> but let's not forget that everything else (including Decca,
> Denon and EMI in-house VTR-based systems) didn't have DSP,
> waveform editing or anything beyond video-style insert-editing.
I do not agree with your statement about the DECCA editor at all.
Anthony Griffits, DECCA:
"Although the format of data was based on a television field_
a television waveform is not used in the recording. The video
recorder is working as a data recorder, recording blocks of data
which happen to have a repetition rate of 50 Hz with an interblock
gap similar to television field blanking. The television
synchronising signals are replaced with digital synchronising
words occurring frequently through the data block."
This clearly shows that the DECCA system was NOT using their IVE open reel
video recorders to record a digital audio signal converted to a Video
compatible NTSC signal to be recorded on a video machine instead it was used
as a pure data recorder directly recording the digital audio signal.
> didn't have DSP,
> waveform editing
The DECCA editor used a CRT display to show the actual waveform when
> anything beyond video-style insert-editing.
The DECCA editor used crossfades selectable from 6 to 50 milliseconds as
insert style edits, Butt Edits, just do not work well for classical music at
> Same with the Sony 1600/1630 system.
I agree totally here having worked 4 years with the
1630/DMR2000/DMR4000/DAE1100 system and thinks this is no good at all. A
royal PITA indeed.
Being forced to listen to music stored in RAM memory, 8 bits undithered, the
quantisation distortion and lack of audibility for small signals made
editing a pain and to really hear what you had done you needed go into
rehearsal mode waiting 2/3 minutes for the video machines to sync and do the
edit in real time.
> I think the Sonic Solutions was first pro-grade waveform editor/mastering
system after Soundstream,
I started using the Sonic Solutions SSP2 in spring 1991 and I was in
One of the best editing systems ever made imo.
> CD mastering was still mostly VTR-centric until the late
> 90's, although Sonic and then ProTools started making
> headway in the mid-90's. I think they typical MO was to dump
> your DAW final onto a 1630 tape or, later DAT and Exabyte
> started being accepted at the CD plants.
U-Matic as a storage medium for a CD master was dead around 1995 as the Sony
CDW900E CD burner, USD $10000 in 1994, mated with the Sonic Solutions editor
made CDR CD Masters possible.
Later on the Exabyte DDP masters took over and nowadays its DDP Masters in
electronic form only uploading directly to the replicator FTP address.
Protools is unusable as a mastering DAW imo.
Very good as the successor to the 24 track 2" analogue tape machine but for
CD preparation very clunky and slow indeed.
I would say that Sonic, Sadie, Prism and Seqouia is what is used by those
doing serious CD mastering.
The Mastering Room AB
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough to
make them all yourself. - John Luther