Nick is right. The dub cable took the color under signal directly from machine to machine to avoid being processed to color over out of the player, and then back to color under again in the recorder. Closest analogy would be S-video dubbing compared with composite dubbing. (I said "closest" analogy, not a great analogy.)
Philip
On Oct 8, 2014, at 3:29 PM, Nick Hrycyk bigblueav@yahoo.com [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Hmm, I remember something about the 'dub' cable you could run between the 2 machines to copy tapes. IIRC it had something to do with the color under signal and bypassed processing giving you 'better' dubs!Nick H
From: "John Moore bigfish@pacbell.net [Avid-L2]" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
To: Avid L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2014 6:16 PM
Subject: [Avid-L2] OT: Sony BVU 800 series TBCs color direct vs. color process?Just trying to recall some of the specifics of the Sony BVU-800 series 3/4 inch machines with the external TBCs. There was a function that worked with the Sony TBC interconnect cable that involved the TBC sending the deck a dithered subcarrier signal that allowed for better chroma performance. The subcarrier signal was sent to the deck to allow for color direct vs. color processing. My hazy recollection was the subcarrier signal fed back to the deck had shifted in frequency to somehow reflect elements of the time base error that the TBC had detected. It all made sense when it was explained to me in 1982 but I'm pretty fuzzy on what was going on exactly. Anybody with a tentelometer want to set me straight?
__._,_.___
Posted by: Philip Hodgetts <philip@intelligentassistance.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (3) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment