LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  January 2010

ARSCLIST January 2010

Subject:

Re: DAT ripping

From:

Shai Drori <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 21 Jan 2010 09:37:03 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (134 lines)

My own experience with dat is that almost all tapes have some form of 
errors on them. I think the idea in dds is that errors are better fixed 
than dat machines. There were many machines that came off assembly lines 
not at spec, thus making the tape not a standard tape. Some machines are 
better at coping with these (my experience with Sony is better than 
tascam for example, but I suspect this is highly subjective). All in 
all, I think the DAT format was the word digital format I have ever come 
across.
Also' checking two files one against the other will not necessarily 
prove one format better than the other. If you get some audio, how can 
you be sure one stream is correct and the other is corrupt? Either the 
dat or dds stream could be better, or am I missing something in the 
methodology?
Shai

Tom Fine wrote:
> I'm happy to do a SPDIF to hard drive transfer and then exchange tapes 
> with someone using a PC-drive transfer system so we can do the 
> comparison Richard mentions.
>
> Please ping me off-list if you have a working PC-drive transfer chain 
> and want to exchange DATs and computer files.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard L. Hess" 
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 5:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] DAT ripping
>
>
>> Hi, Tom,
>>
>> After I saw your post and re-read Jim's post, I think I understand 
>> where he is coming from.
>>
>> What we _should_ be able to do is take the DDS ripped file and an 
>> AES/SPDIF'd copy of the DAT from an audio DAT machine, align the 
>> starts, invert the phase of one, and get dither or silence.
>>
>> In both instances, we're pulling numbers off the tapes (although the 
>> basest representation of the numbers is analog on the tape, the 
>> processing in both instances interprets these analog signals as 
>> either ones or zeros).
>>
>> I would not, without doing the tests that Jim is talking about, be 
>> 100.0000% confident that the two files are identical.
>>
>> I think that the DDS reading could be "better" than the audio DAT 
>> reading as there is no error concealment stage in a data recorder, so 
>> if you grabbed all the bits via the DDS route, you could be sure that 
>> they were correct.
>>
>> These are all subtle differences and are probably not as large as the 
>> "Interstitial Errors" that Chris Lacinak is talking about here:
>> http://www.avpreserve.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Digital_Audio_Interstitial_Errors.pdf 
>>
>>
>> I would expect some burst differences between the two methods, and 
>> those bursts would be where the audio DAT's error concealment kicked 
>> in. Other than that, they should be identical, presuming you haven't 
>> introduced an interstitial error in one copy or the other.
>>
>> I'm glad to see Chris offering to help. I am interested in this. I 
>> would also like to know who is set up with the DDS Mass Ingest of 
>> DATs as I am sometimes asked who can do large DAT collections. At the 
>> moment, I am not interested in doing any because of anticipated 
>> remaining headlife on my machines, the growing lack of parts for DAT 
>> machines, the need to transfer my own DAT collection first, and the 
>> analog work that I have piling up.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> At 04:27 PM 2010-01-20, Tom Fine wrote:
>>> Hi Jim:
>>>
>>> How could the data be "better" than a direct-digital out from a 
>>> properly-working player (ie no head problems or mechanical issues)? 
>>> I thought the main advantage of the computer-drive method was to 
>>> save time. Is there more to it?
>>>
>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Sam" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 12:45 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] DAT ripping
>>>
>>>
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> First, Dave, that information is very helpful.
>>>>
>>>> That said, I didn't ask because I'm worried about the theory.  I 
>>>> was asking
>>>> for a collaborator in testing.
>>>>
>>>> The theory's been discussed before on this list, and I'm aware that 
>>>> more
>>>> than one person/organization has experimented with this to some 
>>>> success.  It
>>>> was also *briefly *discussed at last year's conference in DC.  
>>>> However,
>>>> every time I've seen a discussion about the topic, it has never 
>>>> come along
>>>> with what matters to me: testing to make sure what's coming off the 
>>>> DDS
>>>> drive is the same (or better) data than what would go down the AES/EBU
>>>> pipeline.
>>>>
>>>> I'm still extremely interested in this situation, and after having 
>>>> had to
>>>> deal with other similar formats, I've got ideas for testing that 
>>>> I'd like to
>>>> do.  But I don't have a working DDS setup here.  I could build my 
>>>> own, which
>>>> I might do, but that's a can of worms, and there's other things to 
>>>> be gained
>>>> by having a collaborator in these tests.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Jim
>>>
>>> Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
>>> Aurora, Ontario, Canada       (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
>>> Detailed contact information: 
>>> http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
>>> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
>>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager