lineage question

[Drgiggles1]

if you see analog master > DAT > DAT is this interpreted as DAT[0] > DAT[1] or DAT[1] > DAT[2]. I am assuming the first choice since the master is analog prior to the first DAT. Which is correct ? I just want to make sure... Thank you in advance.

[paddington]

I think I'd only use DAT(0) if the DAT was the master. Even going to DAT, there's an analog generation because you're playing the analog master through analog circuitry and raising the noise floor a bit / adding a tad of wow and flutter when dubbing to DAT.

not sure there's any right answer, though.

[freezer]

.........
not sure there's any right answer, though.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

:thumbsup

[paddington]

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (3 members and 0 guests)
jameskg (http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/member.php?u=11292), freezer (http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/member.php?u=9323), jarrod (http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/member.php?u=323712)

:wave: jarrod

[dcbullet]

Maybe just leave it like this: master C > DAT > DAT