Transferring 1/2 inch 16 track tape. Noise reduction advice.

[Ru_C]

Hi all, i've got a job remixing something from the late 90's that was done on 1/2 inch (16 track) tape.

Unfortunately the client has no idea what machine the recording was done on originally, & hence no idea what noise reduction (if any ) was used.

If memory serves me correctly, there were four different common standards back then. Dolby B, Dolby C, Dolby S, & DBX .

Have i got that right?

I still have access to a my old Fostex G16 (Dolby C) from that era.

What problems would I face if the tape i'm transferring used a different noise reduction type, & could this be corrected in the Digital domain?

cheers

[mhmh]

Originally Posted by Ru_C

...could this be corrected in the Digital domain?

cheers

I see no reason why it shouldn´t be corrected digitally, using hiss reducing software like Waves´ Z-Noise for instance.
You "show" Z-Noise an empty part with tape hiss only in "learn mode" and play around with the paramaters a little. I´ve been using it for years with no problems.

[Pirate Post]

Originally Posted by mhmh

I see no reason why it shouldn´t be corrected digitally, using hiss reducing software like Waves´ Z-Noise for instance.
You "show" Z-Noise an empty part with tape hiss only in "learn mode" and play around with the paramaters a little. I´ve been using it for years with no problems.

My 2Cents...



Noise reduction systems (encode/decode) are typically complimentary compression/expansion and pre/de-emphasis curves. To have any chance at reproducing your audio close to how it was intended to sound, it would benefit you greatly to do a search on the internet to discover how these systems worked, mock them up as close as you can (expanders and EQ not NR Plug-ins) and listen to what method yields the most NATURAL results.


Peter

[GlennR01]

I agree with Peter - you won't solve the proper decoding parameters with a noise plug-in. The expansion/compression schemes not only varied from brand-to-brand, but within brand types themselves (dbx had two or more distinctly different approaches, if I recall, and neither were compatible with dolby, which had at least 4 - A, B, C & SR).

My suggestion would be to eliminate the NR schemes it couldn't be (i.e. 16 track 1/2 inch was not a pro format, likely a Fostex - so you could pretty much rule out Dolby A & Dolby SR). You might even be able to borrow or rent the proper external nr equipment and see which sounds best to you.

In this instance, google is your friend. Best of luck.

[Electrox]

Originally Posted by GlennR01

I agree with Peter - you won't solve the proper decoding parameters with a noise plug-in. The expansion/compression schemes not only varied from brand-to-brand, but within brand types themselves (dbx had two or more distinctly different approaches, if I recall, and neither were compatible with dolby, which had at least 4 - A, B, C & SR).

My suggestion would be to eliminate the NR schemes it couldn't be (i.e. 16 track 1/2 inch was not a pro format, likely a Fostex - so you could pretty much rule out Dolby A & Dolby SR). You might even be able to borrow or rent the proper external nr equipment and see which sounds best to you.

In this instance, google is your friend. Best of luck.

[elicious]

money it was dolby c.
you can test with the nr on/off switch in back of unit.
'member the fostex is -10, so switch jumpers on your interface

b.o.l.
e

e.p.s. if you're doing more than one song
keep a grip o'qtips and alkyhol
as you might need to clean after every tune...

[sean shannon]

For that format, if I recall, there was dbx type 1 on the Tascam MSR-16, and Dolby C on the Fostex.

[BobbyDazzler]

There should be pink noise (or whatever the dolby noise was), printed on the tape if it used Dolby SR Noise Reduction.
There's no way in hell you could emulate SR decoding with an expander plugin!

[GlennR01]

Dolby also used special tones for aligning Dolby A, so unless you know the difference, that's no guarantee its Dolby SR.