Re: [ARSCLIST] Risk assessment tool Q2

[David Lennick <dlennick@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"joe@xxxxxxxxxxx" wrote:

> Are there plug-ins for decoding dbx encoded tapes?
>
> js

Remember dbx encoded DISCS? M&K Realtime put out a few. They sounded
incredible.
I bet they didn't sell any (and later, when the same material came out on CD,
it
sounded horrible for some reason..the equivalent analog LPs were fine).

dl

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Fine" <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 9:43 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Risk assessment tool Q2
>
> > There is a constant chatter level in the plug-ins community about writing
> a Dolby decoder. There are
> > detailed schematics of at least the CAT-22 card, so one would think that a
> SPICE model would yield
> > the needed DSP parameters. I would imagine the folks at Dolby and their
> lawyers would have a few
> > things to say, though.
> >
> > I think this could be a boom for transferring Dolby C encoded cassettes
> and video because, as we've
> > discussed, Dolby C decoding is very sensitive to level decay and most
> tapes -- particularly
> > thin-track/small-format/oft-played tapes lose level over time. I
> understand the rationale behind
> > Dolby C, but in retrospect, I'm not sure it was a good idea for the end
> user. For the manufacturers,
> > it was a way to guarantee that DAT and that short-lived Philips digital
> cassette format never made
> > in-roads into the home hifi market (Dolby C specs, meaningless as all
> published specs are vis-a-vis
> > real music reproduction, were quite impressive compared to Dolby B --
> although I'd argue that Dolby
> > HX should have been pushed wider because it was an excellent idea and
> extended B's performance).
> > Minidisc was also in that mix and has survived mainly due to a loyal cult
> following and Sony's
> > tenacity in the face of constant mass-market rejection.
> >
> > Richard, without giving away trade secrets, do you have anything but a
> very small percentage of
> > business with non-mainstream formats (I'd call mainstream Dolby A, B, C
> and SR and dbx I and II)?
> >
> > -- Tom Fine
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Richard L. Hess" <ArcLists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 10:13 AM
> > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Risk assessment tool Q2
> >
> >
> > > At 11:51 AM 1/7/2006, Don Cox wrote:
> > >
> > >>There is a need for a software decoder for Dolby B and C, with
> > >>adjustments for dealing with such problems.
> > >>
> > >>But even in the 1980s, I used to find that a Dolby cassette played back
> > >>on a different machine did not always sound right - it seems the
> > >>circuits were often badly adjusted in manufacture or had drifted.
> > >>
> > >>C is of course more fussy than B.
> > >
> > > And there is also Dolby S.
> > >
> > > The idea of the decoder in software is great, but as long as Dolby is
> selling hardware products,
> > > they have no interest in the plug-ins.
> > >
> > > The majority of my non-tape-machine equipment in my transfer studio is
> obsolete noise reduction
> > > and I don't have enough!
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > >
> > > Richard L. Hess                   richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Aurora, Ontario, Canada       http://www.richardhess.com/
> > > Detailed contact information:
> http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
> >
> > __________ NOD32 1.1356 (20060108) Information __________
> >
> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> >