Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 2005 23:12:36 -0400
Reply-To:     Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         David Lennick <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Requiem for the DAT (redux, was Storage of audio CDs)
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

How much?

As for transferring, my HHB Burnit will automatically convert 48k to 44.1. The
only 48s I've ever had have been some recorded at the CBC in the early DAT
days. I don't know if they stayed with that or why they used it (was it because
the BBC did?).

dl

Lou Judson wrote:

> All the DATS I recorded (ten years worth) are at 44.1, and when a
> client brings in a 48k DAT, I usually transfer analog to 44.1 because
> it seems to come out just as well or better than a lengthy SRC in the
> digital realm. Thought or comments?
>
> I have a Sony 2300 that works as well as the day it was new, a good
> D-100, a 59ES that seemed to need heads last time I checked, and a
> lowly Panasonic 3500. I've kept the 3500 just in case for a long time
> now and never needed it - anyone looking for one?
>
> <L>
> On Oct 3, 2005, at 5:04 PM, Richard L. Hess wrote:
>
> > Many of us in the tape restoration business are set up for digital DAT
> > transfer as Tom Fine pointed out. One of the challenges is deciding
> > what to do with 48 ks/s DATs. Do you save them as files or downsample
> > to 44.1 ks/s for audio CDs. I guess the answer is partially, "it
> > depends." Here's where a file system makes things easier. Perhaps the
> > answer is "both."