Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!ukma!uflorida!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!info-high-audio-request
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: DBX
Message-ID: <6452@uwm.edu>
Date: 20 Sep 90 12:49:30 GMT
Sender: news@uwm.edu
Lines: 21
Approved: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


In <6354@uwm.edu> gould!infocenter!smatchun@encore.encore.com (Scott Matchunis) writes:

>So I'm curious, what is the consensus of opinion on DBX for home cassette
>decks? I have it on mine and like it much better than Dolby B.  Have never
>compared it to Dolby C or any of the other noise reduction systems
>available.

I have Dolby B, C and DBX on a Teac deck.  The deck sounds really good
when I use DBX, except for breathing I *can* hear on some material.  I
use Dolby C mostly because of the compatibility with the rest of the
world, but it mistracks just enough to dull the highs, and I've never
got round to tweaking it.  I thought I'd use DBX a lot more, but the
work involved in making tapes makes me reluctant to put a lot of work
into tapes that I can't use in my walkman or in my car.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com or thurlow%convex.com@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now."