This could well be the case, too. In any case, as long as I can get a good playback, it's not a huge
issue. When a tape without tones come in, that's another matter. It's hard to believe that all
professional studios that could afford those Dolby units back in the day wouldn't have the expertise
to read the manual and set their machines accordingly, but apparently some or many didn't.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Thal" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2011 12:58 PM
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Dolby A-type level standards
> Apologies if my following points have already been made by others. I
> only occasionally look at digest versions of this list.
> Tom Fine writes:
>> I've run into the same thing with Dolby A reels, with azimuth aligned with a scope, the level-set
>> tones are sometimes lower than expected and in those cases it's great to have Dolby tones to get
>> > the CAT22 to track well on decode. I've always ascribed this to self-erasure over time.
> I think you are mistaken. There have always been differing standards
> for what constitutes Dolby level. It is hardly uncommon to see Dolby A
> encoded tapes recorded at different fluxivities.
> Regarding describing azimuth as being aligned with a scope, this is
> always somewhat ambiguous unless you also state whether you mean that
> two tracks were aligned for minimum inter-channel phase difference, or
> that one (or both) of those tracks were aligned for peak short
> wavelength amplitude response.
> Fred Thal
> Audio Transfer Laboratory