2. analog
  3. 165263-89202

Dolby vs. pre-Dolby

This is a topic I’ve brought up a few times before but with little response. Hopefully this time someone will be interested. Many Agoners have made reference to the fact that records from the ‘50’s sound the best.
My contention is that with the advent of Dolby (created for the purpose of reducing tape hiss) in the early ‘60’s, a very audible degradation of sound ensued. This can be heard not only on LP’s but also on CDs created from analog tapes. There is an openness and seemingly unlimited space on the pre-Dolby discs that I feel is lacking on Dolbyized discs. It can be heard most markedly on orchestral recordings. Without Dolby, the full orchestra surrounds you and still there Is a great sense of detail. With Dolby a lot of the wonderful ambience is lost.
Dolby’s cutting off of the highest frequencies, although allegedly electronically replaced, eviscerates the sound and deprives us of the full picture.
Has anyone else heard this phenomenon?
rvpiano

Showing 4 responses by rvpiano

rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano OP
2,819 posts
 
What I’m talking about is a real phenomenon that many classical music listeners and others have heard and commented on.  The early pre-Dolby recordings do have a different tonal signature to those made with Dolby.
(When I say recordings of course I’m referring to the master tapes from which the records are made. Let’s not quibble over terminology.)
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano OP
2,819 posts
 
I’m speaking of analog LP’s produced by record companies in the late ‘50’s and early ‘60’s whose tapes were recorded NOT USING the Dolby A process. which had not yet been invented. And those master tapes were often used in the making of modern CDS.


Cleeds— I think your referring to the modern use of Dolby..

yogiboy == You’re exactly right, but your not addressing what I’m talking about.
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano OP
2,819 posts
 
However, you’re right, I don’t know the technical details as to how Dolby works. .But one thing is sure, the final sonic signature is not the same as it started out.
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano OP
2,819 posts
 
Cleeds,

Yes indeed, multi miking and tracking played a role in affecting the sound, many think, negatively, You could also cite the switch from tubes to transistors as having a negative affect.
But one thing is clear and indisputable, there were no Dolby recordings made prior to 1965, the year of its invention. That’s not so hard to understand.
Although, you’re right, I have no way of knowing which recordings used Dolby after that date, I sure as hell know there were no Dolby recordings made pre 1965.
And that’s my point!
I believe, in general, records made before 1965 sound better than those produced later.


More to discover