NAB or CCIR??

[Heyhey]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

NAB or CCIR Eq

Are there any audible differences?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Here's something I found on a quick google search:

http/home.flash.net/~mrltapes/equaliz.html

MRL has a pretty good site, huh?

NAB seems to be a standard for professional 2-track masters here in the
US, CCIR more of a European thing.

Supposedly CCIR sounds better (at least at 15ips). Although any Studer
I've used here in NYC has been set up for NAB. So it depends more on
where you're using your tapes and where you'll be sending them.

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq


heyhey wrote:
> NAB or CCIR Eq
>
> Are there any audible differences?
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <FnMQd.8976$Sl3.274627@news4.e.nsc.no>, heyhey <hey@hey.com> wrote:
>NAB or CCIR Eq
>
>Are there any audible differences?

Yes, the noise floor is different. And the ratio of treble headroom to
bass headroom is different.

Don't forget AME (Ampex Master Equalization) and the ever-popular Nagramaster
EQ also!

For the most part if you're working in the US, you need to be using NAB
because everybody else is. CCIR/DIN/IEC equalization is probably more
popular in Europe but again I don't know how many mastering studios deal
with it day in and day out.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

heyhey wrote:
>> NAB or CCIR Eq
>> Are there any audible differences?


Here you see what happens with the EQ, when you
replay a European IEC = CCIR = DIN 15'' made tape with
a NAB - USA machine and vice versa.
http/www.sengpielaudio.com/IEC-NAB-StudiotonbandWiedergabe.pdf

"In USA" means how "fresh" a European made recording sounds in USA.
"In Europe" means how "dull" a USA made recording sounds in Europe.

From the curves you can see what you have to do, to correct that.

Cheers

Eberhard Sengpiel
German Forum of microphone recordings
and soundstudio techniques
http/www.sengpielaudio.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Eberhard Sengpiel <esengpiel@t-online.de> wrote:
>heyhey wrote:
>>> NAB or CCIR Eq
>>> Are there any audible differences?
>
>Here you see what happens with the EQ, when you
>replay a European IEC = CCIR = DIN 15'' made tape with
>a NAB - USA machine and vice versa.
>http/www.sengpielaudio.com/IEC-NAB-StudiotonbandWiedergabe.pdf
>
>"In USA" means how "fresh" a European made recording sounds in USA.
>"In Europe" means how "dull" a USA made recording sounds in Europe.

This is with a 15 ips tape! At 7.5 ips it's just the opposite!
I have no idea what happens at slower speeds.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Eberhard Sengpiel" <esengpiel@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:cv0et9$9ej$02$1@news.t-online.com...
> heyhey wrote:
>>> NAB or CCIR Eq
>>> Are there any audible differences?
>
>
> Here you see what happens with the EQ, when you
> replay a European IEC = CCIR = DIN 15'' made tape with
> a NAB - USA machine and vice versa.
> http/www.sengpielaudio.com/IEC-NAB-StudiotonbandWiedergabe.pdf
>
> "In USA" means how "fresh" a European made recording sounds in USA.
> "In Europe" means how "dull" a USA made recording sounds in Europe.
>
> From the curves you can see what you have to do, to correct that.
>
> Cheers
>
> Eberhard Sengpiel
> German Forum of microphone recordings
> and soundstudio techniques
> http/www.sengpielaudio.com
>
>
There is also the question of the max flux density advised below tape oxide
saturation. This can drop with LP tape
compared with SP.
It was common practice from the mid '80s in our non-Dolby A mastering and
real-time copying (backwards!) studios in London UK to reduce replay gain
by 3dB ref the IEC/CCIR Test Tapes datum peak level, and to increase gain by
3dB on Record, at 7.5" and at 15", usage was mainly talks and interviews.
[The "peak" flux level was set up in the late '50s and therefore was fixed
in the days of inferior tape coatings.] This reduced tape noise of course.
As long as only standard play tape was used and there was no long-term
print-through (stored tail out).
Don't know if this dynamic trick was also done in USA to bump up NAB levels.
PS We could transfer using NAB curve just for USA/Canada distribution
copies.
DIN curve was only for slower-speed domestic tape recorders.
Can I ask a Q. What is the curve used on non-Dolby cassette tape called?
Jim