Steve_Graham@ub.cc.umich.edu (11/12/90)
Last night, recording the U. of Mich. Men's Glee Club, I found myself using a
Panasonic SV 3700 (I think) DAT machine. I've seen DAT machines before, but
this is the first one I've had any hands-on experience with. It has a number
of useful features and I found it a pleasure to use, though the book could be
better--I never did find out the difference between a "skip ID" and a "start
ID" (can anyone clarify this?)
At WUOM we currently use Sony PCM-601 ESD digiboxes to record digital audio
on videocassettes. Since we haven't got our first DAT machines yet, I had to
make a copy from the DAT original. Thanks to the RIAA and other silly greedy
people I wasn't able to make a direct digital clone:
There's this thing called the Serial Copy Management System or some such
thing, which is designed to placate the RIAA people who think that DAT's
ability to clone CD's will kill their sales. The way it works is this: you
will be allowed to make a DAT copy of your CDs in the digital domain, but the
DAT copy cannot be copied digitally. (Of course you can still copy it
through the analog line out jacks.)
The Panasonic DAT machine lets you decide how your original recording will be
flagged: you can set it so that anyone can make unlimited clones, so that no
clones at all are allowed, or so that a single clone can be made as discussed
above. The latter is the default setting, which I used without thinking.
Theoretically, therefore, I should have been able to make a direct digital
clone of this master DAT tape. However the Sony 601 was made before the SCMS
came into being, and apparently it recognized that there was *some* sort of
copy-protect flag, and refused to make the clone. I was able to clone a test
recording I made later with the copy protection turned off, but as soon as I
came to the "real" recording, the "copy prohibit" light came on on the 601,
and it stopped recording (the digital signal just went away). So, if any of
you might be thinking of doing similar things, be aware that you need to set
the SCMS flag to "unlimited copies".
(As an interesting aside, I was surprised to find that the "digital in" RCA
jack on the Sony 601 could accept data from both the EIA RCA digital output
jack, and from the AES ("professional standard") XLR digital output jack with
equal ease, as far as I could tell.)
My first impressions of the sound of the DAT machine were favorable.
Although the comparison is unfair, during dubbing I listened to both the DAT
and 601 via their respective headphones jacks and found the DAT much more
enjoyable. In comparison the Sony seemed spiky and hard, cold, "digital".
It is unfair because the Sony had an extra d/a and a/d conversion in the
chain, and because the headphone amps may not represent the true sound of the
devices. But it confirmed the general impression I had while doing the
original recording with the DAT deck. At the risk of sounding rather
"California", the DAT seemed more "organic". However, I emphasize that this
is a first impression.bill@uunet.UU.NET (Bill Vermillion) (11/15/90)
In article <7584@uwm.edu> Steve_Graham@ub.cc.umich.edu writes: >My first impressions of the sound of the DAT machine were favorable. >Although the comparison is unfair, during dubbing I listened to both the DAT >and 601 via their respective headphones jacks and found the DAT much more >enjoyable. In comparison the Sony seemed spiky and hard, cold, "digital". >It is unfair because the Sony had an extra d/a and a/d conversion in the >chain, and because the headphone amps may not represent the true sound of the >devices. But it confirmed the general impression I had while doing the >original recording with the DAT deck. At the risk of sounding rather >"California", the DAT seemed more "organic". However, I emphasize that this >is a first impression. A friend of mine has the previous version of the DAT, (2500 ??) in this studio, along with a pair of 601s modified with the Apogee filters. (The 601 has limited internal space and there is room for only one filter. So you modify one for recording, the other for playback). We did A/B/C tests against my Sony DAT/Panasonic DAT/Sony 601 (modified). The Sony DAT sounded better than the Pansonic (but this was the earlier model), and the modified 601 sounded better than both, thought the DATs were just a shade quieter (newer designed electronics probably help), the 601 sounded more musical. His 601 was modified after A/B comparisons with an F1 (which has room for both filters - they go in the battery box area so it's not longer DC powerable). Your observations would appear correct for an unmodifed 601. Now to find a new Panasonic and see how it compares. Time for phone calls again! bill -- Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill : bill@bilver.UUCP
bc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) (11/15/90)
Steve_Graham@ub.cc.umich.edu writes: >Last night, recording the U. of Mich. Men's Glee Club, I found myself using a >Panasonic SV 3700 (I think) DAT machine. I've seen DAT machines before, but >this is the first one I've had any hands-on experience with. It has a number >of useful features and I found it a pleasure to use, though the book could be >better--I never did find out the difference between a "skip ID" and a "start >ID" (can anyone clarify this?) On playback, when a skip ID is encountered, the playback will be muted and the tape shuttled to the next start ID. So if you recorded that dead space between numbers where the conductor was blowing the pitch pipe for the Glee Club, or tripped getting onto the podium, you just put a skip ID after (or before) the applause and you won't hear it. At UofIll we use the Sony PCM-2500A/B system which seems pretty nice, although we have had a couple of DAT's turn up blank -- even after we watched the levels bounce, not paused, counter moving, etc (no off-tape monitoring on DAT's yet). Has anyone encountered this problem? [...] >(As an interesting aside, I was surprised to find that the "digital in" RCA >jack on the Sony 601 could accept data from both the EIA RCA digital output >jack, and from the AES ("professional standard") XLR digital output jack with >equal ease, as far as I could tell.) ! >My first impressions of the sound of the DAT machine were favorable. >Although the comparison is unfair, during dubbing I listened to both the DAT >and 601 via their respective headphones jacks and found the DAT much more >enjoyable. In comparison the Sony seemed spiky and hard, cold, "digital". >It is unfair because the Sony had an extra d/a and a/d conversion in the >chain, and because the headphone amps may not represent the true sound of the >devices. But it confirmed the general impression I had while doing the >original recording with the DAT deck. At the risk of sounding rather >"California", the DAT seemed more "organic". However, I emphasize that this >is a first impression. I have found, while sitting in the audio booth after recording a concert in our Great Hall, that I often forget that what I am hearing is the recording and not the live monitor of the hall mics. Of course, what did I expect? :-) -- -- Ben Cox bc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
bill@uunet.UU.NET (Bill Vermillion) (11/19/90)
In article <7666@uwm.edu> bc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) writes: >At UofIll we use the Sony PCM-2500A/B system which seems pretty nice, although >we have had a couple of DAT's turn up blank -- even after we watched the levels >bounce, not paused, counter moving, etc (no off-tape monitoring on DAT's yet). >Has anyone encountered this problem? If I remember correctly the Fostex DAT has 4 heads, a record set and a confidence set that lets you monitor your tape as you are recording it. It also has other nice features such as SMPTE time codes. And it's in the $6000 range. Fostex has (to me at least) a strange image problem. I first encountered their equipment when they entered the pro-audio field as a brand name over 10 years ago. Prior to that they had been oem-ing to major audio manufacturers. They brought their "name" into this country with some very good studio monitoring headphones, and a line of 3 control room monitors, the LS2, LS3, and LS4s. I don't remember pricing on the LS2s, but the LS3 were listed out at about $4500/pair and the LS4'2 were in the $8k range. (Those things were HUGE - bigger than an ordinary 25 cu.ft. refirgerator!) Then they started making 4 & 8 track 1/4" machines, and many only know of them as a home/budget-studio manufacturer. -- Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill : bill@bilver.UUCP
hans@smab.se (Hans C Larsson) (11/19/90)
bc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Ben Cox) writes: >Steve_Graham@ub.cc.umich.edu writes: >At UofIll we use the Sony PCM-2500A/B system which seems pretty nice, although >we have had a couple of DAT's turn up blank -- even after we watched the levels >bounce, not paused, counter moving, etc (no off-tape monitoring on DAT's yet). >Has anyone encountered this problem? Sony has showed DAT's with off-tape monitoring in Japan at the Tokyo Audio Fair. I believe that they use 4 heads instead of the normal 2. -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Hans C Larsson Email: hans@smab.se Saab Missiles, Sweden Motto: "keep it short"