kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) (05/29/91)
I recently purchased a Pansonic SV-3700 Pro DAT machine. Now supposedly
you can copy a DAT and get the same quality on the copy. Now looking
at the way the data is transmitted and calculating the probability of
uncorrected errors being transmitted to the receiving deck I would say
that no degradation in quality would occur. This is using the AES/EBU
pro outputs with balanced XLR connections and not the S/PDIF standard with
unbalanced lines. On the other hand I have a person that says that
degradation will be audible in the fifth copy. So audible that he can't
stand to listen to it. I say he doesn't know what he is talking about.
I'm hold a BSEE and am about to complete a MSEE. The person I'm arguing
with holds no degrees and doesn't understand any signal processing theory
or probability. He says he knows it will happen. I said that we need
some other opinions or reliable data.
So has anyone actually done about 5 generations of copiy upon copy?
Also could someone tell me the actual function of some filters that seem
to be popular in A/D conversion called apogee (sp?)filters. Supposedly
the do anti-aliasing and do something to retain the warmth of analog
recording what is this something else.
Kent
--
/* -The opinions expressed are my own, not my employers. */
/* For I can only express my own opinions. */
/* */
/* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */sethb@fid.Morgan.COM (Seth Breidbart) (05/30/91)
In article <12579@uwm.edu> kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) writes: | |I recently purchased a Pansonic SV-3700 Pro DAT machine. Now supposedly |you can copy a DAT and get the same quality on the copy. Now looking |at the way the data is transmitted and calculating the probability of |uncorrected errors being transmitted to the receiving deck I would say |that no degradation in quality would occur. This is using the AES/EBU |pro outputs with balanced XLR connections and not the S/PDIF standard with |unbalanced lines. On the other hand I have a person that says that |degradation will be audible in the fifth copy. So audible that he can't |stand to listen to it. I say he doesn't know what he is talking about. |I'm hold a BSEE and am about to complete a MSEE. The person I'm arguing |with holds no degrees and doesn't understand any signal processing theory |or probability. He says he knows it will happen. I said that we need |some other opinions or reliable data. | |So has anyone actually done about 5 generations of copiy upon copy? I've made over 5 generations, starting with a tape that was already several generations "deep". There was no audible degradation. All of these copies were made via the rca connectors, using S/PDIF signals. One of the common test cd's has a passage which was made from a master tape, followed by the same passage made from the 100'th digital generation of that same tape. Why don't you copy each of those onto a dat tape several times (in random order), and challenge the person you referred to above to tell the difference? A study recently done by one of the pro audio magazines (Mix?) found that a 20'th generation analog copy is sometimes (depending on the type of sound) identifiably different from the first generation. |Also could someone tell me the actual function of some filters that seem |to be popular in A/D conversion called apogee (sp?)filters. Supposedly |the do anti-aliasing and do something to retain the warmth of analog |recording what is this something else. A company, Apogee Electronics, makes replacement filters for a/d converters. They also make an outboard a/d converter. Seth sethb@fid.morgan.com