• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Vinyl to tape with DBX processors

PROJECT 2501

PROJECT 2501

Active Member
Sitting here staring at brand new unopened pack of type IV metal cassettes tapes that I've had in a drawer for at least 5 years now.... I dont know if it's curiosity, boredom, or the 6 pack of modelo I just tossed back but... I wanna tear the wrappers off and use them....
Like.. right now..

So the goal is to go from turntable to cassette deck.. but that's too easy and no fun.. I wanna complicate things, get extremely frustrated and ultimately be disappointed with the end result so I'm thinking I should throw in a 3bx series ii and a 224x noise reduction unit in there if that's possible. I think that I've read that those units are designed to be used together and if they are does anyone have any experience? How about adding a subharmonic synthesizer in the chain?
Nah... that's just getting ridiculous..

In all seriousness.. I need to know if its advisable to use both the 3bx and a noise reduction processor for recording vinyl to cassette tape using type IV metal tapes..

Thanks in advance
 
Register to hide this ad
Don't use the 3bx for recording. Use the 224 type II for total noise suppression and increased dynamic range. I used dbx type II noise reduction back in the day for recording to cassette. First spin of my new vinyl went to cassette right off. Perfect copy every time. Hardly ever played vinyl. Now all my records are like new...
 
drumbum said:
How much experience do you have with the 3bx and 224?
Click to expand...

Experience as far as what? Using them for their intended purpose? Or playing around with them for a little while and then pressing bypass so the lights stay on as a light show?

If it's the latter... I have 5 solid years of experience
 
PROJECT 2501 said:
So the 3bx is best used for playback only? Not in the recording process?
Click to expand...
The dbx 224 is a compander that is used during both recording and playback. It compresses the audio sugnal for recording and then expands the audio signal during playback thereby reducing the amount of tape hiss. A more detailed description of its operation is available here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dbx_(noise_reduction)

The dbx 3bx is an expander that increases the dynamic range of an audio signal during playback (it is not used during recording). In the process of producing LPs and tapes of music there is usually some degree of compression applied to the audio signal to make sure it remains within the dynamic range limits of the recording medium. The dbx 3bx expands the audio signal during playback to restore its original dynamic range.
 
dhnash said:
The dbx 224 is a compander that is used during both recording and playback. It compresses the audio sugnal for recording and then expands the audio signal during playback thereby reducing the amount of tape hiss. A more detailed description of its operation is available here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dbx_(noise_reduction)

The dbx 3bx is an expander that increases the dynamic range of an audio signal during playback (it is not used during recording). In the process of producing LPs and tapes of music there is usually some degree of compression applied to the audio signal to make sure it remains within the dynamic range limits of the recording medium. The dbx 3bx expands the audio signal during playback to restore its original dynamic range.
Click to expand...
Not to be contentious, but the 3bx can be used for recording, hence the pre and post buttons.
 
PROJECT 2501 said:
The waters are officially muddy...
Click to expand...
If I were to set out to record some lps using the 224x, I would start out with some type I's. Prepare to be impressed!

I would reserve the type IV's for exceptionally well mastered CD's or other digital recordings.

Reserve use of the 3bx for bad recordings with extremely limited dynamic range.

You could really have some fun playing sound engineer with the 224x, 3bx, and an EQ!


YMMV
 
drumbum said:
If I were to set out to record some lps using the 224x, I would start out with some type I's. Prepare to be impressed!

I would reserve the type IV's for exceptionally well mastered CD's or other digital recordings.

Reserve use of the 3bx for bad recordings with extremely limited dynamic range.

You could really have some fun playing sound engineer with the 224x, 3bx, and an EQ!


YMMV
Click to expand...

Type 1? Really? I was under the impression that those had a narrow bandwidth making them ideal for voice recordings rather than music.
 
drumbum said:
Not to be contentious, but the 3bx can be used for recording, hence the pre and post buttons.
Click to expand...
What you have said is correct, but my understanding was the OP would be using a dbx 224 for noise reduction, a dbx 3bx for dynamic range expansion and perhaps a sub-harmonic synthesizer. In that configuration the 3bx would be used for expansion during playback rather than compression during recording.
 
PROJECT 2501 said:
Type 1? Really? I was under the impression that those had a narrow bandwidth making them ideal for voice recordings rather than music.
Click to expand...
The VAST majority of store bought albums on cassette was recorded on type I tape (albeit high speed duplication including digital bin), save a few like The Police's album Synchronicity as an example; chrome tape recorded @120us.

Type I's excel at bass heavy music like electronica( I use the term loosely) and rock n roll.
Type II's are really good for everything and excellent for music that has quiet passages like classical.
Type IV are super duper mondo mega excellent for fetching a high price on sleazebay to fund the purchase of more blanks.


I recommend you download the owners manuals for the 3bx, 224x, and the cassette deck you own.



YMMV
 
Last edited:
drumbum said:
The VAST majority of store bought albums on cassette was recorded on type I tape (albeit high speed duplication including digital bin), save a few like The Police's album Synchronicity as an example; chrome tape recorded @120us.

Type I's excel at bass heavy music like electronica( I use the term loosely) and rock n roll.
Type II's are really good for everything and excellent for music that has quiet passages like classical.
Type IV are super duper mondo mega excellent for fetching a high price on sleazebay to fund the purchase of more blanks.


I recommend you download the owners manuals for the 3bx, 224x, and the cassette deck you own.



YMMV
Click to expand...
I can not find an owners manual for the deck I plan to use. Perhaps you can direct me to a source?
Rotel RD-2200M
 
DBX is only recommended if your cassette machine is in ideal calibration and meets very strict electrical and mechanical criteria. Also you must keep levels lower (don't go above the 0 db indicator on your meters) to avoid pumping and breathing. If you use DBX NR, use DBX Type II, and the 224 unit recommended to you is a good choice.
 
I used the 3 dbx to reduce noise mostly. Remember its a down ward expander if you keep the red lights off. If you start flashing the red lights you are still downward expanding but you are pushing the result to a higher level. I used the professional DBX decoders 750 etc to make R2R tapes. on my Professional and Studio Ampexs. The 224 is designed for consumer cassette machines and consumer R2R where the calibration of the bass doesn't have to be as accurate and the highs can't be pushed due to tape saturation. I would never record above the -10 db level on a great Cassette recorder or above -15 on an average cassette recorder. With the metal tape I'd use the - 10 as a maximum level and I would turn off the dolby noise reduction. Nothing like confusing the issue with two noise reduction systems running at the same time .. I still use the 3BX when dubbing LP's to CD along with a graphic eq to get the bass right. Sometimes on old LP's there is very little bass below 60 Hz so they would over accent the bass from 60 to to 160 hz or so. A totally false recreation.
 
twiiii said:
I used the 3 dbx to reduce noise mostly. Remember its a down ward expander if you keep the red lights off. If you start flashing the red lights you are still downward expanding but you are pushing the result to a higher level. I used the professional DBX decoders 750 etc to make R2R tapes. on my Professional and Studio Ampexs. The 224 is designed for consumer cassette machines and consumer R2R where the calibration of the bass doesn't have to be as accurate and the highs can't be pushed due to tape saturation. I would never record above the -10 db level on a great Cassette recorder or above -15 on an average cassette recorder. With the metal tape I'd use the - 10 as a maximum level and I would turn off the dolby noise reduction. Nothing like confusing the issue with two noise reduction systems running at the same time .. I still use the 3BX when dubbing LP's to CD along with a graphic eq to get the bass right. Sometimes on old LP's there is very little bass below 60 Hz so they would over accent the bass from 60 to to 160 hz or so. A totally false recreation.
Click to expand...
Crazy.

Have you ever owned a deck with dbx onboard?

-10db on what machine? -10 from what zero? 180nw...200nw..250nw?
-15 on what machine?

Who the flip would record with dolby and dbx?

I can't fathom the advice given.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom