Yes, I think I got it. But they did just use the helical scan head to encode digital data that represented the analog music signal , right? Were they only used in studio/mastering and/or broadcast situations? And wow, pre Hi-8. Also, was the purpose an attempt to use this format to turn VCRs into digital consumer devices that failed? I've gotta assume they didn't put DSOTM on the tape as an experiment.
Many machines designed for many applications (including home use) over the years, and they not only pre-dated Hi-8, but some pre-dated VHS and Beta, and used 3/4" U-Matic tape. The machines, IIRC, were starting to make headway into the consumer "home enthusiast" market, which was assumedly MFSL's target audience.
Did they not promote it well, or was it too cost prohibitive? I would think this format would have been every reel to reel owners heaven. Or perhaps people were just too afraid of that word "digital" and didn't want technology that was over their heads?
This stuff may all seem sort of esoteric, but keep in mind that DAT was basically a "mini videocassette" disguised as an audio format. To that end, check out this DAT machine that I used in, I think, 1992, working at the Aspen Music Festival: As you can see, that bottom unit is clearly a derivative of those other "stand alone" Sony units, attached to a "little video recorder" -- this time in the DAT format we all know.
Not enough hardware in people's hands at the time, kind of like if Criterion were to try to sell a video format that was only compatible with, say, 4k commercial Sony projectors. Sure, there may be some really wealthy nuts that have those in their homes, but they are few and far between!
That makes sense. I think DAT didn't do as well as expected for the same reason. And it was quite expensive, I bought a DAT when they first came out and the thing was just under a thousand bucks. And the tapes were not cheap either. And DAT was easily connected to existing home stereo gear. Oh and.. tut-tut... "nuts"..... eccentric..... When they have that much money, it is always "eccentric".
According to the infomation on the internet, these pre-dated the MFSL UltraDiscs (Digital Audio Cassettes released by MFSL in 1984 while first UltraDisc was 1987). If so - are these the only digital masters of the original late 70's/early 80's masters avalable?
I've never seen a 1984 *initial* release date for the PCM tapes from MFSL. (They may have still been available at that point, but AFAIK, the launch date was well before that.)
Actullay, it seems it was even earlier! http://pinkfloydarchives.com/dusmfsl.htm#DSMFSLVHS "In 1983, Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab experimented with producing Digital Audio Tapes. The second Digital Audio Tape offered by MFSL was Dark Side of the Moon. Production Run: These tapes were made by hand only when an order was received for them. Less than a 100 of each were produced." UPDATE: But of course you knew that
They would almost certainly be "unique digital masterings" for at least some titles. MFSL released "I, Robot" very early on in their CD days (I think it was in the second batch of titles), and it's possible that the MFSL CD may use the same digital transfer as the custom-made VHS/Beta release. I would imagine that the other titles would be fresh re-masterings for CD.
Now for the magic question, how much did the tapes sell for, and how much would the least and most expensive gear to play them have costed? And was it on the market long enough for the prices to start dropping?
From wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCM_adaptor "Most video-based PCM adaptors record audio at 14 bits quantization, and a sampling frequency of 44.056 kHz for EIAN countries (or 44.1 kHz for CCIR countries) kHz. However, some of the earlier models, such as the Sony PCM-100, recorded 16-bits quantization as well, but used only 14 of the bits for the audio, with the remaining 2 bits used for error correction, in case of dropouts or other anomalies being present on the videotape." Yikes!
...and some VERY early Sony DAT recorders had 44.056 kHz as a sampling frequency option, along with 48k and 44.1k. Regarding the 14/16-bit situation, here's a bit from the promo materials for the game-changing Sony F-1: Also, even the 14-bit machines could get 86dB dynamic range with full 20-20k frequency response, which is nothing to sneeze at.
Several posts back I mentioned Sony's PCM-1 from 1977. There's some cool stuff about that here, including the $4400 MSRP: http://www.thevintageknob.org/sony-PCM-1.html
One of the very first DAT machines I used -- and Sony's first portable DAT recorder -- was the PCM-2000: ....which was about the size of a large-ish dictionary -- much larger than later models. Note the sampling frequencies:
To think of what we can now do at home with a ten year old clunker PC, an average M-Audio card and maybe some $49 software.
It's amazing to think that this beast came out in 1977. The design looks at least 7 to 10 years ahead of its time!
I will say this about the Hi-8, a format I regret ever using for video production for a year or so, right before non-linear editing became practical. I owned multiple high end Hi-8 editing Sony decks, and a very expensive Hi-8 camera. I went with that so that I could dub in quality sound on top of other audio tracks already on the tape. It was really the only decent prosumer way you could do that at the time. The problem was, this was a very unforgiving, volatile format. You could only go back and forth a couple times while editing and then the tape would start falling apart. Audio would drop in and out all over the place, and lines would start appearing in the video....Sony had no business putting this out. It was a great idea in theory, but they needed a wider format tape for this to really work. I have hundreds of tapes and few work from beginning to end on any of the players I still have. I made one two hour documentary, spent who knows how many hours on it, and the master doesnt even play back now until you are a few minutes into the program, and then it drops in and out throughout. Thank goodness I have the original film elements, but its all on Hi-8 too and the main person I interviewed is now deceased. I will never forgive Sony for putting this format out, and then staying with it for so long, when I know good and well they had to have known it was crap. Would love to hear Vidiots comments about Hi-8! So...Im sure Alesis, Tascam and others looked into this format and quickly discovered it stood zero chance of working in a studio environment. Alesis chose the right format with their ADAT machines. Hope that answers your question.
The look of Sony's pro and semi-pro (or whatever you'd call it -- the REALLY good stuff) in that 1975-1979 time period was really tops, IMO. I'd love to have one of these just for the cosmetics, plus it's really a great piece of gear, based on what I've read: (from here)
Actually, if memory serves I think it may have as there was one multi track digital machine out that used 8mm, though maybe it wasnt Hi-8, but the tape was the same width. I know the machine wasnt out long, and I remember just shaking my head when I saw it. I had a recording studio and knew it would never, ever work. Again, my timing might be off a year or two do forgive me if Im incorrect. Hate to argue with a gort!
Give me any of that vintage stuff from that period over most of the cheaply made stuff that is out there now! Was some beautiful equipment back then!
Nah, argue with me on factual stuff all you want -- no issue with that EVER. It's healthy, and I like to get the straight-skinny "out there," and don't want to go around spreading mis-information about stuff. The only Hi-8 based multitrack system I know of was the Tascam-originated DA-88 (DA-38, etc.) system (I still have many such DA-88 tapes stashed away here, but no longer have a machine on which to play/transfer them), but that was in 1993. The Sony PCM-1 mentioned in this thread was 1977 and the F1 was 1981. The original 8mm video format wasn't introduced until 1985, and the DA-88 on Hi-8 launched in 1993.
Right on, dog! (I like your avatar.) I often tell people that when I bought my first SoundTools (precursor to ProTools) set-up around 1990 or '91, it was centered around a Mac IIsi computer ($3000), involved the SoundTools interface and software (I forget what that cost, but it wasn't cheap/free), a DAT machine (around $1500, IIRC), plus I had to get an external hard drive, and I still recall very clearly buying a *ONE-GIGABYTE* SCSI drive that was the SIZE OF A LOAF OF BREAD, and cost me $1200 el-cheapo via mail order! Now, I can go to my grocery store and buy an 8 gigabyte thumb drive for under $10. Think about that, folks.....it's mind-boggling.
Along similar lines, I ran across this today and got a kick out of it. It's a 5 megabyte hard drive from 1956 being loaded onto a plane with a forklift.
