 |
 |
IIRC the Decca system had a "built in" editor, for cuts only, but still it worked. The decks were in a separate room. Shai בתאריך 07/11/12 12:11 AM, ציטוט Goran Finnberg: > Tom Fine: > >> Sony was 4th (and it was the >> pro-sumer PCM F-1 system at >> first, followed quickly by the 1600 system). > http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/History/SonyHistory/2-10.html > > "Following the development of the home-use PCM-1 digital audio processor in > 1977, the professional-use PCM-1600, which used the U-Matic machine, was > launched in March 1978." > > May I point out that despite having the ability to record digitally what use > is that if you cannot edit? > > Fact is that Sony was still telling me at the London AES in 1980 that they > had no digital editor but soooooon it should be available. ;-) > > Bis, Robert von Bahr, was the first in Sweden if not in Europe? to buy the > Sony PCM-1, 78/79?, and used it to record in parallel with his ReVox A-77 > from then on but he could not edit the digital tapes nor was there any > medium to release any digital recording in their native form. > > When CD arrived, 82/83, the pressing capacity was so low that even if you > did have something ready to be sent to the replicator you could be set on > the waiting list for a year or so. > > At the 1980 AES meeting in London I got bored and walked over to Kingsway > Hall to find DECCA/London producer Jimmy Walker and DECCA senior recording > engineer John Dunkerley recording solo piano works with Vladimir Ashkenazy > at the Steinway. > > Despite having a fully operational digital recorder and editing system home > built they were still recording on two DECCA modified Studer A80 running in > parallel using Dolby A because they did not have more than a few digital > recorders and having many recording teams out recording scheduled works > meant that still some of the recordings had to be made in analogue because > of the shortage of digital recording equipment. > >> no one was making commercial digital recordings > So to be able to make commercial recordings you must have editing equipment > too and having the ability to record digitally but NO editing facility and > you are still dead in the water with no ability to make a ready edited > product for sale. > > This was the biggest reason for DECCA to make everything in house since the > thought of having to go to the USA, Soundstream, for editing was completely > out as far as DECCA was concerned. And the Soundstream editor was big and > clunky and VERY slow........ > > > -- בברכה, שי דרורי מומחה לשימור והמרה של אודיו וידאו וסרטים 8-35 ממ.