Print

Print


> Plangent is wonderful, but a bit problematic as it is still inconvenient to properly archive the bias, but that's another story, and I think in the long run it would be good if we could do that.

It’s as inconvenient as threading the tape  - reading a spectrum analyzer and entering the number in the keypad built into the preamp. Oh and setting azimuth and pressing play.

What’s problematic is that while  the investment in the necessary equipment to achieve this superior transfer is affordable and eminently useable,  the members of this list and the archiving community don’t purchase new gear. Purchases of forensic dSP plugins are routine, new heads, new monitors. Etc. 

It’s not a three eyed left-handed unicorn. It’s a head and preamp.

So with all love and respect to the assembled pros here I’ve been hearing this for 15 years and it’s about time I defended it. It costs money. Not crazy money, but it’s not a 50 year old design either. And it’s easy. It’s a matter of willingness to adopt the technology. Which either because of NIH or misinformation or who knows what. Meanwhile John Chester and I are happy to answer questions for potential customers and to attempt to shoot down the resistance to its further utilization.

Jamie Howarth 
845 652 0277


Please pardon the mispellings and occassional insane word substitution I'm on an iPhone

> On Jul 14, 2019, at 17:42, Richard L. Hess <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Hi, I think many of us agree that it's necessary to preserve both the raw transfer and the decoded version of a file which has been recorded with Dolby or DBX type noise reduction.
> 
> When I first thought about it, I never imagined I'd be part of a team that would produce a better decoder for Dolby A encoded tapes than Dolby, but it's happening and humbling... So, it is a good idea to save as much raw data as possible because who knows what else will come along.
> 
> Plangent is wonderful, but a bit problematic as it is still inconvenient to properly archive the bias, but that's another story, and I think in the long run it would be good if we could do that.
> 
> MY QUESTION is: Are there any standards or recommendations that say "keep the raw undecoded copy as well as keeping the decoded copy?
> 
> It's for a paper that Federica and I are writing.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard
> 
> -- 
> Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
> Aurora, Ontario, Canada                             647 479 2800
> http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.