Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    Yep I fell for one. So far, it's great. Dolby C works fine, transport
    is robust, and the sequencer sync in/out works!
    
    The mixer section is organised slightly differently from the Teac
    machines, but this is only a problem is you're moving from one 
    machine to the other (and not a major problem at that). I prefer
    the X30 to the Porta 05 in this respect. Also, you don't have to
    unplug outputs to hear those tracks off tape during mixdown (less
    fiddling round the back). 
    
    Recommended -- but, certainly in the U.K., prices do vary on Fostex
    gear.
    
    Incidentally, if you wack up the line input volume and turn down
    the master volume, plug in a gittar and switch from 'line' to
    'mic', you get instant Frank Zappa. A minor but pleasing stroke
    of fortune.
    
    Richard.

    No dbx. 'Nuff said.
    
    dp

    Dbx is garbage for anything in the low end; bass, guitar, drums.
    You get a breathing effect every note. If you get the good dbx 
    (read EXPENSIVE) systems, which divide frequencies, do compresion,
    then remix for record, and the same except with expansion for play-
    back, then you get the desired result. BTW this is the same as the
    better dolby systems. In my opinion the dolby c NR is better in
    the bottom end and equal at the top end to dbx
    

    I keep hearing people slag dbx, but my experience with it (8 tracks'
    worth in two Tascam DX-4Ds feeding my Tascam 38) has been unreservedly
    positive.  And my synths crank out a lot of bass.  I am completely
    unaware of the use of dbx on my 8 track masters except for their
    utter silence.  Now, you can argue that this is "expensive" dbx,
    but I think the bulk of the additional expense comes from the
    parallelism (8 tracks' worth) and the automatic control logic (which
    switches encode/decode mode based on what the individual tracks
    at the 38 are doing).
    
    I was not aware that it was possible to design a "garbage"
    implementation of dbx.  dbx is supposed to be compatible with dbx,
    regardless of the implementation, otherwise it can't be called dbx.
    
    I'll take dbx over any Dolby N/R scheme any day.  I've had dbx on
    both my Tascam 244 and on my DX-4D/38 system, and have never heard
    any of the effects you describe.
    
    len.
    

    
    Re: .4
    
    Which dbx system is in the DX-4D??  There is type I (pro) and type
    II (home and portastudio).
    
    Breathing with dbx is, like problems with Dolby, due to level
    mismatches.  In the low bass all tape decks experience head bumps
    which cause irregularities in the frequency response, which can
    lead to level problems.
    
    The best thing for *any* noise reduction system is careful alignment
    *preferably on a per-tape basis*.  I have alignment oscillators
    on my stereo cassette deck at home and believe me, two cassettes
    from the same carton often require different alignments.
    
    

    RE: .2:
    
    I think hiss is much maligned. After all, it's the most professional
    ingredient in many home recordings.
    
    Richard.  

    
    re: .3
    
      I dunno, I always liked listening to radiators leaking behind
    songs. Really helps the music out. 
    
    ;^)
    
    /pjh

    My K-960 has Dolby B and dbx, but Dolby never gets used.

    My Tascam 144 has Dolby B.  And I wish it had dbx.

    I've compared Dolby C w/dbx in a/b comparisions.  And dbx wins hands
    down.  Sounds more like the original.  The Dolby recording sounded like
    it was being played thru a wet rag in comparision.

    I'll take dbx over Dolby any day.  Mr. Rost was/is correct.

-b

    re .3, .4 et al
    	
    	I have not had bad experiences with the dbx on my YamMTX2
    4-track/mixer.  I am really into audio also, and seem to remember
    problems with cassette players years ago which introduced dbx to
    home recordists.  Back then as now, it does seem like the problems
    had less to do with dbx, per se, and more to do with signal tracking,
    level, and attention to other technical detail.  Many audiophiles
    got the same "bad taste" in their mouths for dbx then, as Noter
    .3 seems to have.
                     
    re .0
    	
    	Getting back to the subject, if you need a good mixer and can
    spring to a little more for a 2-speed model, you should take a look
    at the Yamaha MTX2.  At first, I was reluctant to spend $600 on
    a device that seemed to partially duplicate what my synth could
    do.*  But after living with the MTX2, I would not trade it for the
    world!  It works like a charm, and makes stunning recordings.  Now
    if only the material was as stunning...
    
    Clusters,
    Bill 
        
    *That is make "recordings"; I now understand the difference between
    a SEQUENCE and a RECORDING, though.

    I heard that dbx has problems handling sync tones (FSK, SPP, etc.).
    
    I have Dolby C and have had no problems of that nature.
    
    					Scott. 

    re 10
    
    Yes, but the MT2X allows you to cancel dbx on track 1 (or 4?) to
    allow for clean sync track recording. Dave Blickstein, you wanna
    help me on this one???
    
    dp

    I'm a Tascam Porta-1 owner, and while I think DBX is great, it *does*
    sometimes breath, or pump, or whatever you call it, especially noticably
    on bass guitar tracks, or any bassy sound with a semi-percussive attack.
    
    BTW, I record and successfully recover the ESQ's click track with
    the DBX *on*.  No prob, as long as you don't try to record on the
    track adjacent to the one the click is on while you're recovering
    the click.  It just don't work; the record drive energy crosstalks
    to the adjacent reproduce head and scrambles the click.
    
    So what I usually do is lay the click on track 4 while laying a
    guide track on 3 then I can fill up 1 & 2 and themn bounce them down
    to 3 without disturbing 4 or having the sequencer running.  Then
    I fill up 1 and 2 again and then mix the 3 audio tracks with the
    outputs of the synth and drums direct-to-master.  This however,
    requires that I borrow an auxilliary mixer.  Anyone got one for
    sale cheap ?
    
    This 3-track recording is for the birds, though.  More tracks, more
    tracks ! : The age-old cry
    
    						-Jeff    

    re .10 - 12 - I have occasionally, by accident, recorded sync tracks
    (on the edge of the tape, in my case track 8) with dbx.  No problems.
    It's not recommended, but I've never been burned by it.
    
    And regarding breathing on bass, even through headphones, no evidence
    of any breathing or pumping on live bass guitar, or 40 oscillator
    synth bass.  Yes, 40 oscillator - 16 on the Super Jupiter in unison
    mode, doubled with 24 in the JX, also in unison mode.  Or with the
    samples from my MIDIBass.
    
    Maybe I should just count my blessings.
    
    len.
    

    I either record synch with DBX or forfeit DBX on my only 3 audio
    tracks.  Them's the breaks.

    
    I have a porta-two. That has a defeat-dbx-on-channel-4 switch also.
    No problems either way.
    
    Dolby-b and c will round the edges of your pwm waves, making
    them lousy synchronizers. You can see this on a scope, or you can
    read the esq-1 musician's manual, or you can ask somewhere else
    in this notesfile which had this as a topic a while ago. 
    
    /pjh

    If you need an aux mixer cheap, I just finished building a
    keyboard-only mixer.  Plenty of headroom, very quiet, and very very
    cheap. 
    
    Parts came to less than $30 at Jap Shack ripoff prices...
    
    Of course, it doesn't have tone controls, it's just 4x1 (but could be
    bigger, about $3/chan on either side, stereo $2 overall), and doesn't
    do solo/monitor.  And it has knobs, not sliders. Inputs are line-level
    only (keyboards, no mikes). About the only "creature comfort it has is
    a drip-resistant flat area on top, to hold a mug of something cold
    and wet! :-) 
    
    -----
    
    (oh yeah, it will have an "effects insert" loop as soon as I buy
    the jack for it.  That requires moving 3 wires...)  
                                                      
    -----
    
    (sorry db- it has a _wall bug_ !  But any wall bug from 6Vdc to
    15Vdc will work. It likes 12Vdc best.  Love them BiFet op-amps! )
                                               
    -----
    
    I will post the plans in a note somewhere 'round here...
    
    	-Bill (with_solder_stuck_in_his_teeth)

This is turning into another dbx vs Dolby debate.

I think the X-30 is a nifty little machine, provided you don't want effects
loops and can live with Dolby.

To regain use of track 3, record sync on tracks 1 and 4 simultaneously.  Then
record track 3 using sync from track 1.  Then use sync from track 4 for
recording tracks 1 and 2.  If you can't defeat noise processing and track 1,
you might have to be careful. 

    I think the X30 defeats dolby only on track 4 for sync, haven't tried
    it on any other track. 
    
    Best thing is, try a porta-05 and an x30 side by side: DBX v dolby,
    fx loop v no loop, fiddling at the back v no fiddling, just another
    box v striking good looks...
    
    Richard. 


                                 

    Glad to see my original note has stirred such input. I've learned
    alot, even if much of it was sort of off track (no pun intended).
    Could someone please explain what an fx loop is and what is it good
    for? Will not having it (ei. if I get the X30) cause any serious
    limitations? Thanks again.
    				-DM

    
    re: fx loop
    
    
       An effects loop is quite simply a set of send knobs (one per
    channel) and a return knob (or two if it's a stereo return) which
    allow your mixer to send a line level signal from a track/mixer
    channel to an effects device such as a reverb, delay line, phaser,
    whatever.
    
       obviously of some value if you have effects, or are planning
    to get or use effects in your recordings. 
    
    /pjh

Re: .5
    
>>>    Which dbx system is in the DX-4D??  There is type I (pro) and type
>>>    II (home and portastudio).
    
    I didn't see an answer to this anywhere so I'll post one.  The DX-4D
    is dbx Type I.  I'll second Len's comments that breathing bass does
    NOT seem to be a problem with these units.  
    
    However, I used to use dbx Type II with my old TEAC 4-track (2340SX)
    and bass breathing was definitely more noticable.  Perhaps there is
    something about the "cheaper" type II that brings out this behavior.
    
    - John -