Vinyl lovers & dbx encoded records

[Coytee]

I'm currently flipping through ebay (gloating on the demise of "Al's" speakers), looking at dbx items and stumbled across some lp's. I then remembered the difference I heard between dbx disks verses regular disks.

Even though the selection of records (dbx encoded) was not very high... I'm just curious if you (current vinyl lovers) ever heard dbx encoded lp's and what you think/thought about a dbx disk verses "regular" vinyl?

Would you replace your entire collection with dbx disks if they were available or would you RUN away (for what ever reasons) from dbx disks?

I guess what I'm leading to is, what is your opinion on the differences in sound between a regular record and a dbx disk (presuming same recording).

Would you consider a dbx encoded disk "analog"? or would you put it more into the camp of a cd?. Seems to me, it's somewhere in the middle?

[Duke Spinner]

the DBX NR Algorithm was ...Analog .......

[Frzninvt]

Analog yes, but your vinyl will have 90db S/N Ratio, and 90db Dynamic Range equal to a CD with the warmth of vinyl. Pretty ingenious process really.

If you want to try it, get yourself a DBX 224X-DS which is the matching component to your 14/10 and 5BX-DS and spin a few DBX records to see what you think.

They do work and work well.

[Shade]

Never knew there was DBX encoded vinyl. Frzninvt, would the NX-40's be

able to work with these? I still have a few around somewhere.

[Frzninvt]

Yes, the NX-40 will work to decode them. It is a really good process shame it never really took off totally. I used to make tapes in DBX from my Teac R-999X cassette deck, the problem was having a deck in the car to decode them. DBX and Concord made them and some of the higher level Alpine cassette decks had the DBX playback option. I used the DBX decorder with a Nakamichi TD-700 cassette deck and man it was awesome.

[whell]

Bottom line, the few dbx encoded discs that I owned once upon a time sounded GREAT! I had a Technics cassette deck that had a decoder built in, and could play the records through that via the tape loop on my preamp.

Those discs, and that tape deck are long gone, sadly.

[Coytee]

I'm well aware that dbx disks would be "analog". I also have zero interest in starting (or restarting as it may be) another format in vinyl.

I'm familiar with the technology, how it worked and had a 224 unit plumbed into my Akai 747 GX open reel for years (as well as a handful of their disks)

What I was REALLY more interested in hearing is from the vinyl "purists" (and I say that in a positive way).

If you are a vinyl purist, first... are you familiar with the dbx records? If so, did you own them and what is your opinion of those as a format, over "standard" vinyl?

I guess what I'm wondering is, from the 'purists' point of view, is the dbx/disk technology a step forward or a step back. I could see it argued either way and was curious on your thoughts.

Again, I use the word 'purist' in a positive sense.

[Duke Spinner]

No, you misunderstand, CoyTee ..

the Algorithm was Analog, as opposed to being transferred to the Digi=tal domain, then back to Analog ..

[HDBRbuilder]

In 1975 I bought a DBX II model 124, 4-channel DBX unit to go with my Teac A2340-R reel-to-reel tape deck. I was running a Technics SL-1300 turntable with a JVC CD-4 cartridge(MD20X model cartridge, I believe, and it was actually manufactured by Audio-Technica FOR JVC distribution, with specs that were better than the CD-4 cartridges that Audio-Technica marketed under their OWN label!) mounted, that had a shibata nude diamond stylus. I was pushing all of this through an H/K 900+ 4-channel receiver. DBX sent me a few of their encoded discs which sounded great, compared to the other vinyl I had, and I had LOTS of vinyl!

I don't think the question to "vinyl purists" really should apply in this situation, since few folks back then opted for DBX-encoded disks anyway. You gotta understand that since these disks were encoded with DBX from the start, they would only play back properly using the DBX unit, which would take away some from the disk performance when played back without the DBX unit, just the same as playing back a DBX encoded tape without the DBX unit.

The DBX concept was like taking Dolby and putting it on steroids. With Dolby on tape, certain frequencies of a recording that related directly to anticipated tape "hiss" frequencies, according to the tape speed being used (1-7/8" per minute on cassetes) were altered by expanding those selected frequencies during the recording process, then during the playback process, those expanded frequencies were filtered, then compressed back to original in order to eliminate the tape "hiss". With DBX, though, this process was applied to ALL frequencies, instead of just those particular frequencies associated with tape "hiss" at particular tape speeds. Therefore, the entire recording's band of frequencies were expanded, then filtered, then compressed again, to eliminate unwanted noises, which gave you much more headroom, which related to cleaner-sounding recordings, especially at higher volumes. It was somewhat of an aid in reducing heard "rumble" in vinyl, too! But, scratches and pops on vinyl still came through, but not quite as loud as without DBX kicked-in.

DBX made many gains in the market-place, especially for tape recordings, but it never really caught on for vinyl, with the advent of CD's finally nullifying it for any use but in tape recordings. One might try dbx with one of those laser turntables and encoded discs to see what effect that would produce...just a thought.

BTW, I still have all the above-mentioned equipment (in working order), AND those DBX-encoded discs back home, ha! ha!