16 track reel to reel

[Beck]

Yeah, using dbx on the 388 you’re well above the noise floor w/ 95 dB S/N ratio.

With something like the 388 I would aim for 0 VU as a ceiling, if you bounce up to +1 on peaks it’s ok. Quantegy 407 is just right.

Just remember analog VU meters don’t work like LED bars, so pay close attention to the peak-reading LEDs, that they don’t stay on, but only blink at you occasionally.

When I was using cassette portastudios w/dbx back in the day, 0 VU for peak signals was a hard rule with analog meters.

 

[mixmkr]

Now, I know there is an old trick that the pros used to do, that is to record certain tracks and instruments with the NR engaged and then turn it off on playback and the tracks pop out and have more life to them. I found this to be the case and I've done it mostly on drums. The problem is on the TSR-8 you have the NR on four tracks at a time thus making it difficult to use this method without getting a little too much hiss as you are limited to whatever tracks are grouped on the corresponding tracks controlled by the NR. So I find the drums almost always sound better when I disengage the NR on playback (in the mix, they are too hot sounding alone) but the instruments on the two or three other tracks might not sound as good or cause to much hiss.

This statement hit me like a red flag, if we are talking about DBX noise reduction, which I am led to believe is the case, because of mention of the TSR-8 recorder. Disengaging the noise reduction of an (DBX) encoded track is not a subtle difference. I would pretty much put it in the camp of LO-FI sound as it is basically horrible...unless used for an extreme effect. The idea of doing this procedure to make a track "pop" is almost crazy, but yet the debate of whether to encode/decode or not (using noise reduction) is discussed....tape hiss aside, a MUCH more subtle difference. I can understand the "ears" on debating whether to use noise reduction or not (on a properly recorded track), but then to discuss how you would disengage a noise reduction on playback loses ALL my credibilty in the ears of the person doing such.

I'm sure I'll take some hits for this strong viewpoint, but this is totally absurd. It isn't even in the same league as "subtle".
This one gets put in the "book" along with bouncing to a casette deck to get a "phat" (warm)sound. If you can't get it "phat" going in, it aint gonna be "phat" going out. (that sounds pornographic! )

 

[Beck]

The technique of recording with NR and playing without was used with Dolby A for bright, airy vocal harmonies.

It can be heard on The Carpenters “Close to You.” Also used by ABBA, Elton John and a host of others – even Def Leppard.

It’s a very striking effect – quite beautiful.

It won’t work with dbx.

 

[mixmkr]

that's acceptable... a little tape hiss for some of that "air"

btw, how many times have you flipped your dolby on or off...depending on how your cassette sounded on playback? Pretty much most of the time if I was really listening..VS pop it in and walk away... of course a different grade of dolby, but same camp... hit the highs only, for the most part.

 

[A Reel Person]

If...

If you recorded your tracks with dbx, then turned off the dbx for playback, the effect would be the opposite of what you wanted. It would be more compressed, lifeless, thin, harsh, & trashy sounding with less dynamic range. That technique's definitely a no-go for dbx, unless you were actually going for thin, harsh & trashy as an effect.

(IMO) Dolby benefits from this technique sometimes, as I already think Dolby does a poor job of controlling tape hiss and reproducing the highs.

 

[themaddog]

I've found all DBX systems to muddy up the sound a bit. I'm told this is not supposed to happen and that something is wrong with the NR if this is the case, but I've owned two 388's, a TSR-8, my brother also owned a TSR-8 and all of these machines suffered from the muddy problem (not real muddy mind you) but I doubt very much all four machines had problems with their NR system. I often record without the NR and unless I'm listening for it the noise never bothers me.

I have owned a 388, a TSR-8, and a MSR-16. I never noticed any muddy problem, do you hear it on both monitors and headphones?

I mixed a MSR-16 song the other day. Right off of the tape it sounded great. Listening back to the mix off of the computer, it was kinda brittle, but definitely not muddy on either end.

-MD

 

[A Reel Person]

...

My dbx tracks never seemed muddy, but "hiss free" was the characteristic I'd describe them as. I've always considered the dbx NR to be basically transparent, but it effectively reduces hiss to nil, while boosting dynamic range up to 30db. I've only had one noticeable case of dbx "pumping" in over 25 years of use. (YMMV). I've never witnessed dbx to "kill tone".

I've never been happy with Dolby A/B/C's performance, but that's probably another post.

 

[mixmkr]

If you recorded your tracks with dbx, then turned off the dbx for playback, the effect would be the opposite of what you wanted. It would be more compressed, lifeless, thin, harsh, & trashy sounding with less dynamic range. That technique's definitely a no-go for dbx, unless you were actually going for thin, harsh & trashy as an effect.

I think everyone who has ever owned a DBX noise reduction unit, knows that without dispute. But what got me, was that the forum poster "EDAN" implicated he was trying to do such with his TSR-8 but didn't like doing so because he had to do so in groups of 4 (channels) and couldn't do them individually(for just drums as he was suggesting) I can only hope I am wrong in thinking so.
That displays ears even worse than mine At this level of ear "quality" who even cares what kind of mic you use, what kind of preamp, what kind of tape, what kind of guitar, etcc...etc.. much less if you even use noise reduction or not. Seems you could probably just scream into the head stack and get satisfying results at this level of ear training