Comparing Stereo Recorders

   

ASHLEY JAMES
ATC LOUDSPEAKERS

NO PREFERRED CHOICE

Was it a valid exercise ?

Yes it was. One thing I feel I ought to say is that when you listen to anything for long periods of time, then if what you're listening to does have imperfections they assume greater proportions than in the short period of time that we had here. I also think that if I was in familiar surroundings, then it's possible that I may have been able to have sorted out the differences between one format and the next. But I think that today's exercise does prove that the differences are quite small if one looks at it subjectively.

You didn't prefer any format to the others ?

No I didn't. In the period of time available I wouldn't wish to be dogmatic ; it would be wrong to do that. I thought there was an overall slight loss of sparkle on all the recorded formats from the original, and I underline the word slight.

One thing you did comment on was that you thought format C (Otari with Dolby SR) sounded slightly duller.

Yes, but I would have liked to have listened for longer to be sure of that.

As you're involved in loudspeaker technology and consequently come up against the problems of reproducing bottom end, how did the formats perform in this respect ?

I thought the bass was nicely displayed and quite accurate but I do feel it was mixed a little high. I think that's common to a lot of jazz recordings but that's my personal opinion.

To summarise then ?

I think one has to say that although people get wound up about irritations in any reproducing medium, there has to be a point at which we say 'Come on chaps, we can go too far with this' because the differences were quite small. I don't think that even if I'd listened for a long time that I would have ended up saying that I definitely didn't want any of the formats.

Are you surprised by the results ?

Now that I know that I identified one of the analogue formats I am surprised less because I would have hoped that I would have been able to do that - and I'm glad that I did. But I must say that I thought the difference between the analogue and digital would have been greater.

 

Studer + Dolby SR

Sony DASH

Otari + Dolby SR

Studer DASH

Mitsubishi ProDigi

Format

A

B

C

D

E

Preference

1st

1st

1st

1st

1st


   

JOHN EDEN
PRODUCER : STATUS QUO, GRAHAM BONNET, etc

PREFERRED CHOICE : STUDER DASH

Was it a valid exercise?

Yes it was. I think if one good thing is to come out of this, and my opinion is similar to the others here, then it's that we have now arrived at a point where there is such a high standard from all the manufacturers that there are only slight differences between them. And that a lot of the bickering that goes on between particular format users is not really valid. The systems sound great, whatever the manufacturer, and it would be better if we could get the manufacturers to co-operate more and just standardise. MADI should be the way ahead.

You chose format D as your favorite which I can now tell you was the Studer DASH. Are you surprised ?

Not surprised, I did make the comment that I didn't think it was necessarily the most accurate, but there was a certain emphasis in the top end and the imaging that I liked.

What were you listening for ?

Realism, to the original source and what I considered to be the most pleasing sound with the most transparent top end and most accurate bass definition. I have never heard the DASH system before. All the systems were incredibly close. An evaluation like this could have benefited from using longer listening periods and different types of programme material. My format preference on say rock material may have been completely different to what I chose with jazz.

Now that you have shown a slight preference for the Studer DASH, will that change anything for you ?

I don't think so. At present I master on 1/2inch and Sony DAT 2500 and I'm happy with them. I'm also happy with my multitrack situation : a Mitsubishi X850 and 24 track analogue MCI. It gives me the best of both worlds. This evaluation might cause me to try a 2 track DASH format in the studio.

Were you surprised by just how similar the formats sounded?

Yes, I was very surprised. I expected to hear far greater differences, particularly between the analogue and digitals. It just goes to show!
 

Studer + Dolby SR

Sony DASH

Otari + Dolby SR

Studer DASH

Mitsubishi ProDigi

Format

A

B

C

D

E

Preference

2nd

2nd

2nd

1st

2nd

   

DAVID JACOB
PRODUCER : PET SHOP BOYS, COMMUNARDS, etc.

PREFERRED CHOICE : MITSUBISHI ProDigi and OTARI with DOLBY SR

D (Studer DASH) did stand out differently. What was interesting about that is that it drifted in speed compared to the other ones. In fact the two that I thought were analogue (B : Sony DASH and D : Studer DASH) did drift in speed compared to the others - which I thought were digital. So that's kind of confirmed my suspicions. It was not enough that I could hear a pitch change but it was enough that I could tell they didn't line up later in the tape. I know that's cheating but it helped me. If I'm right then an Otari analogue, which I thought was B (Sony DASH) and a Mitsubishi digital, which I thought was A (Studer + Dolby SR), sound almost identical.

I thought D (Studer DASH) was the Studer with SR. C (Otari + Dolby SR) and E (Mitsubishi) I couldn't tell any difference: I thought they were the Studer DASH and Sony DASH. I haven't used any of these formats professionally so I'm just guessing.

Normally I mix onto 701 because it's cheap, convenient and it works - it sounds great. I don't understand what it is people don't like about them. If I walk into a studio and there's a 701 in the reproduce chain, I can't tell the difference and I don't care who knows it.

I can understand why people don't like 701 if they don't use pre-emphasis but if they do, I just don't get it. And what's great is that pre- emphasis is a very simple way of getting noise reduction into people's homes. When they listen on their own CD players the pre-emphasis switches so you've got on-the spot noise reduction.
 

Studer + Dolby SR

Sony DASH

Otari + Dolby SR

Studer DASH

Mitsubishi ProDigi

Format

A

B

C

D

E

Preference

2nd

2nd

1st

3rd

1st

 

 





























A note from Uncle Phil
The Sony PCM 701 ES is a PCM encoder which, coupled to a VCR, enables you to record digital audio as if it was an ordinary video signal. The device also extracts the digital audio message from the video signal, the other way round, for playback. Other machines, such as the PCM F1 and above all, the PCM 1630, work on the same principle.  

Sony PCM F1 with power supply



Sony PCM 1630. In the backgound, a BVU VCR

  The converters of the 701 ES, which is a machine of the mid-80s (remember that the article was written in 1989) are really really bad according to today's standards, and.... even according to those days, they weren't really good, but as the guy says :
1) He doesn't care if people don't like that sound.
2) He is right, it's darn cheap !