I have a Yamaha MT4X cassette multitracker with built-in dbx NR. I've made recordings with and without the NR and find pros and cons. What are your views on dbx?
Mark
Mark
dbx?
- Thread starter MGS
- Start date
Wallycleaver
New member
4 track, I really don't bother. If I'm working with 24 track 2 inch, then definatly I have nr, but the units that most studios have are top of the line. What do you plan on doing with the tape? I notice with 4 tracks that the NR isn't to great. on play back it doesn't bring back enough of the high end.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Sorry... have to disagree with ya WallyC...
...the 4-track cassette unit I've seen have absolutely MISERABLE s/n ratios without some sort of NR (whether it's Dolby C or DBX).... I can't imagine getting any sort of reasonably clean track on a 4-track without NR!
The cons can't possibly outweigh the advantages unless Yamaha messed up the implementation of DBX on that particular unit....
Just my two cents...
Bruce
...the 4-track cassette unit I've seen have absolutely MISERABLE s/n ratios without some sort of NR (whether it's Dolby C or DBX).... I can't imagine getting any sort of reasonably clean track on a 4-track without NR!
The cons can't possibly outweigh the advantages unless Yamaha messed up the implementation of DBX on that particular unit....
Just my two cents...
Bruce
MGS:
Before digital I used an outboard dbx unit. I absolutely relied on it for every "dry" track I layed down. My unit had some trim pots that could be quirky. Very dynamic signals could sound unnatural due to a "breathing" effect. This could usually be solved by easing off on the expander side of the compansion or a tactical use of a noise gate during the recording session.
Have Fun...darth87
Before digital I used an outboard dbx unit. I absolutely relied on it for every "dry" track I layed down. My unit had some trim pots that could be quirky. Very dynamic signals could sound unnatural due to a "breathing" effect. This could usually be solved by easing off on the expander side of the compansion or a tactical use of a noise gate during the recording session.
Have Fun...darth87
Thank you gentlemen.
Personally, I have preferred to use the dbx. I find that the noise level is not too bad on the MT4X without using NR but with the dbx it's practically inaudible. I thought I was getting a bit better high frequency response without the NR, but the difference was minimal. I know this isn't the forum to promote, but if you visit www.mp3.com and search for "Jamie Shea Trio featuring Mark Siltamaki" you can hear my work (11 songs) recorded on the MT4X with dbx. I have one piece at mp3.com under "Mark Siltamaki and Ralph LeFevre" that was recorded on the same unit without dbx. Again, thanks for the responses!
Mark Siltamaki
Personally, I have preferred to use the dbx. I find that the noise level is not too bad on the MT4X without using NR but with the dbx it's practically inaudible. I thought I was getting a bit better high frequency response without the NR, but the difference was minimal. I know this isn't the forum to promote, but if you visit www.mp3.com and search for "Jamie Shea Trio featuring Mark Siltamaki" you can hear my work (11 songs) recorded on the MT4X with dbx. I have one piece at mp3.com under "Mark Siltamaki and Ralph LeFevre" that was recorded on the same unit without dbx. Again, thanks for the responses!
Mark Siltamaki
Use the dbx. Before I went digital I recorded lots of stuff on my yamaha mt50 four track cassette. Sometimes I used the dbx, sometimes not. When I got the korg d16, I transfered all of it (in four tracks) to the d16. The stuff recorded with dbx sounded not so bad. The stuff without the dbx had hideous hiss that I haven't had the knowlege/time/equipment to get rid of.
jeffy_2003
New member
i have the same 4-track...use the dbx.
i have no idea why they even have a button to disable it on that particular unit.
i have no idea why they even have a button to disable it on that particular unit.