keybounce repeat

["ROSSI J.A." <rossi@nusc.ARPA>]

From:	V702M::SYSTEM       21-MAY-1986 11:41
Subj:	Undeliverable mail

 ----Transcript of session follows----
"mmit-eddie" is an unrecognized hostname/address

 ----Unsent message follows----
Date: 21 May 86 11:38:00 PST
From: "ROSSI J.A." <rossi@nusc.ARPA>
Subject: DBX
Reply-To: "ROSSI J.A." <rossi@nusc.ARPA>


The nature of the emphasis and pre-emphasis circuits in Pro-DBX are the only
conceviable place that frequency response alterations would be affected by
the system.  Enven then, the alterations would come at the high midrange
where the circuits have their effect.  If the encoder and decoders are matched
no frequency distortion should (I realize nothing is perfect) occur.  Unlike
Dolby, DBX utilizes the principle of linear compression/expansion.  It's only
effect is to improve dynammic range, reduce rumble floors and increase noise
ceilings.  In theory, there should be no frequency response limitations using
the DBX system.  Who are these audiophiles who are complaining?  More than
likely the same lot who don't believe you can build an accurate solic state
amp.
My solution to the virgin vinyl crisis is to record first playings to Pro-DBX
reel tape.  I have heard no changes in frequency characteristics between the
'live' play and the 'Memorex' version through the same equipment.
If anybody out there experiences frequency disturbances using DBX, they should
chheck the calibration in the emphasis/deemphasis circuits.
I'm glad, Kate acknowledges that digital reproduction sounds different (albeit
better in the caser of the Dreaming) than the actual performances.

'Living in Analog'

John
------
------