Print

Print


Have to admit that I haven't had to do any rate conversion, but (as they used
to say about HiFi recording up to 20 times what the average human ear could
hear) it's nice to know that it's there. It will also convert material recorded
at 32k and I do have some, from when blank DATs were a lot more expensive and
recording vintage material at half speed made no audible difference.

dl

Lou Judson wrote:

> $200 plus shipping? But with the Burnit do you need it? Happy to unload
> it... even if I'll suddenly need it the day after sale!
>
> Tell me, have you ever compared the SRC on the HHB with SRC in
> computer, or via analog transfer? I am curious. I don't get that much
> call, and the clients I see are not archival or audiophile and alwways
> go away happy - and even come back 90% of the time!
>
> Let me know if you are seriously interested.
>
> Lou
>
> Lou Judson  Intuitive Audio
> 415-883-2689
>
> On Oct 3, 2005, at 8:12 PM, David Lennick wrote:
>
> > How much?
> >
> > As for transferring, my HHB Burnit will automatically convert 48k to
> > 44.1. The
> > only 48s I've ever had have been some recorded at the CBC in the early
> > DAT
> > days. I don't know if they stayed with that or why they used it (was
> > it because
> > the BBC did?).
> >
> > dl
> >
> > Lou Judson wrote:
> >
> >> All the DATS I recorded (ten years worth) are at 44.1, and when a
> >> client brings in a 48k DAT, I usually transfer analog to 44.1 because
> >> it seems to come out just as well or better than a lengthy SRC in the
> >> digital realm. Thought or comments?
> >>
> >> I have a Sony 2300 that works as well as the day it was new, a good
> >> D-100, a 59ES that seemed to need heads last time I checked, and a
> >> lowly Panasonic 3500. I've kept the 3500 just in case for a long time
> >> now and never needed it - anyone looking for one?
> >>
> >> <L>
> >> On Oct 3, 2005, at 5:04 PM, Richard L. Hess wrote:
> >>
> >>> Many of us in the tape restoration business are set up for digital
> >>> DAT
> >>> transfer as Tom Fine pointed out. One of the challenges is deciding
> >>> what to do with 48 ks/s DATs. Do you save them as files or downsample
> >>> to 44.1 ks/s for audio CDs. I guess the answer is partially, "it
> >>> depends." Here's where a file system makes things easier. Perhaps the
> >>> answer is "both."
> >