DCC vs DAT vs ACC vs MD
Arie Maaskant
>> Is it any good? What about DAT?
>> The next step is to replace our ancient Sony
>> cassette deck.
>These questions led me back to getting an excellent cassette deck. None of
>the digital formats (MD, DCC, DAT) are nearly cheap (media or players),
I do own a DCC-cassette deck ( app. $300 ) and DCC-walkman ( recording
one, $400 ). It blows away Nakamichi decks etc. It has excellent audio-quality
>even though cassettes lack the convenience of quick track selection. Both
Yes , it is known, that MD is much faster in track-selection, but DCC has
much better audioquality ( anyway, I can't hear the differences between
my CD and digitally recorded ones on my DCC-deck ) even after a second
digitally copy from DCC to DCC.
>DCC and DAT will suffer (to different degrees) from wear and tear, but MD
DCC does wear the same as normal anlogue compact cassettes. It is a question
of error correction. On the tape are blocks of 12 Kbytes, from which
4 KBytes are for error correction. It is written on 8 tracks. Even
the total failure of one of these tracks will be completely corrected.
These tracks are ordered in some kind of way, so that even a complete
absence of the magnetic layer of ( I think ) 1.5 mm will be corrected
properly.
DAT's are offcourse by theory (!) better ( I think. What is better
18 bits with PASC compression or 16 bits straight ? ) in audioquality,
but the wearing of the tapes is much higher because of the helical scan
method of DAT-decks. Furthermore DAT decks are known for the wearing
of heads and fragility ( at least the consumer-type ones ). And they
cost at least twice as much. And you can playback your old compactcassettes.
The disadvantage of DCC is the price of the tapes ( 90 min, $10 ) and
it is not very popular. Maybe it doesn't exist anymore over 10 years,
but at that time a totally different technology will be there.
On the other hand, there is now a DCC-system, that you can use
also as a computer backup medium ( 125 MByte on a 90 min tape or 400 Mbyte
compressed ), so maybe it caches up eventually.
>Plus, the only format which has taken strong enough hold to be a
>"long-lasting" solution is DAT. By this I mean that 10 years from now you
>won't be writing directly to Sony or Philips, asking them for their last
>leftover DCC blanks! But in the meantime, DAT decks are generally geared
>toward music professionals more than home audio.
>Gurutej Khalsa
Arie
.
--
Arie Maaskant University of Amsterdam
Email: a...@fwi.uva.nl Faculty of Mathematics, Computer Science,
Physics and Astronomy
Phone: +31 20 525 6438 Plantage Muidergracht 24
Dirk Pehrke
But DCC is already dead. And the decks are cheap, because of this, whereas MD has a chance to breakthrough, and it has already in japan.
The MD-Recorders of the third generation sound a lot better than the older units (they came to fast to be on the market the same time as Philips with DCC). I can't hear any difference in competition with CD's.
Dirk
JUN YAO ROBATO
: But DCC is already dead. And the decks are cheap, because of this, whereas MD has a chance to breakthrough, and it has already in japan.
: The MD-Recorders of the third generation sound a lot better than the older units (they came to fast to be on the market the same time as Philips with DCC). I can't hear any difference in competition with CD's.
: Dirk
DCC may be dead in the U.S. market, but it is alive & well in Europe. Of
course, the company that developed it, Philips, is European.
Third generation MD players does, indeed, have improved performance.
However, there is still a lot to be desired.
DAT is still better than MD, but one has to suffer the inconveniences
associated with tapes.
I would go for CD-R. Just make sure you don't make any mistakes during
recording.
Jun
Brian L. McCarty
> The disadvantage of DCC is the price of the tapes ( 90 min, $10 ) and
> it is not very popular. Maybe it doesn't exist anymore over 10 years,
> but at that time a totally different technology will be there
Both DCC and MD are essentially dead formats NOW. . .
If you must record digital, DAT is still the way to go.
Brian
Brian L. McCarty
> DCC may be dead in the U.S. market, but it is alive & well in Europe.
> Of course, the company that developed it, Philips, is European.
The fact is NO format can survive without acceptance in the American
marketplace. Beta was more popular in Japan until it was realized that
Americans were embracing VHS.
Brian
JUN YAO ROBATO
: In article <4d4gut$n...@lehi.kuentos.guam.net>, jro...@saba.kuentos.guam.net
The American marketplace may be a big market, but non-acceptance in
America may not mean "rest-in-peace" for the format. Europe is also a
big market and any format that is accepted in Europe can survive without
the help of the American market.
It is just a matter of marketing........like your BELOVED BOSE.
Jun
Brian L. McCarty
> The American marketplace may be a big market, but non-acceptance
> in America may not mean "rest-in-peace" for the format. Europe is also
> a big market and any format that is accepted in Europe can survive
> without the help of the American market.
Show me ONE product format successful in Europe and NOT in the U.S.
It can't be done.
Brian
JUN YAO ROBATO
: Brian
Aaaaaarrrgh! Bwian alias "Mr. BOSE" is BACK!!
If DCC & MD are dead formats NOW, there wouldn't be any on new products
in the market.......and there wouldn't be any place that sells them.
They may be struggling, BUT they aren't DEAD YET. The fact that there
are new developments to improve both formats, and further improvements in
the third generation MD, it shows they are still alive & kicking.
For professional recording, DAT may be the way to go. However, if prices
on CD-R goes down to affordable levels, which have already started, this
would be the best way to record digitally for consumers.
Jun
Arie Maaskant
>The fact is NO format can survive without acceptance in the American
>marketplace. Beta was more popular in Japan until it was realized that
>Americans were embracing VHS.
Nonsense, what about Television-standards ( NTSC vs PAL , Never The Same
Colour )? What about video-discs ( the big ones ) In the US, RCA did try
to compete with a Video-discplayer with a needle :) :)
In Holland , recordshops were full with CD's when in the US, they still
were playing with those black pancakes. The influence of the US concerning
audio and video equipment and setting of standards is nada.
Nevertheless I also think that DCC and MD ( and also CD ) will not last
very long, a few years maybe. The technology of storing digital data
is moving too fast. Within 10 years there will be methods without
moving parts in it. That is the main reason also that I am not a fan
of DAT's It is too fragile and vulnerable ( Helical scan method !!! )
Steven Zipser (Sunshine Stereo, Inc)
McCarty) writes:
>
>In article <4d2vpk$a...@bit.fwi.uva.nl>, a...@fwi.uva.nl (Arie Maaskant)
writes:
>> The disadvantage of DCC is the price of the tapes ( 90 min, $10 )
and
>> it is not very popular. Maybe it doesn't exist anymore over 10
years,
>> but at that time a totally different technology will be there
>
>
>Both DCC and MD are essentially dead formats NOW. . .
>
>
>If you must record digital, DAT is still the way to go.
>
>Brian
>
DAT is the only viable ditial recording format right now.
However, wait till the prices of CD-R's drop.
Zip
Arther Dent
Dhhh...... Like...... PAL, 'en stuff???
Sanghoon Lee
>
>Brian
How about this?
Any company who want to make a great money tries to attack American market and
European market and also Asian market(this market has grown bigger recently).
Among them,suppose that American market is the biggest one. If I were the head
of the campany, and I had a product which can make profit globally, what would
I do? I will attack small market first, then see if that product can do. I want
something which can make me assure that my product has a potential to make
money in the bigger market. But the potential does not always mean that that
product sells well in the next market.
I am not saying that this is totally right. I just made up the story. But I
know that each market has its special needs. I read lots of European HiFi
magazines which deals with lots of products never seen in the US market. I also
know that Nissan cars sold here in the US has never shown to Japanese people
eventhough Nissan is the No.1 car maker in Japan. Europe is also using the
different TV format, PAL than the US and Asian format of NTSC. I also am not
trying to generalize everything, but if you ask so,
my answer is PAL in the Europe, for example.
Hoon
Sanghoon Lee
Michael Schuster
Brian L. McCarty <chai...@worldjazz.com> wrote:
>In article <4d9kk6$6...@lehi.kuentos.guam.net>, jro...@saba.kuentos.guam.net
>(JUN YAO ROBATO) writes:
>> The American marketplace may be a big market, but non-acceptance
>> in America may not mean "rest-in-peace" for the format. Europe is also
>> a big market and any format that is accepted in Europe can survive
>> without the help of the American market.
>
>
>Show me ONE product format successful in Europe and NOT in the U.S.
PAL video :-)
--
Mike Schuster | schu...@panix.com | 70346...@CompuServe.COM
------------------- | schu...@shell.portal.com | schu...@mem.po.com
Ton Maas
chai...@worldjazz.com (Brian L. McCarty) wrote:
>In article <4d4gut$n...@lehi.kuentos.guam.net>, jro...@saba.kuentos.guam.net
>(JUN YAO ROBATO) writes:
>> DCC may be dead in the U.S. market, but it is alive & well in Europe.
>> Of course, the company that developed it, Philips, is European.
>
>
>The fact is NO format can survive without acceptance in the American
>marketplace. Beta was more popular in Japan until it was realized that
>Americans were embracing VHS.
>
It all depends on how you define "format" and "market". The relatively
superior PAL system has survived in Europe for many decades without any
American "support". It's beyond me how you guys in North America can
tolerate that crappy NTSC system ;-)
But seriously: I was under the impression that Beta lost the marketing
battle because they neglected securing availability of software, which
resulted in mass consumer preference for VHS *worldwide* - and not just in
the US.
Ton Maas, Amsterdam NL
JUN YAO ROBATO
: (JUN YAO ROBATO) writes:
: > The American marketplace may be a big market, but non-acceptance
: > a big market and any format that is accepted in Europe can survive
: > without the help of the American market.
: Show me ONE product format successful in Europe and NOT in the U.S.
VINYL RECORDS!! When vinyl records almost died in the U.S., it was and
still is strong in Europe. Mass-market turntables in Europe, like Dual &
Thorens, still produce turntables, while mass-market turntables from
Sony, Pioneer, and the likes are gone from their model line-up. In the
U.S., only in the high-end is where LPs & turntables live. But for
mass-market, it is practically gone.
Want another thing that's strong in Europe but not accepted in the U.S.?
Cars from Fiat, Maserati, Lancia, Peugeot, Citroen, Alfa Romeo, Renault,
Rover, etc. These may be non-audio & video related, but it lies on the same
principle that non-acceptance in the U.S. doesn't mean it's dead in other
markets.
: It can't be done.
It CAN be done, Mr. Bwian Bose "Secret Agent 901".
: Brian
Jun
Bob Myers
> TV was different only because of the FCC insistence on "backward
> compatibility" with black and white (also the difference in AC line
> frequency). I don't understand how your RCA disc example fits; the laserdisk
Utter nonsense. The NTSC encoding standard was developed before either the
PAL or SECAM standards, and could have been used in Europe even while retaining
a 50 Hz field rate. AC line frequency didn't have much to do with TV by
then, and in fact the U.S. NTSC system did NOT preserve line-locked vertical
sweep once color was introduced (NTSC transmissions in the U.S. use a
59.94+ Hz field rate, NOT 60 Hz). PAL and SECAM are both examples of
European standards which succeeded quite nicely while being utterly
incompatible with U.S. practice. Several other examples come readily to
mind:
- 220V, 50 Hz AC power and different outlet designs.
- Vastly different telephone standards, including the basic connector
specs.
- The SCART standard for consumer audio/video equipment interconnects.
- Different automotive safety and design standards (for instance,
you think Ford puts the steering wheels on the same side
everywhere?).
- Teletext and interactive TV standards.
- Considerably more stringent standards on ergonomics and emissions,
which directly impact the design of consumer equipment.
- Television and radio frequency assignments.
U.S. norms (or more correctly, North American norms, since these things are
usually coordinated between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico) are certainly major
concerns in any market - but they are no longer, and have not been for some
time, the ONLY such concerns nor is North America able to drive the standard
practice in any market worldwide. As has already been mentioned, Europe is
a major market - equal in size to North America - and does quite well on
their own when it comes to developing product standards. The ideal is for
us ALL to get together on unified, common, INTERNATIONAL standards, but you're
kidding yourself if you think the U.S. is somehow in the driver's seat in
such situations. When standards ARE different between the U.S. and Europe,
I guarantee you that manufacturers DO NOT ignore the European practices, not
if they want to succeed internationally. There are always some companies
which concentrate solely on their own domestic markets, but if you want to
play worldwide, you DON'T just watch the U.S..
Bob Myers | my...@fc.hp.com
Senior Engineer, Displays & Human Interface | Note: The opinions presented
Workstation Systems Division | here are not those of my employer
Hewlett-Packard Co., Ft. Collins, CO | or of any rational person.
Arther Dent
> DAT is the only viable ditial recording format right now.
>However, wait till the prices of CD-R's drop.
Problem is, CD-R is a record-once format! you literly burn it in, and
it's stuck for life. now, CD-E (ereasable) may be a different story, but
I doubt Columbia/RCA/whatever will like it too mcuh (they already charge
a $20 "settlement" on every DAT recorder sold.)
But, then DAT uses a helical-scan recording method. Not exactly
reassuring, but it works pretty well (I have one tape with 300+ plays and
it looks like new)
Brian L. McCarty
> As has already been mentioned, Europe is a major market - equal in size
> to North America - and does quite well on their own when it comes
> to developing product standards. The ideal is for us ALL to get
> together on unified, common, INTERNATIONAL standards, but you're
> kidding yourself if you think the U.S. is somehow in the driver's seat
> in such situations.
You're I think confusing FORMATS with STANDARDS, Bob. All countries use the
VHS FORMAT for home video, however they operate on different STANDARDS.
Uniformity of both is the ideal, but difficult to achieve.
However, the discussion centers around the adoption of a new FORMAT (DCC and
MD) when NO market, including the U.S., was ready to buy. Either one of the
formats could have succeeded if adopted SOLELY in the U.S., and none can
succeed if adopted ONLY in one of the ancillary markets (Asia and Europe).
This is especially true when SOFTWARE is involved, for the U.S. controls about
85% of the software market worldwide.
Brian
Brian L. McCarty
> >Show me ONE product format successful in Europe and NOT in the U.S.
>
Not a valid example. PAL was developed for different reasons than NTSC, and
their was never any attempt to make television formats compatible. As a
matter of fact, ALL the HDTV formats were designed to be universal, based on
the American HDTV standard. Lack of American participation in the Japanese
standard is what killed it, becuase it could NOT be successful without the
American market.
Brian
Mike Lowndes
writes:
>z...@ix.netcom.com(Steven Zipser (Sunshine Stereo, Inc) ) wrote:
>
>> DAT is the only viable ditial recording format right now.
>>However, wait till the prices of CD-R's drop.
>
>Problem is, CD-R is a record-once format! you literly burn it in, and
>it's stuck for life. now, CD-E (ereasable) may be a different story, but
Well, I use a 1.3 gig rewritable optical with my Mac and can save and
play cd quality music now. I have plugged it in to my hifi and it sounds
quite good. This optical cost around $1600 and they are cheaper today so
it cant be long before we see them specifically for hifi.
Mike.
Arther Dent
>Schuster) writes:
>>>Show me ONE product format successful in Europe and NOT in the U.S.
>> PAL video :-)
>Not a valid example. PAL was developed for different reasons than NTSC, and
>their was never any attempt to make television formats compatible.
What about Sony's "multi-standard" TVs and LD players? ON such gear, NTSC and
PAL are both totaly compatable.
>As a
>matter of fact, ALL the HDTV formats were designed to be universal, based on
>the American HDTV standard. Lack of American participation in the Japanese
>standard is what killed it, becuase it could NOT be successful without the
>American market.
Hmm... I have a few friends who sell HDTV sets in Japan who would be very
surprised to learn that it's dead!
Arie Maaskant
>In article <4dgvsi$s...@fcnews.fc.hp.com>, my...@fc.hp.com (Bob Myers) writes:
>> As has already been mentioned, Europe is a major market - equal in size
>> to North America - and does quite well on their own when it comes
>> to developing product standards. The ideal is for us ALL to get
>> together on unified, common, INTERNATIONAL standards, but you're
>> kidding yourself if you think the U.S. is somehow in the driver's seat
>> in such situations.
In the original article I stated, that CD's were already very popular
in Holland ( and parts of the rest of Europe ) , when at the same time
in the US most music was sold on large black plastic pancakes.
I think, that what has the most influence is on the market, is the
audioquality, ease of use, simplicity of the system and last but not
least MARKETING. CD's ( a total invention after the laserdiscs of Philips,
Sony bought their way in ). This product succeeded because of the
above criteria.
Video2000 a total failure of Philips failed because the system was not
simple and also rather fragile and the marketing was bad ( availability
of software ) Betamax was also less simple then VHS ( the tapeloop of
Betamax is much more complicated ), the image-quality was marginally
better, but that was not important enough. VHS quality is good enough
too, nowadays.
>You're I think confusing FORMATS with STANDARDS, Bob. All countries use the
>VHS FORMAT for home video, however they operate on different STANDARDS.
>Uniformity of both is the ideal, but difficult to achieve.
For normal audioproducts, standards are the same for the whole world.
>However, the discussion centers around the adoption of a new FORMAT (DCC and
>MD) when NO market, including the U.S., was ready to buy. Either one of the
>formats could have succeeded if adopted SOLELY in the U.S., and none can
>succeed if adopted ONLY in one of the ancillary markets (Asia and Europe).
Remember CD's were popular in Europe long before the US. MD and DCC are overall
the same league of products. MD is much more easier in use, DCC can playback
old analogue cassette-tapes. The compression algorithm of DCC is said to
be better ( eg. 18 bits vs 16 bits ). I am very statisfied with my DCC
deck. I wanted it only for temporarily recording classical radioprograms and
CD's and I think analogue cassettes are not good enough and for me even
MD was not good enough. DCC's are perfect for me for this purpose.
But, to be frank. Both systems ( MD,DCC ) will not last very long. The
fact is, that both have lossy compression ( albeit unhearable for DCC
in my case ). With the very rapidly changing of technology in a few
years there will be lossless systems for very low prices.
Maybe there will be solid state media ( proms etc. ) that even
do not need equipment with moving parts in it.
Arie
>Brian
Bob Myers
> You misstate the history, Bob. Sony was VERY close to approval of MUSE as
> "the standard" for HDTV by the FCC, and only a very political argument from
> Zenith, MIT, and others stopped the FCC from approving the standard and set
> the stage for the digital standard that we now are living with.
"Sony" was never close to FCC approval of MUSE; not surprising, since
MUSE wasn't developed by Sony, but rather by NHK. MUSE was offered
to the FCC in the first round of HDTV proposals, along with one other
analog system and the four digital systems which later were merged into
the Grand Alliance scheme. The one thing you got right was that Zenith,
MIT, Sarnoff Labs, etc., DID show the FCC that an all-digital system was
possible, which led to the FCC's decision that the U.S. HDTV standard
would be digital.
> > However - MUSE isn't dead yet, not by a long shot, and remains the
> > only HDTV system in regular broadcast use to date. MUSE
> > transmissions continue,
> Where? NHK has announced plans to discontinue their broadcasts in Japan,
> (which were very limited anyway) and most of the production equipment is
> unavailable now.
Where? Oddly enough, in Japan; as I said before (gee, SOMEHOW you must
have missed it), I was just there. MUSE receivers continue to be sold,
and NHK continues 8 hours of HDTV programming a day in this format. It's
true that NHK will drop MUSE in favor of an all-digital system at some
point in the future; whether or not this will be the U.S. standard
remains to be seen, although we shouldn't overlook the fact that Japanese
manufacturers are very active in the development of the U.S. standard.
The notion is that MUSE sets sold now will later be adapted to whatever
the future Japanese broadcast standard is, via set-top decoders.
But this is getting farther and farther off the original topic, which was
the ludicrous claim that U.S. adoption was ESSENTIAL to the success of
a product or format in the world marketplace. This simply isn't so, and
the HDTV situation was just ONE example cited. Is the U.S market important?
You bet. Is it able to drive the market globally? No way. How many
radios do you see on the shelves of U.S. stores with 9 kHz channel
spacing on the AM band, or FM coverage down to 76 MHz? Want some more
examples? There are plenty out there....
Bob Myers KC0EW Hewlett-Packard Co. |Opinions expressed here are not
Workstations Systems Div.|those of my employer or any other
my...@fc.hp.com Fort Collins, Colorado |sentient life-form on this planet.
Johan Haspeslagh
To answer to the subject :
I own a DCC300 tape deck. I made direct comparisons (through headphones &
speakers) between a CD and the recorded DCC version (through the analog input).
I could not notice any difference. Every detail of the music is there.
I don't know about MD sound (which compresses more) but taking into account
that the DCC compression is undetectable (or probably mostly undetectable), one
can ask if all this fuss about going more than 16 bit, SBM, the ARA proposal of
24 bit if this is really meaningfull ?
If a compression factor of 4 (16 bits to a mean 4 bits) is undetectable,
would a compression to 8 bit not rival a 32 bit quality ?
Another remark is : the 16 bit on a CD could be replaced by 8 channels audio.
Would these 8 channels not be more beneficial to the audio reproduction than
the 2 channel stereo at 16 bit ?
Johan
Brian L. McCarty
> "Sony" was never close to FCC approval of MUSE; not surprising, since
> MUSE wasn't developed by Sony, but rather by NHK. MUSE was offered to
> the FCC in the first round of HDTV proposals, along with one other
> analog system and the four digital systems which later were merged
> into the Grand Alliance scheme. The one thing you got right was
> that Zenith, MIT, Sarnoff Labs, etc., DID show the FCC that an
> all-digital system was possible, which led to the FCC's decision that
> the U.S. HDTV standard would be digital.
>
between Sony and NHK are the equivalent of making them the same entity. The
SMPTE 245M production "standard" was developed for Sony as a precursor to the
approval of MUSE as the U.S. system.
MUSE was offered during the "first round" of the FCC proposals, but the only
reason there was a "first round" was because of the political pressure applied
by congress when MUSE looked to be a slam dunk. The idea of digital video
wasn't yet even off the drawing board at Zenith when the pressure was begun. .
..if the FCC had ordered a "first round" one year earlier, MUSE would have been
the ONLY submission! You need to check your history, Bob.
> Where? Oddly enough, in Japan; as I said before (gee, SOMEHOW you
> must have missed it), I was just there. MUSE receivers continue to
> be sold, and NHK continues 8 hours of HDTV programming a day in
> this format. It's true that NHK will drop MUSE in favor of an
> all-digital system at some point in the future. . .
While MUSE receivers have been sold, the MITI Japan report of 1994 (I haven't
seen '95 yet) said that of the low number of MUSE units sold, over 82% were
sold to commercial entities (demos were available at many locations, and many
different types of companies were using them as a promo). And NHK has
ANNOUNCED the end of the broadcasting, and the measely 8 hours is all endless
repeats. . .because NO new production is occuring.
>
> But this is getting farther and farther off the original topic, which
> was the ludicrous claim that U.S. adoption was ESSENTIAL to the success
> of a product or format in the world marketplace. This simply isn't
> so, and the HDTV situation was just ONE example cited. Is the U.S
> market important?
> You bet. Is it able to drive the market globally? No way. How
> many radios do you see on the shelves of U.S. stores with 9 kHz
> channel spacing on the AM band, or FM coverage down to 76 MHz? Want
> some more examples? There are plenty out there....
And all essentially mickey mouse differences. . . .channel spacing and
bandwidth are political issues, not technical. And irrelevant in the analog
world they were invented in. MD, DCC, and Hi-8 prerecorded video are only
three recent examples of American market failure being the primary cause for
format failure.
Brian
Sandy Santra
I researched and debated for three years which of the three formats--DCC,
DAT, or MD--I was going to move into.
I am not only a collector (600+ CDs), I am also a musician with over
50 hours of original tapes (mostly on old cassettes), which music
needed to be transferred to a new medium.
I bought a Sony D8 DAT "walkman" two weeks ago and have been very happy
with the product.
I have reaped the following benefits from it:
I can use the Sony "long play" mode to cram 4 hours of music on a tape
with a sacrifice in quality that is rarely noticable, particularly when
using the unit as a walkman (the fidelity of the long play mode is
comparable to cassette). This has been great for dubbing my original
music from cassettes, allowing me to put on about 20 DATs what originally
took up 70 cassettes. The long play mode achieves just about the highest
minutes-of-music-per-cubic-inch ratio of all currently available formats
(vinyl, CD, cassette, MD, DCC, DAT). I plan to make DATs of my favorite
100 CDs (recorded using the long play mode on approximately 20 DATs) for
travel in Europe.
When I want crystalline sound, I can use 48 kHz or 44.1 kHz to record and
still get 2-hour tapes; these I can listen to on the walkman when I take
walks in the dead of night when I can hear the difference.
Although heavy, the D8 has no wow or flutter (unlike cassette) and no
compression (unlike MD), is just as stable as MD (even without the famous
11-second memory), and lasts nearly 4 hours on the batteries.
The D8 is also superb for recording on location. For voice, you can get
by with the long play mode.
The start ID function allows you to mark tracks. With the remote
control, you can add, erase (and thereby also move) start IDs.
There is such a strong DAT underground on the Net that information on DAT
resources is readily available. Tapes can be had for $7 a tape. MDs are
much more expensive.
DATs are very small, almost too small to write on. I think I would find
MDs too small.
So for me, DAT has provided a tremendous versatility. I know it's "just
tape"--but I clean my heads regularly and so far haven't had major
problems. Moreover, the D8 is a really well-designed piece of
equipment. That, alone, was almost enough to make me buy it. Just the
*display* is beautiful enough to make you want to buy it.
--
"In an upstairs room, a modem made a connection."
--Lincoln Spector
__________________|_____________________________|__________________________
sandy santra san...@netcom.com el cerrito, california
Mika Koivusalo
>I own a DCC300 tape deck. I made direct comparisons (through
headphones &
speakers) between a CD and the recorded DCC version (through the analog
input).
I could not notice any difference. Every detail of the music is there.
I don't know about MD sound (which compresses more) but taking into
account
that the DCC compression is undetectable (or probably mostly
undetectable), one
can ask if all this fuss about going more than 16 bit, SBM, the ARA
proposal of
24 bit if this is really meaningfull ?
>
In DCC-system, the high frequency range is limited in real-life
situations. With sine sweeps it goes up to 20 kHz, with music not. You
can hear the difference easily with any kind of music which spectrum
reaches 20 kHz. Most of the pop music and also classical music falls
into that category.
If you have hearing loss at high frequencies, so that you cant hear
much over 15-16 kHz, you cant hear the difference. In low and middle
frequencies DCC does very well indeed. You can quicly test your
hearing's upper limit with an ordinary tv-set. If you can hear its
15625 Hz (in Europe, PAL system) tone when it is turned on, you should
also hear DCC's treble loss.
More-than-16-bit and ARA proposals are would-be-things, SBM is real. In
dat recorder it reduces noise about 4-5 db's, and you can really hear
it. Although it does need a high quality analogue source, for examle a
very low noise microphone. With noisy sources SBM's advantage is lost.
Mika Koivusalo
Finnish HIFI-magazine
Jon Wallis
>
>In article <4d9kk6$6...@lehi.kuentos.guam.net>, jro...@saba.kuentos.guam.net
>(JUN YAO ROBATO) writes:
>> The American marketplace may be a big market, but non-acceptance
>> in America may not mean "rest-in-peace" for the format. Europe is also
>> a big market and any format that is accepted in Europe can survive
>> without the help of the American market.
>
>
The pint. (Of Beer, 20 fl.oz, Imperial).
--
Jon Wallis University Web Master & Senior Lecturer in Computing
School of Computing & IT, University of Wolverhampton, UK - WV1 1SB
Personal Information Page: <URL:http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/~cm1906>
--------------Opinions are mine, not my employer's-----------------
dre.d...@gmail.com
Now at feb 2014 .. everybody wants hear clear sounds but with tape saturation. Everybody listen on cloud systems on servers in MP3 format whats is 200 times more bad than dat dcc en cd. en dvd en HD.