapes but I've been unsatisfied with the audio quality and Tape Hiss.( Probably due to the cheap shoebox cassette player I got from Amazon) What System would you recommend for CD like audio quality? I also plan on getting Type IV cassette tapes. I just want the best quality audio I can get that will stand the test of time and last forever haha
Hi, very nice vid, thx. When i listen to a dolby B or C, i found that the sounding result is not as good as without NR. I suppose that some details in sound are lost during the process. Of course there is less hiss but the music doesn't sound as good. Don't know if high-com 2 and dbx suffer from the same issue but i think it's inherent in all NR systems. The beauty of analog music is the level of details, but if we manage to send the signal into series of condensators and resistances, i guess they tend to remove a lot of details. As a great fan of Nakamichi audio, not only tape decks, i would go for a high-com 2. I wouldn't be surprise if Nakamichi took care of that issue, and choosed the best solution in collaboration with Telefunken. Another thing to mention is that the hiss is only noticable when there is no sound, so i think it affects less the sound quality that any NR system which tortures the signal. Any advice or comment about that and about high-com 2 will be appreciated. Thx
Unfortunately Dolby chips need calibration at a certain point or simply may have some issues so unless you are using several decks and you know how Dolbyb sounds when it works properly, don't stop there. In any case, I agree that sometimes it just isn't a good effect. Depends also for which music you are recording
Hello. I have a cassette from 1989 by Billy Joel that mentions and specifies that this tape is recorded with the Dolby B system and that if it is played on a player that does not have Dolby technology, the treble will be heard with a “decrement.” . My player is a Luxman k331w which supports both codecs, B and C. When listening to music and with Dolby off, the treble is perceived as somewhat simple; when changing it to Dolby B, the sound is “cleaned” but the treble remains poor. But when I apply Dolby C the treble becomes present well above Dolby B, even more intense than with Dolby off. Normally, when Dolby is turned off, the sound is higher, although with background noise. Why does that happen? I don't understand. I hope you can give me a few minutes to help me with this question. Thank you very much.
Ciao Guido, great video. I recently bought a Technics RS-B605 to experiment a bit with dbx. The guy I bought from never used dbx (didn't even know what it was). I must say I was really blown away about the results. Did some a/b/c test with Dolby and dbx and the latter clearly won for me. When searching online for the NAK T-100 Audio Analyser, I came across a website by Chen Wang. I downloaded a complete NAK T-100 in software that can do even more that the original hardware model. You should absolutely check it out. He also sells software equivalent codecs for Dolby B/C, DxI and DxII plus a DxL Compander only. I played with the DDi and DxII versions and they are awesome. With the DxII codec you can record and playback in dbx without even having a dbx deck, so great for experimenting When my RtR is fixed I will probably also check the DxI Codec. I read through the comments and couldn't find anything about these products. Maybe an idea for a future video?
Could we have a comparison between the different systems (the ones you have) in order to get a better idea of the artefacts and dos and don'ts with each ? Excellent video BTW.
Do you have any experience with National Semiconductor's Dynamic Noise Reduction? I had a radioshack made audio processor with built in DNR and I found it to be very effective - it was also one of few NR solutions I've seen with an adjustable knob to determine the aggressiveness of the noise reduction. It wasn't that popular but I loved my external DNR box when I had it - nowadays I use the noise reduction of my Pioneer RG-1.
Always wanted to try DBX. I had a cheap Yamaha dual well deck I used so most of my stuff I recorded was on that with Dolby B, I tried C a couple times but didn’t seem to work great with it. I have a Nakamichi BX-2 now and haven’t tried it yet with C, after this video I want to! Wish I could get an S machine, but the Sony TC-615S always seems to be broken whenever I come across one
Awesome video as usual! What DBX Tape Decks would you advise for recording tapes, please? And if I listen or someone else to my tape, do the second deck benefits from DBX record, even the DBX is not present on the second deck?
There is also a rare digital NR system that Pioneer developed for some of the twin cassette decks. it was to make a noiseless copy of a Dolby or Non Dolby encoded cassette. The mechanisms that where used where terrible with lots of wow and flutter in the copy. The copy was also lousy but worked and it was quiet as the original recording. I also have this deck.
Telefunken developed High Com, Nakamichi jumped on the High Com wagon with High Com II... and plus there is HUSH Super C (single ended).. which states in the users manual that it can be configured to decode Dolby B tapes..
Great Video i was wondering why you never mentioned the Philips system then you did at the end lol - i never liked Dolby C as i could always hear the pumping on the early SONY Dolby S deck that i used to have but after you explained about the different grade chips i might try it again on my recently purchased SONY KA6ES as i have only used Dolby B & S on that and i have to say that Dolby S sounds fantastic on it , i also have 2 Revox A77 Reel to Reel's that have Dolby B i wish someone could come up with a way of modifying the boards to work on Dolby S now that would sound amazing
Yeah, actually there are several companders of other brands but they are just not present enough to mention. My list is not only based on quality but also on the impact they had on music recording and playback history! Yes, you should give Dolby C another chance!
It's simply not true to say that Dolby B was a quick and cheap solution. When it was introduced it was truly revolutionary, and was a key factor in establishing the Compact Cassette as a HiFi format. When the deck is properly optimized for the blank cassette, the results can be excellent. Try Dolby B on a top quality deck like a Nakamichi Dragon, and the result is extremely transparent. The key problem is that it was quite sensitive to the deck being correctly aligned for Dolby playback level, and the sensitivity and bias requirements of the tape being used. Dolby C was even more sensitive to proper setup, but by that point, more decks allowed you to adjust the playback level, sensitivity, and bias for the cassette being used. Dolby S was really an attempt to reduce the problem of setup misalignment, and introduced fairly stringent requirements for the decks mechanics and setup flexibility.
Yes, I agree and in fact I included it in thos top 8 list. I just wanted to emphasize the quality and sophistication of the other systems, which are superior.
What about ANRS/ Super ANRS from JVC and DNL from Philips. They have been implemented in a lot cassette decks and RtoR recorders back then? I hope you give some light on this. Thanks
As you can see the video is way too long. I had to make some choices between quality and popularity. Maybe high-com isn't that popular as ANRS but I did wanted to talk about Telefunken and telcom and at that point Ingad to complete the picture with high-com and high-com II. I will surely do another video including the rest, there are so many!
hi, my guess that you mean upward compression, as the standard downward would simply reduce the peaks of the signal. i was wondering how the encoding correlated to the decoding, how is the compression 'activation curve' stored on tape, and then later used for expansion as the slightest difference will result in pumping? if you expand based on the recording itself, there are less peaks to trigger on as they were compressed.
I remember years ago spending quite a bit of money on a DBX unit. I found that it had this breathing effect which was annoying. I used it for my open reel tape deck. I ended up going back to Dolby.
Fantastic, and so clearly explained as always, so thank you! I bought a Pioneer CT-S620 in the mid-90s which, along with Dolby B and C, has Dolby HX PRO. The deck needs serious attention now both mechanically and electronically and so I'd probably be better off finding another model. I was aware of Dolby S back then but it may have been too expensive for me.
I had a dbx deck in the 1980s My memory of the marketing at least was it wasn't just companding, but compressed then filtered before decompression, which basically cleared the noise in addition to yhe increase in range. Maybe i misunderstood or misremember?
I picked up a restored JVC KD-A66 cassette deck with JVC's super ANRS system. I like it better than dolby system. Super clean output on commercial tapes, even better on chrome and metal.
SR was developed for motion pictures. Only much later is was also used for audio only, but much less and not as much as the others. The other versions of Dolby are better IMHO or equal and they dedicated to audio exclusively. For me it makes more sense to discuss about the pure audio systems.
@@datsunmadman It's not just high quality cassette decks... You need to use a very high quality tape... Type IV Metal cassettes sound phenomenal when recorded at a high level with no noise reduction. The thing is that metal tapes are hard to find now and extremely expensive.
Outstanding explanation! I've learn a lot, but I think you miss one. What can you say about MPX which is present in many tape decks. I ask because my intention in to buy a tape deck as Christmas present for me. Thanks for all the videos and keep up.
Mpx is not a noise reduction system. It is used when you record from FM radio. So only use it if you record from FM radio. It filters away a specific tone that cannot be heared and is not part of the music. Similarly, your deck might have a button for a subsonic filter. That one is only used during recording of an LP. It filters away extremely low tones generated by pick-ups only, and are not part of the musical recording either.
In order to play Dolby-B is it enough to get a good deck or is it also worth getting a noise reduction unit? The only one I'm aware of is the JVC NR-50.
I use an external HiCom NR unit for RTR and 8Track which it sounds the best for and not cassette. You can play it without the NR unit and the tapes still sound normal.
@@anadialog I am pretty sure it's a HiCom unit because it does not work with dbx or Dolby encoded tapes. It's an MXR brand unit from the late 70's with dark brown wood sides and a black finish. Am I correct that this is a real HiCom unit? There is no information on it anywhere. This encoded recording will also work in B NR but a Dolby encoded tape will not on HiCom playback otherwise It sounds jagged like playing a non Dolby tape on Dolby C. It does work very well with zero noise and a high gain like dbx with no pumping. It does make the recording sound great and I use it a lot on my Akai GXR 82D and Pioneer 707. I also have a CX unit from the same design and make from the same era that I use with my Columbia vinyl like my Pink Floyd The Wall and Shango albums that are encoded in CX . You also forgot to mention DNR which was used in tape playback only since there was no encoding involved in the process. Maybe you can make a video on DNR or mention it sometime during another subject. That is the next add on unit I want to experiment with. My CX unit kinda works like it but it's not true to all my non Dolby recordings and some sounds jagged like using Dolby on non Dolby encoded playback.
Metal tapes were dramatically superior to standard-bias composition in every metric but they would just destroy the heads in short order. Now to be clear, I'm referring specifically to my own experiences, in the 1980s and early 90s, with cassette decks only. I have owned two reel-to-reel decks but neither had any metal tapes played on them, as that would have pretty much required a second mortgage on the house.
Highcom was a broadband compander and not limited in high frequencies. It achieve 25dB extra dynamic in high frequency band. And 20dB in the lower frequecies. I own a Telefunken RC300 which is of awesome build quality and lasts since 1981 and still running, no rubber bands. HighCom got some modification for soft switching time constants I have applied to my HighCom modules and the sound quality is way better than with any other NR system. The RC300 had 2 tape speeds (normal and half). I made some changes in the electronics to run it double speed instead of useless half speed. Therefore I had to modify the recording equalizer to get a flat frequency response. Now it has about 80 to 83dB S/N ratio.
If you check, as I said in the video, Highcom acted on the 1.2khz-8.6khz. Broadband means on all frequencies within this range, instead of fixed frequencies like in other companders.
@@anadialog Highcom has emphasis functionality, at higher level high frequencies are reduced at recording time to avoid tape saturation as a compressed signal is louder in the high frequencies. Same for low frequencies. So that does not mean that it will not compress frequencies higher than ~8kHz. It IS a broadband compander that works from 20-20000 Hz, if recorder is able.
I picked up a nice cassette deck yesterday a Yamaha KX 800u has dbx noise reduction Dolby b and c also has a nice feature a bias test feature to adjust your bias I've never seen nothing like that also it's a three head deck which is nice paid by 75 bucks I think that's a pretty good dea for this deck anyway here's my thoughts on dbx I recorded a cassette in dbx and played it back in dbx I'm pretty satisfied with it but time to time some of the sounds sound kind of muffled is this normal is there maybe a certain type of tape I need to record with dbx in your opinion the deck seems to be working fine your thoughts on this thank you
The dbx chip may be compromised...no need of specific tapes. Try servicing it and make sure they know how to check the dbx circuit otherwise it's just better to get another deck in better shape.
Hi everyone, I'm getting into 4-track cassette recording and have a query related to dubbing and noise reduction. When I dub cassettes from my master, which at this stage will be a HiFi VHS, what would be the best to use - Dolby B, C, or dbx? I have seen the odd deck with Dolby HX as well, whatever that is. I've read that dubbing with Dolby C will sound bad if the listener doesn't have Dolby C - same with dbx. Does anyone have any experience with this? TIA
Not really volume it's gain increasing or decreasing. Not necessarily the chips at-fault itself it's the circuitry from and to the chip plays the biggest part. Put a good quality polyurethane film capacitor of 10 Nano farads across the power rail of the Dolby chip plus and minus give it better filtration smooth out the signal. And low ESR value capacitors like Rubicon black gate that's why you're getting the pumping problem, the Dolby IC is picking up background noise and delay in the signal it can't determine if this is part of the music or not. I was wondering have you tried analogue tape as a belt for your turntable but yours is direct drive
Scusa se scrivo in italiano, ma il mio inglese non è il massimo. Ho visto che al minuto 29.52 tra i marchi che hanno utilizzato il sistema High-Com II hai inserito Super-D. Io pensavo che il Super-D fosse un altro sistema di riduzione del rumore sviluppato da Sanyo, sono in errore ? Si tratta del medesimo sistema che veniva semplicemente chiamato con due nomi differenti ?
Is Dolby'C' on 1/4" multitrack WORTH using if the result is gonna end up digital anyway? I mean, would it be better to not turn it on and then use digital noise reduction algorithms later on… Perhaps both Dolby and WAVES would be the way to go? What are your thoughts and is there anyone in the comments section had any experience of this, please? Thanks!
Is Dolby S like the SR (Spectral Recording) system introduced in 1987 on the original version of the film ROBOCOP? Love DBX, which was used on APOCALYPSE NOW, but somehow ruined the master tape of the STEELY DAN album KATY LIED, though its issues might soon, finally be resolved.
Hi again dear ANA[DIA]LOG i have a quetion about dolby systems & calibrations : The quetion is .....For example we want to record a cassette with any dolby b-c-dbx e.t.c but we need to perform the calibration 1st in our 3 head head . Which is better to calibrate the cassette with or without dolby ?? Thx for any reply :-)
@@anadialog Sorry for my too late Thx for your reply it was me accidentally de-activated the replies to my comments now it 's ok i can see the replies ...THX :-)
ANA/DIA/LOG. HELLO! ALDO. I watched about noise reduction system. Mostly my cassettes are not recorded with DOLBY. I think the reason is because I record from REEL to REEL. In my opinion the most important thing is your SOURCE; if your SOURCE is poor and low recorded, even someone who has $10.000 stereo equipment the recording will not come out good. Sometimes I use very cheap MAXELL Normal cassette without Dolby and it comes out very good. The ones which I have recorded with Dolby B I come to listen the recorded music and I turn OFF the Dolby then back to Dolby and I don't find any difference no HISS. You can make a program about SOURCE in your videos. I have 4 blank cassettes which are very high quality; I hope you have them. QUANTEGY 472 type II professional series 45 minutes. I have one recorded Classical piano, it' fantastic; if you have keep them well. O.K. my friend, CIAO.
I understand, but its not only a matter of hiss. A good compander should also extend the frequency response. Good chrome or metal don't relly need it but with ferric I always use it. It is in the end also a matter of a taste. Yes, of course the source is the primary aspect. I agree but it is rather obvious I think. In any case it's good to point it out sometimes.
Dear Aldo. I just watched the video how to cut mastering for vinyl on copper disc etc. By the way I am not very good in computers, and I didn't know how to send you comment at bottom of the screen; so I am sending you this way. I listened Black Sabbath LPs I liked ORCHID track B and Lord of this world track A
Why didn’t I know this stuff back in the 1980s?! I was always recording in high school but never knew how to properly use Dolby so I had it off most of the time, and I depended only on Type II and IV tapes for any kind of decent sound. I didn’t know what calibration was either! Now I have a Dolby S deck and I can’t believe what I hear especially when a Type IV is properly recorded and calibrated.
Anyone happen to know what a Dolby FM Broadcast Unit Model 334 with the Type-B Cat No. 66 card in it would run these days? It's all but impossible to find them and information is minimal with the exception of the original documentation.
Guido, I just picked up a cassette tape deck with DBX and DB B and C on Ebay over the weekend. The first thing that came out of my mouth, after the first 2 minute recording session, was: "Jesus F. Christ, whoever invented this technology was a fuc**** genius" (forgive my French). I am still shocked that the audio quality (from a normal, not metal, tape that I have) approaches that of my professional 2-track reel to reel at 15 IPS!!!!! DBX (not the other 3 systems equipped with the deck) DRASTICALLY improves the sound quality by virtually eliminating the noise level without sacrificing high frequencyresponses. I thought I was listening to the source (from DSD)!
@@anadialog thanks for igniting my interest in cassette tapes again, which I ditched entirely after getting my first high end CD/SACD player nearly 2 decades ago. And, no, I no longer look down on cassette tapes (having spent 1 weekend testing them extensively with DBX. I wonder if DBX is as good as HX Pro or Dolby S.
Dolby, according to most audiophiles, dont usually use it because it never works right, the reason is unknown to me why it doesnt work right. I always try it, and if it ever does what the chart shows, I will use it, but I have only used one deck so far, so Im not sure if it works or who uses it. Im getting a refurbished deck with a year warranty. It has dolby S, I dont know if it will work right, but if if doesnt, it wont matter to me, but if everything else works right Ill keep it. Hxpro is more effective at noise reduction according to what I hear, and metal tapes can capture the head room extension, which also means they have less noise by comparison and Hx pro is also said to reduce noise, probably by reducing distortion. if I have dolby S, I probably will use that over b, and c. What really matters more than anything, is autotune. On my JVC its called cal, which i think is same thing, correct me if Im wrong. It makes up for slight differences between tapes, and the difference matters. Also I have bias adjust, also important.Its good to understand how it all works though, so thanks for your efforts. Biggest problem is finding a tape deck that will work right at all.
@@anadialog yes it allows the maximum bias allowed, reduces distortion by not oversaturating the head, unfortunately not many tape decks have it. I hope the type s Dolby works on my deck. I found one with a 1 year warranty, refurbished. I appreciate your efforts, is good to refresh my memory with the information.
Since the Dolby B was arguably the worst noise reduction and so many pre recorded cassette tapes were released with it, in your opinion, what is the best way to get the highest quality sound out of a " generic Dolby logo" (Dolby B) recorded cassette? (Even with a good quality deck) - I have a Yamaha and a Teac.
techmoan made a RUclips video about dbx on vinyl they were called dbx disc and required a decoder and could give a dynamic range of 90 decibels on vinyl records
How does in work in regards to deck and tape? If the tape is recorded with B, and my deck has a selector for B, C, or none, how would I select which one to use?
The diagrams shown of compression and expansion must not be accurate or correct because the upper frequencies show a dB gain of different amounts, but what I I here when I use Dolby is it cuts out or filters out to many high frequencies, especially symbols. When the music plays I dont hear tape hiss, but I dont really and honestly seem to notice it at all were it is significant enough to pursuade me to ever use dolby. The only good thing about it is I can always turn it off. However I saw a dbx stereo componant and I would say the results I heard were amazing, especially impact restoration. This was one of the most impressive things I ever heard, but I never used it and completely am impressed with how everything sounds without it.
I am afraid you are misunderstanding the concept of companders. The diagrams shown are all correct and furnished by manuals or manufacturers. Don’t know what is your experience and deck but if your comment is based on one deck then do take into consideration that your Dolby chip is corrupted. A lot of people don’t know this or forget it (and that is why perhaps we have so many Dolby haters) but Dolby must be recalibrated and/or can work wrongly giving bad results and if you don’t know how a true Dolby tape sounds like you may think that that is the way it sounds.
@@anadialog I have never used Dolby because on the 2 tape decks I own they both cut out high frequencies. I only use metal tapes because they allow the higher bias, I don't see the significance in tape noise as I don't care if I hear it between the songs or not, it's never noticeable by me, I don't really hear it in my recordings. I only know what I can hear, Dolby always is left off by me.
@@anadialog Let me clarify about dolby. If it sounded better, I would use use it. I have owned one deck, with it, and I am amazed it lasted this long, 30 years, its the only deck I have had. It always cuts out the high frequencies when I try using dolby b, and c, so I always leave it off, and it always sounds better with it off. If tape hiss bothers you, what about grove noise on vinyl records? Nobody complains about the groove noise. I honestly dont understand the need for it, I never notice it really, but I believe the HX pro is may be why I dont hear it, and I think it works better than dolby. Thats what I mean by the accuracy of the chart, what I hear doesnt match the chart. I dont buy prercorded casettes, I only buy TDK metal tapes, all of my recordings are 20 years old and still have at least a 0 to +2 dB response, they still sound good. as far as my tape deck, uncertain of what to do, it has a display problem. I bought a replacement Denon deck, but it has some problems too.
I did mention it in the video description along with others. It's a compander, just like the others, and not that present in the industry and that is why I set it aside along with others.
Hi Been recording for little over 50 years. I think it all depends on your taste. A lot of people like high end frequency in their music. So a lot of them like digital , like CD dat etc. For me I like a more natural and warmer sound of analog. I think one reason and a lot people of my generation like that. Their ears condition to that analog sound. So started recording with dolby B. It good at the time. Then I heard of dbx with 30 db in noise reduction. I said wow !!. I tried it out. I was totally disappointed. I heard all this hissing and pumping noise. It sucked. So back to dolby b. When I got older I could afford nicer decks. Like Naks , Akai's and Teac's and so on. So started dolby c and then CD's came out. So started playing CDs .So bought a DAT deck and a CD recorder. I did this for a couple years. But didn't sound right to me. Around this time dolby S came out tried recording CDs. But they sounded too much like Cd's. So I tried recording cd's with dolby c. I restored my high end decks. Boy did love the sound. So I did that for about 20 years. About 10 to 12 years ago I had ( I still have) a few decks ( Teac Z 5000 , R 999x and the pro version of the yamaha Kx 1200 the c300) I thought I give the DBX II a try. WOW I love it !! More dynamic and explanation. To me sound great , no pumping and hiss. So that what I use now. Haven't tried DBX III or High com. I do want to tried this DBX disc that have on my Teac R 999x and my DBX 222 processor noise reductio and buy some DBx disc record's.
Nice video as always this is the third time i'm watching this marvellous video and l really liked it even better i wish if i could give one more like actually i did with my 2nd channel , but i have a quetion about the dolby symbol in the VU meters display analog or flaurocent on our cassette decks , for example in my Aiwa AD-F 850 this symbol is in between -2 and 0 db unlike in my Technics RS-BX707 is in between +2 and +4 ....... what does this means ? Does it means that we must use a dolby system for recordings levels below this symbol where ever it is and not to use any dolby for recording levels above this symbol ?? Thx for any reply and i'm glad sister country Italy to my country Greece goes better n' better from this corona virus :-)
Great observation! Yes, not many decks have that but it is useful. Exactly, you should use it for that type of recording signal or lower, because that means that you are using tapes that saturate more quickly like type I or low quality type 2.
Hello everyone... I would like to share an interesting experiment I conducted... it involves the tape hiss that's talked about a lot ... tape hiss isn't actually as much as it is thought to be ... I'll explain my experiment... it involved brand new tape and recording on a cassette with no input and blocking the heads (two head machine) ... 1st I blocked the rec/play head from contacting the tape during record ... played it back and there was only a very slight thump sound as hit stop (erase head circuit turned off) other than that thump both sections of the tape were EXTREMELY QUIET as far as hiss ... the 2nd part was mind blowing.... same recording with no signals being recorded only this time I blocked the erase head from contacting the tape and there was about twice as much hiss level compared to the rec/play head being blocked ... so that lead me to think why is the hiss much more noticeable now? Interesting conclusion of why ... the BIAS signal increased the hiss level ... it is very easy to conduct the same experiment... I used a small piece of napkin (covered the tape in the cassette before i put it in the machine.... I recorded the output into my computer so I could examine the wave form in Cool Edit ... the cassette machine I was doing the test with was a Sony FX7 ... the machine erases the tape to virgin levels as I stated earlier only a slight thump as the erase head circuit turned off when I hit stop ... so I concluded that the BIAS adds a lot of the hiss that we call "tape hiss" ... Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all
I remember in the 80's it was a guy who had a Sony stereo with big speakers and on the stereo it only said Dolly NR if I remember correctly. and if you activated the Dolby on it then the sound became dark. so maybe not so strange that he did not use Dolby on it. then he had a reel to reel as well. there were people who thought it was the best
Normally, if a tape sounded "dark" or muffled when played back with Dolby turned on, it means that the tape wasn't recorded with Dolby in the first place. So, it never had the expansion signal for the chip to work with.
It was developed by Bang & Olufsen and sold immediately to Dolby but that is not a noise reduction system as the other commenter said, but a bias intensity regulator.
I had to make some choices. There are also several others that I had to exclude. For ANSR I can say that it was an older type of NR and on JVC decks, which aren't that amazing. Considering all high-com versions and their direct relation with telcom I decided to give more space to those. In any case I the future I will do another video on the secondary NR systems.
![ANA[DIA]LOG](http://yt3.ggpht.com/50CpmGNilS8aoMlarZVhI_GxRDoZdbj4ZgwCMZXg-Rq2PrEvCytlE6RVyLUrNY-rwE_sAlZ1Zw=s48-c-k-c0x00ffffff-no-rj)
ERRATA CORRIGE: At 29:50 I made a mistake in the caption. High-Com II is ONLY Nakamichi.
The other names are other secondary types of noise reduction systems: Toshiba - Adres; Sanyo - Super-D; EMT NoiseEX; CBS CX and CXTV; Burwen Noise Eliminator.
Finally I forgot to talk about Dolby SR (Spectral Recording, introduced in 1986)!
Hey uhhhh i could use some advice...i have some downloaded unofficial FZ tapes and id like to back it blank cassette, i just bought a telefunken 450 tape deck with High Com 1
Now some of these tapes have hiss, for one reason or another, but i wanna back up a show that has a lot of Amp Hiss/Wind
Do you think high com would bring the noise down while keeping the mix intact
Usually on some of these bootlegs, anything past 10Khz is usually a lot of noise
Companders or noise reduction systems as High Com are designed to reduce the inherent tape hiss of the cassette you are recording, it will not affect, or at least not that much, hiss present and recorded on another cassette. Sorry about that.
I may just have solved my noise problem. I found a 1995 Denon DN -790 R. It has dolby b, c and S! and hx pro plus a bias control. This may be rare find. Hope it works out. This is touted as the best type of noise reduction. Hx pro is a must.Denon has a good quality turntable allthough some are a little skeptical, but its brand new. its a little pricey at $2500, but, its of good enough quality I think. The old ones have their problems, I had to send one back. We certainly need turntable and cassette decks to be made again. Hopefully they will have a comeback.
I got the Nakamichi HiCom II and I did copy the motherboard (in CAD) and repopulated it with all the same components. Then mounted it inside HiCom II and setting one PCB to permanently REC and one PCB to permanently to PLAY. This makes my unit probably very unique and the only Nakamichi HiCom II in the world that codes and decodes simultaneously within. 👌🏻 😃
Cool!!
WoW! Respect! What you did does not occur often in nowadays world! Would you consider doing one more to order? 🙂
@@FTube77Hi and thanks. Yes it is a little odd unit. I do no longer have access to neither parts nor cad designs, but I would consider selling it on eBay preferably with the Nakamichi 680ZX Discrete Head Cassette Deck w half speed option. Please let me know if you would be interested. I think 110/230 VAC /Claes
😮
Wow - excellent - knowledge is power. I had long ago bought a TEAC A 3440 11" reel recorder with the dbx unit. When I made a recording without it, you could hear the hiss. I tolerated the hiss, but it bugged me - I mean a heck of a good recorder should not have hiss. But when the dbx unit was hooked up, all 4 channels that would automatically switch between record and playback, the hiss was all but gone - you really had to listen hard to detect it, if you could. The dynamic range was amazing, the quality of the sound simply superb. It made all the difference in the world. Actually I think the playback sounded a bit better somehow - it was like 3D sound. After that, no going back. Try to play back a dbx recording without the decoder - noooooooo! turn it on and suddenly, you are transported to heaven. Ya, that good.
Of course today, it is all digital and noise is absent. Is the sound quality as good as analogue? Debatable. Does anyone care? When you go to a theatre, the digital silence is dead quiet - but then again it should be with a $100,000 system. Loud is crazy loud, like in real life. Can a tape equal that? I doubt it. But it comes pretty darned close.
Now then, does it matter. We are all caught up in a world of perfection. Perfect what? I have a 1930 Knabe 9' grand piano. It is not perfect, but incredible nonetheless. I have had some people state that this piano is the best sounding piano they have ever played. It is the minute imperfections that made it so human, warm, comfortable. When compared to a so called perfect Bosendorfer Imperial at $250,000, I don't like it. Too clinically pure. Cold perhaps. Like a perfect woman who flaunts her clinical beauty with an attitude of 'the great ME'. No thanks.
I see digital as clinically pure. Ya, unrealistic. You never hear sound that way ever. The world has its hisses, pops, scratches, jet noise, traffic and wind in that sound. Do I like the clinically pure digital sound? Honestly - tolerate it but it does not give me warm and fuzzy feelings. It does not hug you.
The Teac with dbx does however. Can't explain it.
So at the end of the day, what is perfect. Clinically pure or a bit of imperfection from that? Noise reduction is needed for sure, and digital gets it right, but at what cost? What advantage is it to have a great 4 channel reel deck and dbx unit, outside of bragging rights? And to watch big reels go round and round? I will tell you. It is warm, inviting, gives you a hug and makes you say 'oh my , does that sound nice. It does have its place in our hearts. I like it. They got it right.
Just like a travel back in time...
I came in here just by accident but stayed tuned: Half of my age age at the beginning of the 1980s where computers were not existing I built a NR system from Telefunken HighCom boards attached to a (if I remember correctly) Sony Taperecorder. It was a great enhancement but in the first version there was some breathing effects in the recordings. That was fixed (of course by me - it was the age of the electronic hobbyists) with about 5 to 10 passive components and it worked quite well. Thet was the time of buying 30cm vionyl LP records, recording them to tape and putting them back into my shelf to keep them pristine for the rare occasions of playing them on the turntable. All those treasures still standing in my other flat and unused since 20 years or so.. just relics of a nice time of life.
I really like DBX. I started using it in 80/81 for my cassettes and reel to reel tapes and I still use my DBX 224 unit to this day. I even had a DBX unit in my car in the day to play my cassettes. I also have some DBX encoded albums and they're pretty amazing, if you haven't heard them : )
Sweet!
Agreed, dbx was a great advantage in analog tape recording and playback assuming you can afford to obtain that technology in all of your tape playback equipment.
Excellent presentation and explanation on all the main tape noise reduction systems. As a matter of fact, IEC Type II (CrO2) has the lowest noise floor of all tape formulations, even lower than Type IV (Metal particle). But with Metal, you can (must) record hotter, hence the "perceived" lower noise.
What I’ve heard is that the 70microsecond EQ curve was developed to serve as an impromptu noise reduction as it boosts frequencies on record and cuts them on playback. As tape formulations improved, the need for the difference in EQ was lessened, but it was kept in place. Wasn’t explained to me why it was kept, but I assume it was more nuanced than just a difference in formulation.
Thank you very much for the very informative videos you share with us, Great Videos!
With your permition, I would like to add some more important points related to NR systems :
1) Reference Level Calibration:
All NR methods (except DBX) require to be recorded and playback at specific magnetic level, other wise they would suffer from improper operation. The "better" the NR system in terms of NR improvement, the more sensitive it would be to changes in gain levels. also depend on media, the higher the basic noise level is (i.e. standard cassette vs Metal one) the more sensitive to gain changes is the system.|
There for, the Dolby C system for cassettes, though it has an excellent performance at time of recording, would suffer from normal ti,e cassette degradation, from azimuth changes, from comparability to other cassette deck playback etc. while the simple dolby B recorded cassette would not be so delicate.
What is Great about dBX is that the system encoding emphasis and convert a linear signal level into a logarithmic scale and the decoding works exactly the opposite way, thus dBX system eliminate the need for a reference level calibration, it can be perfectly decoded and played back at many different gears, no need to generate calibration tone prior to playback of a dBX decoded material.
2) Machine compatibility
To my memory, Dolby B noise reduction was effective on frequencies above 4 KHz, and 10dB of reduction, Dolby C on frequencies above 1kHz 20 DB reduction on the mid range frequencies and "only 10dB" on the high frequency (to avoid Recording head saturation)
3) Recording Bias Control:
Since Dolby recording involves with elevating the recording of the high frequencies close to saturation levels, the Dolby C introduced a method (developed years earlier by Tandberg for RTR machines) that was controlling the BIAS of the magnetic recording head, where each time a high energy of high frequency was recorded, the bias level of the head was reduced to keep total signal to the recording head out of saturation. This method increase the dynamic range of the very high frequency which normally could not be recorded at level higher than -20db (Normal Cassette) and -10dB (Metal Cassette). Dolby C noise reduction was actually reducing the actual level of very high frequencies at recording and amplify back at playback
4) Tandberg TD20A Real to Real:
Tandberg RTR model TD20A SE (from 1985) is the only machine I know that was able to reach A weighted 80dB SNR without using a NR system, they have used a special magnetic heads. the Actyliner system (Bias control for high frequency recording) and "special Equalization (Not NAB or IEC) which utilized the extra high frequency headroom thus had stronger emphasis on recording and stronger the emphasis on play back. in my opinion (and experience) the Tandberg RTR TD20A and TD20A SE are at the top of home (4 track low speed version) and Semi pro (2 track High speed) machines I know.
I’ve been making music since 1990, released music on major labels and have been obsessed with sound since I was a kid. But this is the first time someone has explained noise reduction in such a passionate and fantastic way. I’ve really learned a few things here. I often abuse noise reduction systems in a way to create nice artefacts in my work even today. But you’ve basically shown me why I love noise! Thanks for an ace video! You’ve explained it in a way that casual listeners and nerds alike can appreciate and understand. +1 follower! ✨
Edit: excited typo 😂
Working through my signals and systems class right now and it's so cool to be able to hear about all of the application throughout history. Thanks!
I was a reel-to-reel junkie when I was in high school. As soon as I had the money I ran out and purchased the original Advent 101a outboard Dolby-B add-on device. A year later I purchased the 100A for a whopping $270.00 ! Since then I have "recycled" the case from that unit for a DIY audio project. (So I got my $$ worth off of that item..) I used Dolby to transcribe my "new" records to open-reel tape even at 7 1/2. Still have most of the tapes. Ray Dolby was an electronic genius..thinking and designing years ahead of his time. RIP Dr. Dolby.
Cool! Thanks for sharing that.
That was a great explanation, I learned something new.
Thanks man!
Vangelis preferred DBX noise reduction when recording to his Lyrec 24 track machine. He used it on almost all of his albums recorded at Nemo Studio. I believe he then used Dolby A when mixing down to the Ampex 2 track machine.
Interesting!
Not surprising to me. From what an audio engineer friend of mine has said, DBX was technically better, but between lack of market saturation and the recordings sounding awful without the decoder in comparison to Dolby B, it was difficult to get consumers to adopt a new system.
I have a DBX 224x from the 80s that I bought in Germany and I still use it today.
Nice!
Dolby SR 363 with the upgrade by Jim Williams from audio upgrades just can't be beat. Period!
Nice video but you must do a part two and include sanyo super d and dolby SR. Thanks
Maybe I could do that!
Thank You for interesting video ! I used all these systems in my live (also Dolby A and Telcom C4 in my job in a TV-station) My cassettdeck (Technics RS-B965) also has Dolby B and C and also dbx. My TEAC X1000R has dbx I, but for me the best system is Super D Plus N 55 from Sanyo ! 40dB noisreduction in 2 bands. No "breathing" or "bumping" I ever could hear, it was not so popular in this time (1980) but for the consumersection it was the best solution because it was not sooo expensive and worked really great, till now ! I could adjust the signallevel under the noisfloor so that You could not hear it, and if I switched Super D on, signal came clear and without any hiss back without any breathing ! ! For me much better like dbx ! 👍
I agree. I also have the Sanyo Super D and at first I simply couldn't believe it. It is phenomenal. Purely in terms of sound, it is quite capable of upgrading a few hundred dollar deck into a several thousand dollar deck, and I am really not kidding! It was also manufactured by Fisher, and prices are now going up and up for these units on the used market as more people are realising just how good they are.
I always use Dolby with great effect
Even Dolby B sounds great on my deck,Dolby C gets most of my tapes
Then again my deck is high end so it's understandable that it has a very good decoding and encoding of Dolby
Also bad Dolby on a Walkman for example can be the head azimuth not adjusted
Hi from France ! Very good video. Can I just add that most of people will buy second hand tape decks and after servicing around 250 of them, the noise reduction chips are almost the last of the problem.
To obtain a good quality sound there is so much more to do before !
A single dust or hardened grease into the capstan will bring deviation in the speed, the same for a slightly worn pinch.
More over the heads calibration will be as important. I won't list all the requested deep servicing that you need to do before thinking even playing with noise reduction !
Best
Of course, I agree! This was just a video on these systems...
A Very educative ! and very good one !
Wow!
Extensive, comprehensive and almost definitive video on the reduction noise systems topic.
Really GREAT job, ANA[DIA]LOG.
Hello I love your channel I’ve subscribed a while ago it’s lovely to see and hear about cassettes I love cassettes and cassette decks I’m an ex audiophile and owed over 40 decks I really hope you try your best to tell new companies to remake new decks and tapes it would be amazing it’s a niche market really but I’m 53 and grew up with cassettes since I was four please try and keep the info of new decks up to date Tony
I will. Thanks Tony!
Great video, Guido. My first and best cassette deck I owned was an Akai GXF-90 with 3 heads, dual direct drive capstan motors, manual tape calibration (built-in test tone generator), etc........ It had Dolby B and sounded great, as long as you played a tape that was recorded on this same machine. Eventually I stopped using Dolby, and the tapes sounded great to me on their own.
Thanks for your explanation, of this complex subject. It has helped me to get an understanding of the theory. I only knew about noise reduction systems, mainly Dolby , but was unaware of the process.
Thank you Steven!
Great info. One question..
What was Dolby HX-PRO?
Thx! That was a recording technique to automatically adjust the bias while recording. Not a compander.
@@anadialog always thought it had something to do with noise reduction because the logo would be found near NR &/or S logo. Thanks a lot. Just miss those beautiful looking racks and decks. Sadly today audio is 'seen' as an association with video.
Love your channel! And your English is absolutely stellar 👏
Thank you so much Andrew!
Teşekkürler.
Thanks for your support!
Excellent overview, but you miss Dolby SR, the pinacle of noise reduction system that kill digital audio multitrack market in the late eighties.
Dolby SR provide up to 106dB of SNR.
I did not miss it actually. I excluded it. It's mainly a surround movie audio NR system.
@@anadialog It was used a lot in for 2 trks recording and multitracks recording.
The studio where I was working in the eighties got about more than one hundred cards of Dolby SR.
We even put a set on our Sony 1Inch videotape.
BTW the Dolby SR was the pinacle of audio analog treatment before the introduction of DSP.
His son David, tell me that this Dolby SR was is last project as an engineer, apparemtly he develop the concept and the final product from start to the beginning.
I see. Thanks for your input. Maybe my perception was wrong to exclude it but in my master tape roaming I have rarely seen it and also online it is rarely discussed.
@@anadialog every engineer that came in contact with dolby SR said that it was the best for two track mix down master recording.
I see. I just had the perception that it was mainly adopted in the motion picture industry. I guess I am wrong.
Geat vid! Lots of knowledge. Thank you for producing.
Also.. how did you do that in one take? Magnificent!
Thank you for a great episode :) Highly appreciated it, perhaps you could have mentioned something about JVC's ANRS.
A lot of people are saying this. I guess my perception is different plus I did wanted to give space to Telefunken, which obviously includes telcom and high-com eating all the time up. The video in fact is just too long. As mentioned in other comments, I will do a second part with the other missing ones...there are quite a number that need to be mentioned!
Ciao, ho acquistato un deck Teac c-3x, volevo sapere se posso collegare il mio dbx 150 esterno sul Teac. Hai qualche informazione? Ne sarei grato😊 complimenti per il canale!
Certo! Ovviamente dovrei usarlo anche in playback se ci registri
@@anadialog ciao grazie per la risposta, di solito lo uso con un revox a77 la cosa che non capisco è che dietro il trac ci stanno 4 rca per dbx esterno secondo te posso collegarle in quelle o semplicemente negli ingressi in e out del registratore?
Great vid as usual. I always hated the Dolby NR systems, they removed so much of the high end, that I always turned it off. I personally think it's incredible they could make it that far with such a useless system. You can almost do the same thing with an equalizer. At least that's my opinion. A good example of what it sounds like I think many will agree - In this video intro it sounds like 0.18 with Dolby 0.28 without.
Dude Thank you so much for explaining everything about DNRS and tape stuff. I've recently been tying to put all my digital music onto cassette tapes but I've been unsatisfied with the audio quality and Tape Hiss.( Probably due to the cheap shoebox cassette player I got from Amazon) What System would you recommend for CD like audio quality? I also plan on getting Type IV cassette tapes. I just want the best quality audio I can get that will stand the test of time and last forever haha
Get a Nakamichi, even a basic model. Can't go wrong. In any case a 3 head deck from the second half of the 80's should do the magic
Great video. I have a question, what is the time has the attack and release parameter in the Dolby B - C compressor? Thanks for the video.
Hi, very nice vid, thx. When i listen to a dolby B or C, i found that the sounding result is not as good as without NR. I suppose that some details in sound are lost during the process. Of course there is less hiss but the music doesn't sound as good. Don't know if high-com 2 and dbx suffer from the same issue but i think it's inherent in all NR systems. The beauty of analog music is the level of details, but if we manage to send the signal into series of condensators and resistances, i guess they tend to remove a lot of details. As a great fan of Nakamichi audio, not only tape decks, i would go for a high-com 2. I wouldn't be surprise if Nakamichi took care of that issue, and choosed the best solution in collaboration with Telefunken. Another thing to mention is that the hiss is only noticable when there is no sound, so i think it affects less the sound quality that any NR system which tortures the signal. Any advice or comment about that and about high-com 2 will be appreciated. Thx
Unfortunately Dolby chips need calibration at a certain point or simply may have some issues so unless you are using several decks and you know how Dolbyb sounds when it works properly, don't stop there. In any case, I agree that sometimes it just isn't a good effect. Depends also for which music you are recording
Hello. I have a cassette from 1989 by Billy Joel that mentions and specifies that this tape is recorded with the Dolby B system and that if it is played on a player that does not have Dolby technology, the treble will be heard with a “decrement.” . My player is a Luxman k331w which supports both codecs, B and C. When listening to music and with Dolby off, the treble is perceived as somewhat simple; when changing it to Dolby B, the sound is “cleaned” but the treble remains poor. But when I apply Dolby C the treble becomes present well above Dolby B, even more intense than with Dolby off. Normally, when Dolby is turned off, the sound is higher, although with background noise. Why does that happen? I don't understand. I hope you can give me a few minutes to help me with this question. Thank you very much.
sorry for the question. I already understood after calmly watching your video. thank you
Nice video thnx.
I remember, early 70es, Grundig cassete decks had DNL (by Philips). Some words about it, please.
Ciao Guido, great video. I recently bought a Technics RS-B605 to experiment a bit with dbx. The guy I bought from never used dbx (didn't even know what it was). I must say I was really blown away about the results. Did some a/b/c test with Dolby and dbx and the latter clearly won for me. When searching online for the NAK T-100 Audio Analyser, I came across a website by Chen Wang. I downloaded a complete NAK T-100 in software that can do even more that the original hardware model. You should absolutely check it out. He also sells software equivalent codecs for Dolby B/C, DxI and DxII plus a DxL Compander only. I played with the DDi and DxII versions and they are awesome. With the DxII codec you can record and playback in dbx without even having a dbx deck, so great for experimenting When my RtR is fixed I will probably also check the DxI Codec. I read through the comments and couldn't find anything about these products. Maybe an idea for a future video?
Could we have a comparison between the different systems (the ones you have) in order to get a better idea of the artefacts and dos and don'ts with each ?
Excellent video BTW.
Good idea. Taking notes...
Do you have any experience with National Semiconductor's Dynamic Noise Reduction? I had a radioshack made audio processor with built in DNR and I found it to be very effective - it was also one of few NR solutions I've seen with an adjustable knob to determine the aggressiveness of the noise reduction.
It wasn't that popular but I loved my external DNR box when I had it - nowadays I use the noise reduction of my Pioneer RG-1.
No I haven't thanks for pointing that out. Perhaps I will introduce it in the second volume of the video that Inwill donin the future.
Always wanted to try DBX. I had a cheap Yamaha dual well deck I used so most of my stuff I recorded was on that with Dolby B, I tried C a couple times but didn’t seem to work great with it. I have a Nakamichi BX-2 now and haven’t tried it yet with C, after this video I want to! Wish I could get an S machine, but the Sony TC-615S always seems to be broken whenever I come across one
The dbx on the Technics machines for example are amazing...take a look ruclips.net/video/dFyFnKF33vo/видео.html&feature=share9
Awesome video as usual! What DBX Tape Decks would you advise for recording tapes, please?
And if I listen or someone else to my tape, do the second deck benefits from DBX record, even the DBX is not present on the second deck?
There is also a rare digital NR system that Pioneer developed for some of the twin cassette decks. it was to make a noiseless copy of a Dolby or Non Dolby encoded cassette. The mechanisms that where used where terrible with lots of wow and flutter in the copy. The copy was also lousy but worked and it was quiet as the original recording. I also have this deck.
thank you. Awesome explanation
Telefunken developed High Com, Nakamichi jumped on the High Com wagon with High Com II... and plus there is HUSH Super C (single ended).. which states in the users manual that it can be configured to decode Dolby B tapes..
Great Video i was wondering why you never mentioned the Philips system then you did at the end lol - i never liked Dolby C as i could always hear the pumping on the early SONY Dolby S deck that i used to have but after you explained about the different grade chips i might try it again on my recently purchased SONY KA6ES as i have only used Dolby B & S on that and i have to say that Dolby S sounds fantastic on it , i also have 2 Revox A77 Reel to Reel's that have Dolby B i wish someone could come up with a way of modifying the boards to work on Dolby S now that would sound amazing
Yeah, actually there are several companders of other brands but they are just not present enough to mention. My list is not only based on quality but also on the impact they had on music recording and playback history! Yes, you should give Dolby C another chance!
It's simply not true to say that Dolby B was a quick and cheap solution. When it was introduced it was truly revolutionary, and was a key factor in establishing the Compact Cassette as a HiFi format. When the deck is properly optimized for the blank cassette, the results can be excellent. Try Dolby B on a top quality deck like a Nakamichi Dragon, and the result is extremely transparent. The key problem is that it was quite sensitive to the deck being correctly aligned for Dolby playback level, and the sensitivity and bias requirements of the tape being used. Dolby C was even more sensitive to proper setup, but by that point, more decks allowed you to adjust the playback level, sensitivity, and bias for the cassette being used. Dolby S was really an attempt to reduce the problem of setup misalignment, and introduced fairly stringent requirements for the decks mechanics and setup flexibility.
Yes, I agree and in fact I included it in thos top 8 list. I just wanted to emphasize the quality and sophistication of the other systems, which are superior.
Thanks a lot , very helpful info
What about ANRS/ Super ANRS from JVC and DNL from Philips.
They have been implemented in a lot cassette decks and RtoR recorders back then?
I hope you give some light on this.
Thanks
Also wondering the same..i think ANRS is more or less a renamed version of Dolby B...something with patents..
As you can see the video is way too long. I had to make some choices between quality and popularity. Maybe high-com isn't that popular as ANRS but I did wanted to talk about Telefunken and telcom and at that point Ingad to complete the picture with high-com and high-com II. I will surely do another video including the rest, there are so many!
hi, my guess that you mean upward compression, as the standard downward would simply reduce the peaks of the signal. i was wondering how the encoding correlated to the decoding, how is the compression 'activation curve' stored on tape, and then later used for expansion as the slightest difference will result in pumping? if you expand based on the recording itself, there are less peaks to trigger on as they were compressed.
I remember years ago spending quite a bit of money on a DBX unit. I found that it had this breathing effect which was annoying. I used it for my open reel tape deck. I ended up going back to Dolby.
I bet it was an early version that did suffer from this issue as mentioned in the video.
You mght have been trying dbx I. I think it sucked.DBX II is a lot better
Amazing explanation, I learnt a lot. Thanks!!
Thank you!
Fantastic, and so clearly explained as always, so thank you! I bought a Pioneer CT-S620 in the mid-90s which, along with Dolby B and C, has Dolby HX PRO. The deck needs serious attention now both mechanically and electronically and so I'd probably be better off finding another model. I was aware of Dolby S back then but it may have been too expensive for me.
That is a very good model...a lot of labs are now servicing again decks, maybe you can get it back to its standards!
@@anadialog Thank you, I shall have a look round,
Excellent , some things I did not know , Brilliant video
I had a dbx deck in the 1980s My memory of the marketing at least was it wasn't just companding, but compressed then filtered before decompression, which basically cleared the noise in addition to yhe increase in range. Maybe i misunderstood or misremember?
I picked up a restored JVC
KD-A66 cassette deck with JVC's super ANRS system. I like it better than dolby system. Super clean output on commercial tapes, even better on chrome and metal.
Nice!
I can't believe you did not mention Dolby SR Noise reduction.
SR was developed for motion pictures. Only much later is was also used for audio only, but much less and not as much as the others. The other versions of Dolby are better IMHO or equal and they dedicated to audio exclusively. For me it makes more sense to discuss about the pure audio systems.
Nice video as always :-)
I never use NR. My lovely pioneer cassette decks make such lovely recordings that I don't get much hiss.
Dolby S is lovely to have but cant use tapes I make with it back on my walkman so I dont really bother
I never use nr either with high quality cassette and great deck no NR needed
@@datsunmadman It's not just high quality cassette decks... You need to use a very high quality tape... Type IV Metal cassettes sound phenomenal when recorded at a high level with no noise reduction. The thing is that metal tapes are hard to find now and extremely expensive.
@@revokdaryl1 high quality cassette makes all the difference. I Never used type 0
@@datsunmadman You've never used metal type IV tapes?
Outstanding explanation! I've learn a lot, but I think you miss one. What can you say about MPX which is present in many tape decks. I ask because my intention in to buy a tape deck as Christmas present for me. Thanks for all the videos and keep up.
Mpx is not a noise reduction system. It is used when you record from FM radio. So only use it if you record from FM radio. It filters away a specific tone that cannot be heared and is not part of the music. Similarly, your deck might have a button for a subsonic filter. That one is only used during recording of an LP. It filters away extremely low tones generated by pick-ups only, and are not part of the musical recording either.
Ronald gave a perfect explanation!
@@ronaldjanmaat6191 Thanks Ronald for the information. I've learn something today!
Actually mpx is used to filter the 19khz pilot signal
In order to play Dolby-B is it enough to get a good deck or is it also worth getting a noise reduction unit? The only one I'm aware of is the JVC NR-50.
For cassettes a good deck is enough and probably tuned for that medium. For reel to reel you need a stand alone unit
I use an external HiCom NR unit for RTR and 8Track which it sounds the best for and not cassette. You can play it without the NR unit and the tapes still sound normal.
Cool!!
@@anadialog I am pretty sure it's a HiCom unit because it does not work with dbx or Dolby encoded tapes. It's an MXR brand unit from the late 70's with dark brown wood sides and a black finish. Am I correct that this is a real HiCom unit? There is no information on it anywhere. This encoded recording will also work in B NR but a Dolby encoded tape will not on HiCom playback otherwise It sounds jagged like playing a non Dolby tape on Dolby C. It does work very well with zero noise and a high gain like dbx with no pumping. It does make the recording sound great and I use it a lot on my Akai GXR 82D and Pioneer 707. I also have a CX unit from the same design and make from the same era that I use with my Columbia vinyl like my Pink Floyd The Wall and Shango albums that are encoded in CX . You also forgot to mention DNR which was used in tape playback only since there was no encoding involved in the process. Maybe you can make a video on DNR or mention it sometime during another subject. That is the next add on unit I want to experiment with. My CX unit kinda works like it but it's not true to all my non Dolby recordings and some sounds jagged like using Dolby on non Dolby encoded playback.
Metal tapes were dramatically superior to standard-bias composition in every metric but they would just destroy the heads in short order. Now to be clear, I'm referring specifically to my own experiences, in the 1980s and early 90s, with cassette decks only. I have owned two reel-to-reel decks but neither had any metal tapes played on them, as that would have pretty much required a second mortgage on the house.
Consideri il Sony TC-S1 un buon deck di partenza?
Non è un granchè meglio cercare altro nello stesso budget
Hey, how about a top ten acoustic album list ? Do you like this kind of music ?
I sure do! But first I have several other lists I would like to present, but thanks fornthe suggestion. It is a good list that needs a video!
Highcom was a broadband compander and not limited in high frequencies. It achieve 25dB extra dynamic in high frequency band. And 20dB in the lower frequecies. I own a Telefunken RC300 which is of awesome build quality and lasts since 1981 and still running, no rubber bands. HighCom got some modification for soft switching time constants I have applied to my HighCom modules and the sound quality is way better than with any other NR system. The RC300 had 2 tape speeds (normal and half). I made some changes in the electronics to run it double speed instead of useless half speed. Therefore I had to modify the recording equalizer to get a flat frequency response. Now it has about 80 to 83dB S/N ratio.
www.ernstschroeder.de/highcom.htm
If you check, as I said in the video, Highcom acted on the 1.2khz-8.6khz. Broadband means on all frequencies within this range, instead of fixed frequencies like in other companders.
everything.explained.today/High_Com/
Here: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Com
The band range has bibliographic references.
@@anadialog Highcom has emphasis functionality, at higher level high frequencies are reduced at recording time to avoid tape saturation as a compressed signal is louder in the high frequencies. Same for low frequencies. So that does not mean that it will not compress frequencies higher than ~8kHz. It IS a broadband compander that works from 20-20000 Hz, if recorder is able.
Ok, maybe my information is incomplete. Can you show me a reliable source where this is stated like I did?
I picked up a nice cassette deck yesterday a Yamaha KX 800u has dbx noise reduction Dolby b and c also has a nice feature a bias test feature to adjust your bias I've never seen nothing like that also it's a three head deck which is nice paid by 75 bucks I think that's a pretty good dea for this deck anyway here's my thoughts on dbx I recorded a cassette in dbx and played it back in dbx I'm pretty satisfied with it but time to time some of the sounds sound kind of muffled is this normal is there maybe a certain type of tape I need to record with dbx in your opinion the deck seems to be working fine your thoughts on this thank you
The dbx chip may be compromised...no need of specific tapes. Try servicing it and make sure they know how to check the dbx circuit otherwise it's just better to get another deck in better shape.
What about JVC anrs
Hi everyone, I'm getting into 4-track cassette recording and have a query related to dubbing and noise reduction. When I dub cassettes from my master, which at this stage will be a HiFi VHS, what would be the best to use - Dolby B, C, or dbx? I have seen the odd deck with Dolby HX as well, whatever that is. I've read that dubbing with Dolby C will sound bad if the listener doesn't have Dolby C - same with dbx. Does anyone have any experience with this? TIA
I would try with nothing and use a good tape. If hiss is disturbing you, definitely dbx IMO.
Not really volume it's gain increasing or decreasing.
Not necessarily the chips at-fault itself it's the circuitry from and to the chip plays the biggest part. Put a good quality polyurethane film capacitor of 10 Nano farads across the power rail of the Dolby chip plus and minus give it better filtration smooth out the signal. And low ESR value capacitors like Rubicon black gate that's why you're getting the pumping problem, the Dolby IC is picking up background noise and delay in the signal it can't determine if this is part of the music or not.
I was wondering have you tried analogue tape as a belt for your turntable but yours is direct drive
Scusa se scrivo in italiano, ma il mio inglese non è il massimo. Ho visto che al minuto 29.52 tra i marchi che hanno utilizzato il sistema High-Com II hai inserito Super-D. Io pensavo che il Super-D fosse un altro sistema di riduzione del rumore sviluppato da Sanyo, sono in errore ? Si tratta del medesimo sistema che veniva semplicemente chiamato con due nomi differenti ?
Ciao! Si. Hai perfettsmente ragione. Mi sa che ho fatto casino con le didascalie....ora faccio una errata corrige. Grazie!
Is Dolby'C' on 1/4" multitrack WORTH using if the result is gonna end up digital anyway?
I mean, would it be better to not turn it on and then use digital noise reduction algorithms later on… Perhaps both Dolby and WAVES would be the way to go?
What are your thoughts and is there anyone in the comments section had any experience of this, please?
Thanks!
Is Dolby S like the SR (Spectral Recording) system introduced in 1987 on the original version of the film ROBOCOP? Love DBX, which was used on APOCALYPSE NOW, but somehow ruined the master tape of the STEELY DAN album KATY LIED, though its issues might soon, finally be resolved.
No thet are different and unfortunately I actually forgot to insert SR here. Sorry about that.
@@anadialog OK. Maybe more on SR later?
Hi again dear ANA[DIA]LOG i have a quetion about dolby systems & calibrations :
The quetion is .....For example we want to record a cassette with any dolby b-c-dbx e.t.c but we need to perform the calibration 1st in our 3 head head .
Which is better to calibrate the cassette with or without dolby ??
Thx for any reply :-)
Good questione. Its better to calibrate WITHOUT the NR activated.
@@anadialog Sorry for my too late Thx for your reply it was me accidentally de-activated the replies to my comments now it 's ok i can see the replies ...THX :-)
@@Badassvidsz no problem!
What about JVC's ANRS?
ANA/DIA/LOG. HELLO! ALDO. I watched about noise reduction system. Mostly my cassettes are not recorded with DOLBY. I think the reason is because I record from REEL to REEL. In my opinion the most important thing is your SOURCE; if your SOURCE is poor and low recorded, even someone who has $10.000 stereo equipment the recording will not come out good. Sometimes I use very cheap MAXELL Normal cassette without Dolby and it comes out very good. The ones which I have recorded with Dolby B I come to listen the recorded music and I turn OFF the Dolby then back to Dolby and I don't find any difference no HISS. You can make a program about SOURCE in your videos. I have 4 blank cassettes which are very high quality; I hope you have them. QUANTEGY 472 type II professional series 45 minutes. I have one recorded Classical piano, it' fantastic; if you have keep them well. O.K. my friend, CIAO.
I understand, but its not only a matter of hiss. A good compander should also extend the frequency response. Good chrome or metal don't relly need it but with ferric I always use it. It is in the end also a matter of a taste. Yes, of course the source is the primary aspect. I agree but it is rather obvious I think. In any case it's good to point it out sometimes.
@@anadialog Dear my friend Aldo. Thank you for your response. I just recorded Carmelo Zappula, Amami.
Dear Aldo. I just watched the video how to cut mastering for vinyl on copper disc etc. By the way I am not very good in computers, and I didn't know how to send you comment at bottom of the screen; so I am sending you this way. I listened Black Sabbath LPs I liked ORCHID track B and Lord of this world track A
Why didn’t I know this stuff back in the 1980s?! I was always recording in high school but never knew how to properly use Dolby so I had it off most of the time, and I depended only on Type II and IV tapes for any kind of decent sound. I didn’t know what calibration was either! Now I have a Dolby S deck and I can’t believe what I hear especially when a Type IV is properly recorded and calibrated.
Me too, believe ne! I rediscoverd the whole thing!
I found a BDX I at Goodwill. It needed cleaning and recapping. Found a like new DBX II on ebay for cheap.
Anyone happen to know what a Dolby FM Broadcast Unit Model 334 with the Type-B Cat No. 66 card in it would run these days? It's all but impossible to find them and information is minimal with the exception of the original documentation.
Guido, I just picked up a cassette tape deck with DBX and DB B and C on Ebay over the weekend. The first thing that came out of my mouth, after the first 2 minute recording session, was: "Jesus F. Christ, whoever invented this technology was a fuc**** genius" (forgive my French). I am still shocked that the audio quality (from a normal, not metal, tape that I have) approaches that of my professional 2-track reel to reel at 15 IPS!!!!! DBX (not the other 3 systems equipped with the deck) DRASTICALLY improves the sound quality by virtually eliminating the noise level without sacrificing high frequencyresponses. I thought I was listening to the source (from DSD)!
Yes! Thanks for this comment! It will keep me going for months, so glad that you are experiencing this! Awesome!
@@anadialog thanks for igniting my interest in cassette tapes again, which I ditched entirely after getting my first high end CD/SACD player nearly 2 decades ago. And, no, I no longer look down on cassette tapes (having spent 1 weekend testing them extensively with DBX. I wonder if DBX is as good as HX Pro or Dolby S.
Thank you! Remember that Hx-pro is not a NR system, but an auto-bias adjustment during recording.
what about VICTOR'S SUPPER ANRS (NOISE REDUCTION SYSTEM)
Couldn't list them all :)
DBX was also applied to some records.
Indeed, in fact I said that at 25:30 ;-)
Dolby, according to most audiophiles, dont usually use it because it never works right, the reason is unknown to me why it doesnt work right. I always try it, and if it ever does what the chart shows, I will use it, but I have only used one deck so far, so Im not sure if it works or who uses it. Im getting a refurbished deck with a year warranty. It has dolby S, I dont know if it will work right, but if if doesnt, it wont matter to me, but if everything else works right Ill keep it. Hxpro is more effective at noise reduction according to what I hear, and metal tapes can capture the head room extension, which also means they have less noise by comparison and Hx pro is also said to reduce noise, probably by reducing distortion. if I have dolby S, I probably will use that over b, and c. What really matters more than anything, is autotune. On my JVC its called cal, which i think is same thing, correct me if Im wrong. It makes up for slight differences between tapes, and the difference matters. Also I have bias adjust, also important.Its good to understand how it all works though, so thanks for your efforts. Biggest problem is finding a tape deck that will work right at all.
Try dbx and everything will make sense. Remember that HX pro is not a compadre but a bias regulator during recording.
@@anadialog yes it allows the maximum bias allowed, reduces distortion by not oversaturating the head, unfortunately not many tape decks have it. I hope the type s Dolby works on my deck. I found one with a 1 year warranty, refurbished. I appreciate your efforts, is good to refresh my memory with the information.
Does anyone know what a Double Dolby System( circuit) is?
Since the Dolby B was arguably the worst noise reduction and so many pre recorded cassette tapes were released with it, in your opinion, what is the best way to get the highest quality sound out of a " generic Dolby logo" (Dolby B) recorded cassette? (Even with a good quality deck) - I have a Yamaha and a Teac.
I think you have the solution. Check which were the best Dolby B chips in high quality decks, some were very bad, and then go for it.
techmoan made a RUclips video about dbx on vinyl they were called dbx disc and required a decoder and could give a dynamic range of 90 decibels on vinyl records
Yup, I have dbx records and they sound great!
Were there any DBX 1 prerecorded mainstream cassette albums released?
No, just bootlegs.
How does in work in regards to deck and tape? If the tape is recorded with B, and my deck has a selector for B, C, or none, how would I select which one to use?
If it's encoded in B use B. All prerecorded cassettes, unless stating otherwise, use Dolby B.
what is the best to get for a reel to reel!
IMO dbx, but remember that most recordings that did use NR systems adopted Dolby A and SR.
The diagrams shown of compression and expansion must not be accurate or correct because the upper frequencies show a dB gain of different amounts, but what I I here when I use Dolby is it cuts out or filters out to many high frequencies, especially symbols. When the music plays I dont hear tape hiss, but I dont really and honestly seem to notice it at all were it is significant enough to pursuade me to ever use dolby. The only good thing about it is I can always turn it off. However I saw a dbx stereo componant and I would say the results I heard were amazing, especially impact restoration. This was one of the most impressive things I ever heard, but I never used it and completely am impressed with how everything sounds without it.
I am afraid you are misunderstanding the concept of companders. The diagrams shown are all correct and furnished by manuals or manufacturers. Don’t know what is your experience and deck but if your comment is based on one deck then do take into consideration that your Dolby chip is corrupted. A lot of people don’t know this or forget it (and that is why perhaps we have so many Dolby haters) but Dolby must be recalibrated and/or can work wrongly giving bad results and if you don’t know how a true Dolby tape sounds like you may think that that is the way it sounds.
@@anadialog I have never used Dolby because on the 2 tape decks I own they both cut out high frequencies. I only use metal tapes because they allow the higher bias, I don't see the significance in tape noise as I don't care if I hear it between the songs or not, it's never noticeable by me, I don't really hear it in my recordings. I only know what I can hear, Dolby always is left off by me.
@@anadialog Let me clarify about dolby. If it sounded better, I would use use it. I have owned one deck, with it, and I am amazed it lasted this long, 30 years, its the only deck I have had. It always cuts out the high frequencies when I try using dolby b, and c, so I always leave it off, and it always sounds better with it off. If tape hiss bothers you, what about grove noise on vinyl records? Nobody complains about the groove noise. I honestly dont understand the need for it, I never notice it really, but I believe the HX pro is may be why I dont hear it, and I think it works better than dolby. Thats what I mean by the accuracy of the chart, what I hear doesnt match the chart. I dont buy prercorded casettes, I only buy TDK metal tapes, all of my recordings are 20 years old and still have at least a 0 to +2 dB response, they still sound good. as far as my tape deck, uncertain of what to do, it has a display problem. I bought a replacement Denon deck, but it has some problems too.
I thing to says anything about Adres noise reduction from Toshiba.It is a similar like DBX, or not?
I did mention it in the video description along with others. It's a compander, just like the others, and not that present in the industry and that is why I set it aside along with others.
Sanyo Super-D, was a combination of dbx and Dolby (external unit model N55), and remember JVC and their ANRS and Super ANRS (basically Dolby ripoffs)
Hi Been recording for little over 50 years. I think it all depends on your taste. A lot of people like high end frequency in their music. So a lot of them like digital , like CD dat etc. For me I like a more natural and warmer sound of analog. I think one reason and a lot people of my generation like that. Their ears condition to that analog sound. So started recording with dolby B. It good at the time. Then I heard of dbx with 30 db in noise reduction. I said wow !!. I tried it out. I was totally disappointed. I heard all this hissing and pumping noise. It sucked. So back to dolby b.
When I got older I could afford nicer decks. Like Naks , Akai's and Teac's and so on. So started dolby c and then CD's came out. So started playing CDs .So bought a DAT deck and a CD recorder. I did this for a couple years. But didn't sound right to me. Around this time dolby S came out tried recording CDs. But they sounded too much like Cd's. So I tried recording cd's with dolby c. I restored my high end decks. Boy did love the sound. So I did that for about 20 years. About 10 to 12 years ago I had ( I still have) a few decks ( Teac Z 5000 , R 999x and the pro version of the yamaha Kx 1200 the c300) I thought I give the DBX II a try. WOW I love it !!
More dynamic and explanation. To me sound great , no pumping and hiss. So that what I use now.
Haven't tried DBX III or High com.
I do want to tried this DBX disc that have on my Teac R 999x and my DBX 222 processor noise reductio and buy some DBx disc record's.
Strange, everyone else favours Dolby S😮
Nice video as always this is the third time i'm watching this marvellous video and l really liked it even better i wish if i could give one more like actually i did with my 2nd channel , but i have a quetion about the dolby symbol in the VU meters display analog or flaurocent on our cassette decks ,
for example in my Aiwa AD-F 850 this symbol is in between -2 and 0 db unlike in my Technics RS-BX707 is in between +2 and +4 ....... what does this means ?
Does it means that we must use a dolby system for recordings levels below this symbol where ever it is and not to use any dolby for recording levels above this symbol ??
Thx for any reply and i'm glad sister country Italy to my country Greece goes better n' better from this corona virus :-)
Great observation! Yes, not many decks have that but it is useful. Exactly, you should use it for that type of recording signal or lower, because that means that you are using tapes that saturate more quickly like type I or low quality type 2.
@@anadialog Thank you very much :-)
You are very welcome!
Hello everyone... I would like to share an interesting experiment I conducted... it involves the tape hiss that's talked about a lot ... tape hiss isn't actually as much as it is thought to be ... I'll explain my experiment... it involved brand new tape and recording on a cassette with no input and blocking the heads (two head machine) ... 1st I blocked the rec/play head from contacting the tape during record ... played it back and there was only a very slight thump sound as hit stop (erase head circuit turned off) other than that thump both sections of the tape were EXTREMELY QUIET as far as hiss ... the 2nd part was mind blowing.... same recording with no signals being recorded only this time I blocked the erase head from contacting the tape and there was about twice as much hiss level compared to the rec/play head being blocked ... so that lead me to think why is the hiss much more noticeable now? Interesting conclusion of why ... the BIAS signal increased the hiss level ... it is very easy to conduct the same experiment... I used a small piece of napkin (covered the tape in the cassette before i put it in the machine.... I recorded the output into my computer so I could examine the wave form in Cool Edit ... the cassette machine I was doing the test with was a Sony FX7 ... the machine erases the tape to virgin levels as I stated earlier only a slight thump as the erase head circuit turned off when I hit stop ... so I concluded that the BIAS adds a lot of the hiss that we call "tape hiss" ... Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all
I remember in the 80's it was a guy who had a Sony stereo with big speakers and on the stereo it only said Dolly NR if I remember correctly. and if you activated the Dolby on it then the sound became dark. so maybe not so strange that he did not use Dolby on it. then he had a reel to reel as well. there were people who thought it was the best
Normally, if a tape sounded "dark" or muffled when played back with Dolby turned on, it means that the tape wasn't recorded with Dolby in the first place. So, it never had the expansion signal for the chip to work with.
I don't use any kind of NR in my recording on cassettes....but if i must use one...i would use DBX...
I don't know but I think that my fav was HX Pro
Birger Olofsson I like it too, but that’s not a noise reduction.
It was developed by Bang & Olufsen and sold immediately to Dolby but that is not a noise reduction system as the other commenter said, but a bias intensity regulator.
I've never listened to any Dolby S tape deck but I think that those are the best. I've big fantasies about Dolby S anyway. *LOL*
and the HXPro?
HxPro is not a noise reduction system. It optimizes the bias during recording.
Dolby B on pre recorded cassettes was because at that time every deck has dolby B.
Where is the JVC ANSR system ? It is more used then high-com.
I had to make some choices. There are also several others that I had to exclude. For ANSR I can say that it was an older type of NR and on JVC decks, which aren't that amazing. Considering all high-com versions and their direct relation with telcom I decided to give more space to those. In any case I the future I will do another video on the secondary NR systems.