Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Why I Don't Use DBX Noise Reduction
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 янв 2021
- it's nothing personal, I'm just lazy.
more on David Blackmer: www.stereophile.com/news/1130...
🙏 SUPPORT ME ON PATREON 🙏
/ madeontape
👂 Listen to the music of Made on Tape 👂
madeontape.bandcamp.com/
spoti.fi/3dJFkXf
www.madeontape.com/
⌨️ FOLLOW ME ON THE INTERWEB 🖥 🕸
/ madeontape
/ madeontape
Peace and be good to each other ✌️
A way that I’ve combatted hiss without having the muffled sound of the dbx is to boost the high frequencies on the channels while tracking and then turning them down on playback. Cutting the high frequencies on playback can reduce the presence of the hiss.
But I mostly don’t even fight it. Musics gotta exist somewhere. It never lives in complete silence.
that’s GREAT advice and words of wisdom. music never exists in a vacuum because you know, sound doesn’t exist in a vacuum 🙌✌️🤘📼
Very old and good tip ! Actually thats some how the way dolby labs goes with noise reduction from A , b , c and s. On the other hand hiss is not the worst thing in the world if a recording is really good! Art is much bigger than tape hiss!
I recently watched an interviewer with a mixer (Jaycen Joshua) saying that he and his mentor (Dave Pensado) like white noise , and sometimes, insert it in digital recordings because it gives a frame of reference - like youre saying. They think that it (subconsciously) indicates, to the listener, what the 'rear' of the soundstage is. The furthest, most 'in the back', part of the song.
What you are doing is essentially the same thing DBX denoisers do but you are doing it in a non-linear fashion so it's hard to fully eliminate the hiss. What you do by turning up the high frequencies is that you hit some kind of threshold/knee (either tape saturation or electronics saturation or both) reducing the dynamic range of the high-frequency content and later cutting it to taste. It's a technique used to achieve specific effects that not many people know but in general +EQ / non-linear processing / -EQ was a techique used in studios and also a technique used inside machines. It's a form of encoding/decoding and also has very interesting mathematical stuff in the background :)
I was thinking about this theory since I just got a 388 and it’s very hissy. Haven’t had the chance to use it very much yet but the hiss has been on my mind. Happy to hear cranking the highs up front could help on the rear end
If im being honest, I think track 2 sounded a tiny bit better than track 1, so for me the sound of dbx sure wins! I never used dbx by myself though, just dolby B and S.
i hear ya! i had to cut so much of the footage of me testing DBX with a fine tooth comb and realizing i might not hate it. Ultimately as i mention, it’s about fast work flow for me...
I preferred track 2.
I have a Four track TEAC that has a far worse problem than tape hiss. The problem with 4 track is crosstalk coming from the tracks in the opposite direction! What do you do? Easy, I'm buying a two track Revox B77. My one will have 7.5ips and 15ips. I will do some experiments at both speeds with and without dbx. I had a cassette deck with dbx, Dolby B and Dolby C HX pro. Dbx was easily the best of the lot.
Dolby S is great. It's too bad they finally got it right just as cassettes were abandoned by industry (not by people!).
@@timhubbard8895 sounds like your heads are misaligned? i'd also check the tape fluxivity, you may just be printing too hot a signal, narrow track machines like my fostex E16 tend to have pretty bad crosstalk if its not within factory specs, I usually get around -40-50db of crosstalk at 'factory' bias, when i first got the machine the previous owner was printing +9db when its designed for +5, and that led to almost -30db of crosstalk, you could see it on the meters it was so bad, also make sure you demagnetize the head regularly, magnetized heads i've found contributes to more detailed sounding crosstalk
I could tell that track 2 had the dbx, but I couldn't necessarily say that it sounded bad or anything. If it was the only version anyone ever heard there would be nothing to compare against so really it came down to whether it sounded good or bad, and... well it sounded rather good still. haha.
You might be interested to know that the maestro Vangelis used DBX type I noise reduction on ALL of his early recordings! He preferred DBX to Dolby type A because he liked the subtle nuances it gave his recordings.
ooohhhh i’m not familiar and will check him out! thanks for the reco! 🙏
@@MadeOnTape Check out Spirals first
“It ‘encodes’ a recording”🤣 love it!
Nice video dude👍🏼. Thanks!
i know right? funny way to word it 😂
Another awesome and instructive video 👍🙏😉🎈
thank you for checking it out and let me know if there’s anything you’d like to see covered!
Hi,im cant sync my acoustic drum,electric guitar and Bass with my DAW click track when i dump my tape recorded track back to my DAW,Can i use SMPTE using MOTU midi express xt or MOTU micro express to align my Acoustic Drum or Electric guitar time exactly like my DAW time signature or click ?
Hi there! Unfortunately this is not my area of expertise...yet. I will be doing a video on syncing tape tracks with a DAW.
This fellow (I forgot his name but he's active in the Portastudio FB group) has a video on this exact process: ruclips.net/video/ucDJohgSrSM/видео.html
@@MadeOnTape thank you god bless you🙌🙌🙌
I prefer the no dbx sound here; with dbx the hi hat seems to disappear. I think if you are recording to a cassette 4 track, and the listener knows this as part of the "allure" of the album, a bit of tape hiss is fine...maybe even required? Btw I dig your Stingray tone; anything else on it other than plugging directly into the board?
agreed. re: stingray tone. This is just Stingray into Boss Chorus into board.
it’s almost always straight in, but i whipped out that SansAmp Para driver recently and will record more with that too
Interesting. I never heard such a big difference with the DBX before. I guess for whatever reason it’s just not very flattering to the drum machine. I did a comparison on my channel years ago with and without DBX on a live drum kit and there was only a slight difference besides the noise floor. Is it possible there are different versions of DBX, or even different noise reduction systems on various Tascam machines?
yeah i wonder? Also, never rule out user error on my part 😂
There are different versions of DBX. One is called "Type I" which is used for professional use and the other "Type II" for cassette decks. Then, there are integrated circuit versions of Type II which are built into machines like the Tascam 4 track, some Panasonic portable players and some cassette decks. The other option, which I prefer is the external unit of the DBX encoder/decoder which has adjustment options and has a higher sound quality.
An eq during final mix seems to take care of any hiss or unwanted frequencies in a recording.
EQ or even these days: Izotope RX software!
I'm interested in your argument against DBX here. Do you know if your DBX circuitry has been calibrated? I ask because in nearly every Tascam maintenance manual I have seen (and even the Fostex ones, that use dolby C), there is a procedure for adjusting the DBX while adjusting your input and repro levels curing calibration. I wonder that possibly if your DBX is out of adjustment, this is the source of the audio degradation?
I'm asking because I also read a lot of positive reviews about Tascam's DBX systems, but this is coming from R2R machines. I use a TSR8 and 48, and I also do not use DBX, but I also don't feel I need to since I mix in the box and empty hiss tracks get muted anyway. Just curious.
you can always sneak a bit of RX noise reduction plugin action on the final mixdown if you're going hybrid
lovvvvve RX it’s a life saver
Without some sort of noise reduction, my Tascam throws a "hissy fit" get it?
😂💛📼
From memory recording off and bounce down have it on, then I'd give it a mild "Re EQ" at that stage, just a subtle tweak and out into mixing mastering.
Edit I just checked out my Tascam and it is OFF.
this sounds just like a track I made back in the day on my 4 track with a 505 and guitar - great job!
thank you! I'm happy to trigger some nostalgia!
I agree with mirage on this one. Boosting the high end of the frequency spectrum whilst recording with DBX then the roll off on mixdown. But great video my friend. To be totally honest I feel that the one with DBX sounds better purely because of the compression effect. I only ever record in my tascam488mk1 8 track recorder and when recording on DBX setting it sounds great. Feel free to check out my channel for some of my recordings. Keep up the great work.
i don't know how i let this comment slip by! Great insight, and i'm certainly more open to using it down the road. thank you for the nice comments 🙏
I have a Yamaha MT-4X and recently discovered that if I record with DBX and don’t use it when playing back, it sounds AMAZING. probably just compressing the shit out of everything but but I’m telling you it sounds good. Definitely worth any added noise but it’s not too much.
i’ve never tried it! might be a future video topic because i love to play with things like that! thanks for watching and the inspiration! 🙏
when the drums were isolated i thought the DBX sounded really bad but in the mix with the band i thought the difference was basically nominal overall. i could tell i think (i got it right) but i wasnt super confident and it was really a 50:50 shot
thanks for watching and listening!
How do you like your Supro guitar? If that is a Supro?? 😊
love it! It's a baritone guitar. The output jack was poorly soldered so it failed at one point, but easy enough to fix!
@@MadeOnTape I didn’t know they made a baritone. I have the big single channel Supro with the monster 15 inch speaker. I feel my damn GAS syndrome kicking in. Anyhoooo I love the channel. We were definitely cut from the same cloth. (Tape Spool)
On cassette recording, Dolby B, C, and S were later used. Like dbx, Dolby Noise Reduction had to be encoded and decoded. Dolby S had over 85 dB Signal to Noise Ratio, which was very close to CD quality at about 90 dB Signal to noise ratio. Most people would engage noise Reduction on playback only and this would create a very muffled tape sound.
thank you for sharing and watching!
I have used DBX on home recordings I seem to agree it muddy's the sound and quiet to loud passages you can hear a whooshing or breathing effect where the compression / decompression circuits are having problems keeping up with the differing sound levels, I prefer a bit of background hiss but more open dynamics
💯 on the dynamics! thanks for watching 🙏
Comparisons sound...
drumm. Solo,
3:07 drum maschine rec.
3:13 ply from tape (no dbx)
3:52 ply from tape (with dbx)
...to push the timenumber for direct comparison...
4:37 comparisons,
multi instr. rec.
7:16 more comparisons ...
...switching from both ways
...thanks for that nice video :)
Greetings from Austria
greetings from New York City! hope all is well across the pond!
On RUclips I would be hard pressed to hear a real difference, but I have used dbx type II noise reduction since 1981. I have used it with both cassette, vinyl and reel to reel tape.
I never experienced the dreaded breathing that people complained about. Though I followed the recording tips I read about in my owners manual that suggested using 3 db less on the vu meters than you normally would for a given tape formulation. So if you normally recorded at +6 on the tape you would record at +3. It's truly amazing when you hear a well recorded dbx recording.
I certainly pushed the DBX too hard when I first tried it! Now that I have more experience I will do a follow up video to this one for sure! thanks for commenting 🙏
@@MadeOnTape Breathing was actually not the name I was thinking about at the time. The trouble I was thinking about is called pumping and is where background noise would increase and decrease during a very quiet passage of music.
I never have experienced this issue with dbx before though I know it was an issue for some people. I suspect that it was related to over saturation of the tape due to record levels or an incorrect tape biasing. It's amazing to have the beauty of analog sound with the deep black background of a good digital recording. It's like the best of both worlds!
I use dbx on Yamaha K 1000 and C300, for some reason I actually like it better than on my Technics RS B905. On Technics, they give recording calibration knobs to adjust boost the high end but I'm just trying to figure it out. On Yamaha, you can use a calibration knob until you get a flat curve that will be shown on the machine. On Technics you have to do it by the ear. One trick I use on Technics is, send a 100hz, 1000hz, 3000hz, 10000hz, and 15000hz signal into deck and adjust all the levels so I my levels during the playback don't drop especially on high end.
I like the compression you can immmediately hear on the Track 2 with DBX on
My main format is 1/2" 8 track and I don't use DBX.
As a good tech told me, NR is great only when both the deck and the noise reduction are properly calibrated. Most people form bad opinons about it because they're using a deck that hasn't been calibrated in decades and so the dbx just sounds aweful.
This goes back to the compression/expansion principle. All NR assumes that what you put into the deck is what you get out (in terms of frequency response). If your tape deck isn't calibrated to have an even frequency response, NR just makes that worse.
great advice! I also come at it from a perspective of having not grown up recording on this format: the hiss/noise floor is desired sometimes.
Bro you’re cracking g me up if I close my eyes and listen to the way you speak you sound like jack nickolson haha - it took me a minute to figure out who it sounded like but then it all came together lol
I've experimented with recording things with a treble boost, then playing it back with noise reduction enabled to somewhat even out the high end that gets lost, but I haven't done it enough to figure out the best result. Your tracks sound pretty good to me with the dbx tho, not a huge difference in the final product to my ears, just a little more clean.
ultimately whatever sound you prefer, to me, is the right way to do it!
so you know noise reduction isn't a dynamic process, its a kind of messy sliding band deal, like a multiband compressor where the bands do exactly what's needed based on the input signal, at least dolby, dbx is more of a fixed compressor and expander, but if you're using dobly think about it more like a dynamic eq, which yeah that boost is going to help get those frequencies above the tape hiss further, but the decoder will see it and make the boost 1.5x louder when it expands it, also again it'll be dynamic based on how loud the high frequencies are, but overall if it sounds good it sounds good, people commonly modify dolby A units to make "exciters" that without distortion soundgoodize a signal so why not use it as a dobly de-harsher
I use DBX and it swings and roundabouts with it off you get improved Top End but you end up with background noise. with DBX on. it sort of sounds like a noise gate taking the Top of a tad the recording is more quiet but hey you have EQ something magical happens when you bring it over to a DAW it seem to tighten up why not use both?
Got a 4 track Fostex 160. It has dolby. A bit muffeling, but thats ok. No dolby is a bit hissy. I think I am not hitting the tape hard enough. Figuring it out. Thanks for your video's. ✌️
glad you figured it out and hope you're having a blast!
I'm no muscisian by far, but I am an Audiophile or Hi-Fi geek. On my system I could not tell the difference between the 2 traks ? Maybe the clip on Trak 2 sounded a little softer, but that's about it.
thank you for listening! 🙏🏻
I love dbx, I've always used it
🤔 I'll think no dbx on drums and the rest activate it, is that possible?
hi there! you can't isolate DBX on individual tracks, so it's all or nothing
I definitely preferred the non-DBX sound. If hiss is REALLY an issue you can easily use RX or other modern digital noise reduction software to remove it in post with far less top end loss, if any.
Great video !!!
I also prefer recording without noise reduction on 4-track, but I began recording on a Tascam 688 casette 8-track and I've found that the dbx is necessary. The 688 uses some kind of circuitry black magic IMO. Without noise reduction it is way noisier than a cassette 4-track, but with noise reduction it sounds almost as clean and full as digital. Also, the 688 does not deliver the same tasty saturation that 4-track cassette does. It's a different animal.
thanks for sharing! i’d be keen to try a 688 someday. seems very different for sure.
Yeah I don't really mess with the dbx until I do the final mixdown on type1's.I like my music to sound as raw as possible anyways.
thanks for commenting! Do you have an external DBX unit? cheers!
@@MadeOnTape yeah one on my Tascam 242 and Tascam 202mk7
I have used a dBX 224 unit for years now. The biggest problem is the huffing sound it can make when the signal input is too strong for the encode function. If there are no audible artifacts? Then it works fine. Another sad reality is that you have to record the tape so LOW that you don't get really good impact outta the tape itself!
Hiss is the unity of the mix it fills the gaps and let’s the beats flow in one river
this is the most poetic description of hiss i’ve ever heard
Way back in the day... late 1970's I used a DBX 155 4 channel with my TEAC 3340/S and it made a super difference. Unlike Dolby, it compresses the WHOLE signal frequency 20- 20k
( if i remember correctly ) and then expands it back to normal levels accept without the perceived tape hiss frequency's. All of us kids messed with it over and over, drums, vocals, guitars and bases. even used a frequency tone generator I built from a HEATHKIT unit ! , and we all agreed, it really worked. So, we recorded 3 tracks and then bounced to the forth track without DBX because then we felt we would get the full fidelity that the machine had to offer, and record the overdubs once mixed without DBX. hiss and all. We erased all the blank air in between overdubs effectively erasing the noticeable recorded tape hiss and background headphone noises etc. Also , we never recorded higher than + 2 in order to leave a bit of headroom and ultimately less chance of overloading the tracks. So, @ 15 ips the bass was warm and fat and and the bed tracks were super clear and punchy. I think sometimes we did the over dubs with DBX and sometimes with out. you could select weather you wanted it or not because of the bypass button in the middle. it was always easy to hear if you had used it to record because you could hear the tape "breath" in and out during play back. so, simply press the corresponding button and poof no hiss.
So, EV TAPCO 72 12 channel mixer, TEAC 3340S 4track, DBX 155 noise reduction, a home made spring reverb and a rack mount MXR Chorus/ Doubler, and an Echoplex,
a UERi 1178 limiter / compressor and we were ready to be discovered and ready for Stardom !
it was just a matter of time.
thank you for sharing!
It sounds like the DBX reduces your bass frequencies somewhere in the "compander". I should do the same test on my 246, but I always thought it really helped, especially if bouncing, and way better than Dolby. But maybe try boosting your bass eq when recording with it? Cool test
edit: now that I think about it, it makes sense you would dislike it especially because of being a bass player. If my NR was killing my guitar tone I would be pissed and turn that ish off.
i’m sure i’ll experiment down the road again, but good call on the bass tone...
@@MadeOnTape listening to this again, there is definitely a loss of definition on the electric guitar. The DBX makes it sound kinda weak/flabby in comparison. Interesting
DBX sounded bettr to my ears
this is why I love being human!
Being an owner of nearly all portastudios and Studio 8 (388), cassette formats do gain from DBX and are very sensitive to cassette quality, I've found cassettes that sound stellar and others that sound really bad, always Type II. Studio 8 on the other hand can do both with more ease since the format is larger. The best way to fight hiss is to record loud, other than that I do like the dbx sound for some genres and not for others but it's not a bad denoiser. Companding is a linear process so not much information is lost/changed, something similar happens to vinil records with the RIAA curves. Moreover, I have recorded in super analog format (8 channel 1 inch tape/MCI jh16) and also Studer A800 MKIII and Studer A80 2ch 1/2". They all sound amazing but most of the time people are not gonna be wanting the hiss. So as an artist/producer I do like hiss in many recordings but people/clients most of the time want it out.. Finally, I have used partial DBX as an effect plus EQ, it's totally doable! :)
DBX is great for my recordings for my tapes and reel to reel but I do not use it anymore because if I play my tapes to another cassette deck in my bedroom upstairs, I will need to bring my DBX processor upstairs too to hear the full dynamic range. Without the DBX processor, you cannot play the tapes anywhere else.
😂
Ja
Dbx type I or type II ??
not sure! it’s a TASCAM Porta Two deck 🤷🏻♂️
great video, man.
yo thank you for watching and listening
let me know if there’s anything you’d like to see on the channel 🙏🏻🤘🏻
I rock a 1988 Akai MG-614 with DBX and does rarely or not ever use it,.So i am in with your thinking 😃💚🙏 Love cheers
i've only found it to work with acoustic performances with a wide dynamic range! cheers!
I always liked the Dolby C on the Fostex A8 And the Fostex 16 track. You never new it was there but took out the his. Like the other post said I boost the highs going in With DBX. I saw a report around the early 80s that said Dolby S was the nearest to digital in the high in recorders. I wish they would come out with DBx and Dolby Plugins to decode old tapes. im sure they do just haven't come across any.
ahh a plugin decoder would be very cool. Appreciate your comment and insight!
@@MadeOnTape @john Bass - Check U-he Satin. I've just discovered the compander section and it is really exciting me (lol)
Recording at 0 db is a must. Any lower and you do run the risk of "pumping" or "breathing." You can also record a small bit higher than 0 db and the expanding part of the system (playback) reduces any saturation distortion that might get generated. This is about dbx II. dbx I only works well on higher speed tape units with a different noise spectrum profile. I've used both kinds with my Tandberg TD20A 1/2 track open reel at 15 IPS; Type I sounded slightly better. At 7.5 IPS, Type II was better. Have fun experimenting if you can!
Love your music!
love this comment! thanks for listening and more coming!
Are you sure the DBX on your machine is calibrated properly? They do tend to 'drift' from spec after a while. Maybe your machine should get serviced. Also, try a different tape. I find some tapes, for whatever reason, don't 'like' noise reduction, and some do. With the tapes that do like it, it's definitely worth it. Thanks for the cool video.
i’m definitely no expert and this could be the case! I will be experimenting more in the future and take this into account.
thanks for watching!
I think the reason a lot of modern tape users don’t like dbx is because we want to push it into the red while recording to get tape saturation. Dbx is designed for fidelity. It’s meant to be used in a way that avoids distortion.
agreed 100%
Dude, you are 100% correct!! When I try to push the signal into the red while recording with DBX engaged, I get dropouts like crazy!!!
Damn. I really need to switch my DBX off and compare myself
i’d love to see one another video of yours with it!
Thanks for your video. It is hard to hear a big difference, even on headphones. Well I guess that is RUclips audio. I'm guessing the DBX companding is softening the detail. I purchased a DBX 224 compander back in the 1980's with my Revox A77 quarter track R-R. I didn't like it; albeit did reduce noise. My older unit uses tantalum caps thru out the device. I my opinion, tantalum, ceramic, and mylar caps should never be used in audio circuits. I've learned a lot about audio circuitry in the last 40 years. I guess vinyl and tape are popular again. Good digital is so "Clean", in comparison. They rarely need noise reduction in red book CD's. DVD-Audio and SACD take the dynamic range up past 20 bits. Few amps/speakers can out resolve 18 bits. Video was the same way; once we got the D2 format, noise wasn't an issue. Have you ever biased and equalized your deck for a particular tape formula? You might try to optimize your deck to take advantage of the DBX. Also, did you use a direct box for your guitar? Recording a microphone signal would help in your comparisons. Good Luck... 🎧
I used to use an external DBX noise reduction box with my Fostex 8 track reel to reel recorder because I couldn’t stand the built in Dolby C .. I found that the DBX didn’t degrade the high end on playback like Dolby did 🤷♂️ To be honest it just sounded a whole lot better to my ears for eliminating tape his .
So all the music you've made so far has no form of noise reduction (even in your DAW)? I started off not using noise reduction because I was using it wrong and it made my music sound like crap, then I recently realized that it might not be that bad. I do use noise reduction in Audacity when I digitize my tracks, but idk how that compares to DBX. I should do some tests but I am lazy! I kind of liked your DBX track better in this video, I didn't notice a hiss in either recording but the DBX one sounded sharper and more clear.
no noise reduction at all! not even in DAW. i’m also lazy and probably using it wrong 😑
When I first started making tunes on my Porta Two, the mixes were pretty sparse so the tape hiss was a lot more noticeable, I don't notice it as much in my recordings now but I still hear it in the beginning and the end
it gives it a cool factor 😎
True, I was doing some tests today and it was hard to avoid clipping with DBX on! I think out of laziness I'll keep DBX off, also I might stop using noise reduction in Audacity.
@@mattwardynski7429 you might like it, you might hate it! The only important thing is to have an opinion!
Guitarist in my second band that was semi successful used a dbx on his rig and all u heard was HSHSSSHSSSSSSSSSSHSHSHSHSHSHSHSHSHHSSHSHS. HISSSSSSSSSSSS 🐍
omg the snake i'm dying 😂
Some people really like hissy, compressed music with limited head room and THAT'S OKAY. Personally, I can go either way with it.
Incidentally, with an external DBX expander/compressor, you can adjust the recording levels and also match the input/output levels. You don't need to max out your VU meters with DBX (avoid this to avoid distortion). Extended headroom, no noise and extended range on a tape is almost a magical thing and it can be achieved with DBX.
I have no skin in the game. I'm just an audio enthusiast.
love it! i agree with you 💯, and since i’m newish to portastudio recording i am leaning toward the hissy compressed stuff for the moment. i’m sure that will change down the road! 🙏thanks for your thoughtful comment🙏
Never had much liking for the built in noise reduction units since you can not calibrate them yourself, at least not easily. The outboard DBX 224 model that I have seems to expand the dynamics just a little bit more on playback, your sample is loosing dynamics very noticeably. The thing I do not like about DBX is that the noise floor pumps with transient sounds. Percussive instruments are the most effected. Tap, tap, tap, sounds like shpio, shpio, shpio. I also have an outboard Dolby B unit, but noise reduction usually does more harm than good to the music. (Edit, changed 222 model to 224 model)
thanks for sharing your experience! I have limited experience, but I don't like how it treats my percussive instruments, too. Cheers!
I collect tape machines, and repair them as a hobby. I have thinned the herd by quite a bit however. Had the Teac V-800X and Akai GX-R60 that had built in DBX, also a Panasonic 2 head deck with DBX built in. From personal experience I can say that the built in DBX never sounds as good as an outboard processor. I bought my DBX 224 model back in 1983 and recorded on a Tandberg TCD-440A and a Sony TC-399 reel to reel.
thanks for sharing! i’m ready to admit that i’ll try it again soon, but i’m also not bothered by the hiss on my recordings.
@@MadeOnTape I prefer 15 ips and 2 track recording playback on my Technics RS-1506 with no noise reduction. I have also recorded live bands with hifi VHS. Noise reduction is like putting a band aid on a broken leg, and it does more harm in other ways to the music than good. IMHO
my video today features an MCI JH-16 track, 2-inch tape machine...the studio owners said no noise reduction is needed in that format and it sound killer
Just EQ the hiss out of the tape tracks into the mixdown.
Love my DBX 224... love my DBX NX-40... Love my DBX 122... perfect in all records... you possible have a defective unit.
it's possible! It's also possible that when I made this video I was ignorant of how to get a good sound with it!
I use DBX type 2 units with a cassette deck and a reel to reel. One from the 70's and one from the 80's (122 and 140X), neither of them cause treble loss. You must have a poorly setup/cheap implementation of dbx in your 4 track machine. Many cheaper DBX cassette decks etc used high tolerance components around the DBX chip, resulting in mismatched encoding/decoding, drifting away from DBX specs.
i wouldn’t rule it out! In my set up and workflow, i prefer the sound of DBX off, but i’m probably not using it enough to learn its sweet spot!
Tape4 (metál)
Tape2( crom)
dbx is fine
But
Original noise is not to much in metal or chrome tapes.
Normal tape the result is .... Not acceptable for me.
( I am never used normal tape because of all of them below the standard
HiFi)
dbx like every noise reduction can be out of alignment.
this is true ⬆️
To Dolby or not to Dolby that is the question
Through RUclips and my high end headphones, to be honest, track 2 sounded better. Whatever the DBX did, in this case, it added life to the sound and opens it up. Just how I hear it from here.
As much as I was preconditioned to hate on DBX, I've conceded that when doing multitrack recording on my Yamaha MT4X, the added s/n ratio and the DBX encoding hiding flaws/minor dropouts in the tape itself, it's a lot more forgiving, especially if you're bouncing tracks around. Don't listen to what half-deaf 70 year-old 'audiophiles' say. DBX didn't fail in the consumer space because of Dolby's market share supremacy. Dolby B/C were massive failures. Ask anyone if they ever used it. (I did, but I knew what I was doing and my tapes sounded phenomenal).
The problem was getting the average dipshit to understand what noise reduction encoding/decoding even was. In the lower-end budget studio where all you had for tape was cassette-based, you damn well needed it. I saw a Fostex 4-track with Dolby C on it once. What the hell were they thinking? To use that while editing must be an absolute trainwreck of a shitshow. Dolby C works beautifully once when you play the tape back immediately on the same machine you recorded it on. Then that's it, show's over. It's a muffled mess on everything else and eventually even on the machine that made it too.
So, in essence, I'm not sure what the hell all this 'purity' is about when the end result is a hissy/drop-outy sound. Do what sounds better, not what old white men say. Just my two cents. :)
Track 2 sounds great
thank you 🙏
Great vid Chris. In my short here, I recorded the drums in this vid in Logic, then bounced them to the Porta Two, tracked the guitars in the porta two, bounced the drums, and guitars backed into logic then did the guitar solo in Logic only along with the vid. I used DBX when I tracked the guitars, and bounced drums in the porta studio. I actually now like the DBX. I think it sounds great either way depending on the trim settings, etc… DBX in my opinion is there for anyone without any other outboard gear like a compressor, etc…
ruclips.net/user/shortsd3pEp32l2k4?feature=share
At this point if I can get a Type 1 cassette to have barely any hiss I’m happy. I still enjoy the music but Dolby B or C I don’t like-I use a headphone preamp. Much prefer hiss over Dolby. Also this is not an issue if you purchase Type II cassettes, but they’re pricey.
and don’t buy the new manufactured type II cassettes, you’re better off with a type i
Your refusal to use noise reduction ... especially one as aggressive as DBX ... is not at all controversial.
For the benefits, there are limitations and drawbacks. Some people can work within those while others cannot, and good arguments can be made either way. That's trite, but it's nonetheless true.
An argument in favor is that noise reduction does reduce inherent noise, increasing your S/N and reducing your noise floor. Arguments against it can include the fact that you are introducing additional steps in the signal flow and also that the decoding process may not always track with the encoded recording perfectly.
But, really, all that should matter is that you make it sound as good as you can with what you are using. A good recording without DBX is preferable to a mediocre recording that was made with it.
I agree a thousand percent! thank you for your cogent insight!
@@MadeOnTape You're welcome. And thank you for your complements.
If your peaks are at 0db it sounds better than any noise reduction. You can't record DBX like you do using Dolby or no noise reduction.
💯
but why do you wear sunglasses inside
so i don't have to look into my own eyes while editing 👀
I’m honestly perplexed as to why/how dbx ended up being the noise reduction system baked into a lot of these older recording systems. I know that the standoff units were awesome in track recording, but I honestly feel like Dolby B would have been a better option.
And Dolby B kinda sucks.
I run an Aiwa cassette deck with dbx, Dolby b, and Dolby C. The dbx noise reduction system is fantastic for incredibly loud music. Modern pop and hip hop performs flawlessly, no “breathing” or noticeable modulation.
I think you need to work with DBX. It is the industry standard. Perhaps you font know enough about how it works... :)
that very well may be true! thanks for watching!
For me, track 2 sounds stronger clear and better. I have worked with compander, in fact I have built two of them, and using it for cassette recordings. It is final solution for decks, for tape speed of 4,75 cm/second. Your recorder is a weak link, it loses higher frequencies. Either change the tape or adjust bias.
thanks for your insight! Do you still use the companders you built? cheers!
@@MadeOnTape yes, I do. I did revive one of them and using it with Technics deck, and dolby C engaged.
Another one is still in testing , built with NE 570 circuit.
@@colloidalsilverwater15ppm88 I had to look up NE 570! Very cool and I'm happy technically savvy people like you exist! 🙏
@@MadeOnTape Thanks, for nice words. On the other hand, I am happy when see that people experiments with audio. Like you. Keep on, and wish you plenty of good ideas for videos. I am considering to record pink noise on both channels, but in one straight signal and on the other processed through compander. So, in that way we have same(mono splitted on two) signal, same deck, same speed same tape and to record it. It will be interested to see results, on spectrum analyzer. Btw, if there is some errors in writing I do apologize because English isn't my native language.
@@colloidalsilverwater15ppm88 your English is great! I wouldn't have guessed it wasn't your first language. (I, like many Americans, can barely speak one) 😂
Have fun with that experiment!
Hi, my Humble opinion :D ... i think the DBX on your Tape device its not that good :) . I have done (Years ago) recordings with DBX and i didnt experience this kind of hi freq. muffling and that heavy compression (at least that was what i could hear wich my cheap in ears.) Nice video by the way!!!!
you may very well be correct! i’ll have to acquire more four tracks to find out 😂
thanks for watching and the nice comment 🤘🙏
honestly i think dbx works really well in any format above 7 inches per second but tascam was smoking some strong ass shit to try and use it on a cassette, i to this day, do not understand still, but frankly i prefer dobly above it any day of the week, fix ur bands to my ass i like my dynamic dobly encoding, at least it sounds musical
"smoking some strong ass shit" 😂
thanks for the laugh and for watching 🙏
It is a life reduction :)
cant reduce life. wont reduce life 😎
I don't think I hear any meaningful difference, except that track 2 is maybe clearer?
Man. DBX all the way.
Night and day.
If you want real saturation, record with DBX on, then turn it off for playback....
Definitely sounds better without DBX, eq/amp and worst case a VST noise reducer is sufficient
No! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no! no!
Respectfully, you are not supposed to slam the meters into the red while DBX is engaged!! The DBX is already adding hugh amounts of compression, and slamming the meters is gonna turn the song into mush. I found this out the hard way! Keep the levels at a moderate setting and you'll be fine!
i’m definitely going to do a follow up! appreciate the comment 🙏🤘
@@MadeOnTape
I say this because, I have a tascam 688 cassette recorder, and since they've tried to squeeze an additional 4 tracks on an already narrow cassette tape, its almost impossible to record without noise reduction, it has a "hissy fit". With the dbx, you don't even have to go into the red at all, because it's compressing the holy hell out of the signal!
@@dannydaniel1234 i hope to get my hands on a 688 down the road! The dream is a 388, but I live in NYC with limited space lol
again, thanks for sharing! I'm definitely going to do a follow up because I made this video with less experience. Now, I can still say I generally prefer the DBX off, but I'm curious if I play examples back to back what people will hear/prefer.
all is fair in music and art!
@@MadeOnTape
Trust me, my friend, you're gonna hear a tremendous difference. You can slam dolby C a bit, but DBX does not like loud, slammed signals.....Many major multi-million selling records have been cut with it, and if the public don't care, we should not, either!!
@@MadeOnTape
*Does not like
My bad
Are you a chunky branch of Jack Stratton from 2011?
that’s an astute observation with more meaning than you may realize
@@MadeOnTape hehe I was just looking for companders and dbx processing and found your channel, then I got the og stratton vibe instantly. Good stuff, new sub for you :D
dig your synthwave Vulf covers! 🙌
How old are you, sir?
how old do you think i am?
@@MadeOnTape 22?
the camera and glasses make me look way younger 😂
@@MadeOnTape how old.are you exactly? You remind me of Billy Joel in one of his album covers.
@@jn3750 I was born the year of the TASCAM Porta Two, 1987
My english is very limited, so i’ll try to give my opinion.
If you go for a warm almost overdriven tape sound don’t use dbx an st the level as strong as you need to achieve it, but if you need a moer clean sound turn it ON and be conservative with levels. It’s far from a rule, just my point of view. But the most important is to try everything and let your ears to decide. Saludos from Buenos Aires!!!
i think that you made a perfectly clear point! as i experimented in this video (footage edited out), i realized i don’t hate DBX, but instead I might not have been gain staging correctly.
I like the way you put it better!
@@MadeOnTape i think it’s because dbx needs a clean encoded signal recorded on tape to decoded correctly, if you distort that signal then dbx can’t expand it accurately
@@lu4enp Thats a great way to think of it!
Sounds as though that tape is over biased.
could be! any insight on how to adjust on a portastudio? thanks for watching 🙏
Does the deck have a bias adjuster on the front of the deck, if so turn in anti clockwise until the treble on recording is clearer. If no adjustment on the outside there are two adjusters on the circuit board inside. Again, turn them until the playback of the recording is clearer. Undersbiasing will result in a thin bright sound. Overbiasing will result in a thick muddy sound.
@@75eszhgclk TASCAM portastudios were calibrated overall for type ii, including the DBX system. I'd have to open it up again to see if that's easily adjustable but I don't think it is. Thanks again for listening and sharing!
Keep the videos coming!
Interesting video on dbx. dbx has zero tolerance for anything that is out. Your tape must be properly aligned to the machine you are using. Period! It will suck if you don't. It is a high power compander like it or not. You have to understand why and how it works. Any error from the tape side from Bias to Equalization to Head azimuth affects the complete picture of dbx. I had a Tandberg TCD-3014 and I could account for all of that. A portastudio can't. It is wrought with compromises, and will never make the tape sound the way it should. No calibration facilities, no record play head adjustments, none of that was there. Made the portastudio the not the best it could be. I grew up with tape. I use a dbx 224 today on many of my Cassette decks perfectly. Now my A&D 6300 knocks it dead with dbx with air and openness that almost hits my former Tandberg. Should have never sold that machine. You want it right with dbx, you have to do the leg work before you process your tape with dbx, otherwise don't bother. Also keep in mind all tapes encoded with dbx will be dead to you if you can't get support for dbx noise reduction anymore. Could very well happen. Dolby is done with noise reduction. Hi-Com forget that. DNR is gone, and anything else that remotely manages Noise Reduction is history. I use a TEAC A-7300 and I want the 2 track version of that. I want to play Master Tapes. Guess what? None are encoded with dbx because it doesn't have too. Tape has its limitations but when done well, dbx is not needed at all.
thanks for sharing!
without dbx each recorded track adds too much hiss to the main mix. This destroys the overall dynamic of any recording dramatically. The real portastudio sound comes from the dbx noise reduction system. btw ..I liked the second version more. It is way more clear.
Instant like only because of the 505 and the porta two..these two machines where basically my whole studio in the 80s.
thank you! They are so funnnnn
Bro you’re cracking g me up if I close my eyes and listen to the way you speak you sound like jack nickolson haha - it took me a minute to figure out who it sounded like but then it all came together lol
hahahaha you’re the first to make that comparison 😂🙌🏻