[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Dead FM Broadcasting Technologies

In the opinion of many, DBX was a superior format in that it applied the
compression across the entire audio spectrum rather than fragmenting it into
1 high end only(consumer) or 4 (professional) bands.  It seemed to be a bit
more tolerant of the differences between one deck to another (ie. recorded
in the studio, played back at home).

The major problem with the format was a total lack of non-dbx playback
compatibility.  Dolby could be fudged on playback.  DBX recordings sounded
like hell if not decoded.

I actually have 2 dbx rack mount dbx units at the shop that came in with
some tape decks that I bought.  I also ended up with a few DBX encoded LP's
(The Carpenters ?) that would playback through the units.  They were totally
unlistenable (program content aside) without the DBX units.

Brian T. Vita, President
Cinema Service & Supply, Inc.
75 Walnut St. - Ste 4
Peabody, MA  01960-5626 USA
Sales: (800)231-8849/Sales Fax (800)329-2775
Bus Ofc +1-978-538-7575/Business Ofc Fax +1-978-538-7550

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lou" <lspin@attbi.com>
To: <bri@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 10:13 AM
Subject: RE: Dead FM Broadcasting Technologies

> I have always played my Dolby-encoded tapes with the Dolby turned off.
> It was definitely too muddy!  Even though there was hiss present, highs
> were nicely enhanced.
> I have an Akai cassette deck from several years ago that has dbx noise
> reduction (in addition to Dolby B and C).  The dbx seemed to be a more
> dynamic system.  Lows and highs were boosted dynamically.  But you
> couldn't really enjoy playing dbx-encoded tapes on anything else but a
> dbx unit.  I the dbx tapes sounded better than the Dolby tapes, but I
> couldn't play them in my car.  It's no wonder the dbx system didn't
> catch on.
> -Lou