Author Topic: DAT VS. NJB3 (Read 8916 times)

Depechemode1993 · « **on:** January 08, 2005, 07:47:06 PM »

I just want to know is the quality of the JB3 as good as DAT? and can you see the levels on your recording and change levels on the fly?

Joe w. · « **Reply #1 on:** January 08, 2005, 08:07:15 PM »

looks like you are going analog in to your d-8 via mini? I'd say, in your case.....the d-8 would be better a>d conversion. but you have to ask yourself which you value more:

D-8:
better a>d conversion, requires the purchase of media, real time transfers

jb3:
lesser a>d, no media required, quick transfers.

Brian Skalinder · « **Reply #2 on:** January 08, 2005, 09:52:05 PM »

Quote from: Joe w. on January 08, 2005, 08:07:15 PM

the d-8 would be better a>d conversion

Bah.

Depechemode - I'll re-host my D100 v. NJB3 line-in comparison if you want to hear it. And check the Archive Info for a pros/cons list of MD v. NJB3 v. DAT.

Sanjay · « **Reply #3 on:** January 08, 2005, 11:01:19 PM »

i've been running line in recently, and haven't noticed too much difference.

Oh and there is mac software now, works with itunes.

Depechemode1993 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 08, 2005, 11:12:39 PM »

thanks guy. +T

brian,
if you could put the comparison up that would be nice. I might switch over whenever my D8 dies. As I have herd DAT is going down the tube and JB3 prices are going up so I am probably going to buy one now and put it in a case or something. plus is it easy to crotch it when you are stealthing?

F.O.Bean · « **Reply #5 on:** January 08, 2005, 11:16:02 PM »

IMO, for ease of use and many other things, JB3 rules superior

Brian Skalinder · « **Reply #6 on:** January 08, 2005, 11:27:09 PM »

Quote from: Depechemode1993 on January 08, 2005, 11:12:39 PM

if you could put the comparison up that would be nice.

Comp is up over on bt.easytree.org:

tracker entry
torrent link

Quote

plus is it easy to crotch it when you are stealthing?

Yes, though I don't use it for stealthing.

Depechemode1993 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 08, 2005, 11:31:39 PM »

hold on I have to clear out my cookies for the torrent...

tchoub · « **Reply #8 on:** January 09, 2005, 02:06:58 PM »

Quote from: Brian Skalinder on January 08, 2005, 11:27:09 PM

Comp is up over on bt.easytree.org:

tracker entry
torrent link

thanks for this.
I do not hear a lot of difference between the 2 sources (and I don't know if it is a bad or good thing...)
For me, the sound of Source #2 seems a little bit more detailed.

Brian Skalinder · « **Reply #9 on:** January 09, 2005, 02:28:39 PM »

Quote from: tchoub on January 09, 2005, 02:06:58 PM

thanks for this.
I do not hear a lot of difference between the 2 sources (and I don't know if it is a bad or good thing...)
For me, the sound of Source #2 seems a little bit more detailed.

Thanks for the feedback. The D100's line-in and ADC is well respected, so IMO it's a Good Thing that the NJB3 stacks up (depending on one's ears, playback, etc., of course). PM coming shortly with source ID info.

Depechemode1993 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 09, 2005, 09:08:14 PM »

I really like the DAT better. what do you prefer Brian? but they both really sound the same to me.

Brian Skalinder · « **Reply #11 on:** January 10, 2005, 12:44:01 AM »

Quote from: Depechemode1993 on January 09, 2005, 09:08:14 PM

I really like the DAT better. what do you prefer Brian? but they both really sound the same to me.

How do you know which is which? I don't think I've PM'd you the results, yet! And if they sound the same, how does that mesh with you preferring the DAT? Just curious. I'll send a PM with detail on which source is which and why I prefer one over the other - after you PM me with which you think is which, and why.

NewHomebrew · « **Reply #12 on:** January 10, 2005, 09:13:41 PM »

I liked 1 a little better, but it was pretty close.

Depechemode1993 · « **Reply #13 on:** January 11, 2005, 08:51:18 PM »

Brian... you have in the files don't you? 1 is the DAT and 2 is the JB3.. I don't know I just picked one.. I mean yeah they sound the same but I dunno I listened to them non biased...

Brian Skalinder · « **Reply #14 on:** January 11, 2005, 09:05:31 PM »

Quote from: Depechemode1993 on January 11, 2005, 08:51:18 PM

Brian... you have in the files don't you? 1 is the DAT and 2 is the JB3..

Nah, all I do in the TXT file is identify the two sources, not which is source 1 and which is source 2. So...care to hazard a guess?

Depechemode1993 · « **Reply #15 on:** January 12, 2005, 05:23:06 PM »

it would be nice if you told which one is which...

BJ · « **Reply #16 on:** January 12, 2005, 05:34:55 PM »

Quote from: Depechemode1993 on January 12, 2005, 05:23:06 PM

it would be nice if you told which one is which...

he does, after you d/l and guess, put your thoughts out for others to see...

taktheride · « **Reply #17 on:** February 21, 2005, 06:35:50 PM »

Quote from: O-dog on January 08, 2005, 08:17:43 PM

From the highly regarded FAQ thread found in the archives here...

[010] What are the pros and cons of the NJB3 v. DAT or MD?

Cons
poor mic-in performance compared to portable DATs (though you shouldn't be running mic-in, anyway)
http://www.taperssection.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=16338.0

HTH

Can you explain a bit more about that point?

F.O.Bean · « **Reply #18 on:** February 22, 2005, 12:01:46 AM »

the crappy mic pre's in most portable dats and the jb3 is poo=poo, so you avoid the mic pre as much as possible and instead run LINE-IN

taktheride · « **Reply #19 on:** February 22, 2005, 11:12:28 AM »

Quote from: Bean on February 22, 2005, 12:01:46 AM

the crappy mic pre's in most portable dats and the jb3 is poo=poo, so you avoid the mic pre as much as possible and instead run LINE-IN

So Bean, here is my possible setup mic>soundpro's batterybox>line-in JB3
would that be bypassing the problem you mentioned?
Or better yet let me ask this..
here is my equipment, how should I hook it up?:
stealth mics (miniplug)
sound pros battery box with levels and bass roll off
JB3

Is there anything else I should get? I see a lot of tapers convert to digital in for the JB3... Does that make a LOT of difference?
I'm not trying to hijack this thread, and I'm not just soliociting answers blindly, I've been reading a LOT on this site and still have a few questions.

Thanks Bean and everyone else.

kfrinkle · « **Reply #20 on:** February 22, 2005, 11:21:53 AM »

I dont see how people can compare JB3 and DATs anymore.

With all the upkeep and media requirements for the DAT, its a real pain in the ass and money pit compared to the JB3. Also, the AD conversion in the JB3 seems to be just fine. I just dont think the DAT users really want to admit it. I still havent found anyone (and I am sure they exist...) that has had problems with the built in AD converter. For a stealth rig, going mics > SP bat box > JB3 kicks ass, you cant beat it (unless you are skinny as fuck like me, in which case it is a bit harder to stealth). It is important to get the second battery for the JB3, so that is gonna cost you a few extra bucks. The leather case doesnt hurt either. Look around and you see a ton of people out there now with seriously bad ass rigs, with a JB3 at the end of it. DAT is dead, praise the Lord. I get tired of all the wankers who claim that its DAT or nothin. I get shit like 'It just doesnt have the warmth of a DAT' all the time, and its bullshit. Perhaps that is why i have 2 JB3s right now.

Nick Graham · « **Reply #21 on:** February 22, 2005, 11:30:26 AM »

I was, and in a way still am, one of the biggest supporters of the JB3. With that being said, I've recently switched back to DAT. After taking a more "official" role as archivist for a local band, I prefer actually having a physical copy of the show when I leave. Having that tape in my back pocket gives me a since of security I'd lost when using a JB3. You also have to figure that there are 15 year old DAT decks still in the field today. JB3s were only introduced like 2 years ago, their reliabilty over time hasn't been proven yet. They've also been discontinued, so service/repair work will likely be impossible.

All other things considered though (speed of transfers,ease of use, etc.) the JB3 could easily be considered superior.

kfrinkle · « **Reply #22 on:** February 22, 2005, 11:49:36 AM »

I actually transfer the wavs to puter, then after mastering, I burn all the raw wavs to Data DVDs. Even DAT tapes shouldnt sit around for more than 5-10 years before you retransfer them, if what I have heard is correct. If you get good DVDs, they easily last 10 years, and you have the raw data, which i find to be better than having only the audio format ...

hexyjones · « **Reply #23 on:** February 22, 2005, 12:22:21 PM »

Quote from: Nick Graham on February 22, 2005, 11:30:26 AM

I was, and in a way still am, one of the biggest supporters of the JB3. With that being said, I've recently switched back to DAT. After taking a more "official" role as archivist for a local band, I prefer actually having a physical copy of the show when I leave. Having that tape in my back pocket gives me a since of security I'd lost when using a JB3. You also have to figure that there are 15 year old DAT decks still in the field today. JB3s were only introduced like 2 years ago, their reliabilty over time hasn't been proven yet. They've also been discontinued, so service/repair work will likely be impossible.

All other things considered though (speed of transfers,ease of use, etc.) the JB3 could easily be considered superior.

That makes no sense what so ever...

Its not like you NEED the JB3 to listen to the recordings...record with them as long as they will last...put another hard drive in - start over...there is almost nothing to wear out...they are the same drives used in thousands of laptops...what do you want "proven"?

The vast JB3 user community has amassed a large archive of repair and maintainence information that addresses most issues anyone will likely encounter...and then some!

nickgregory · « **Reply #24 on:** February 22, 2005, 12:24:50 PM »

no one has any clue how long DVD-Rs last...they havent been around long enough...as for stealthing...I disagree wholeheartedly, the JB3 doesnt touch the D100 in terms of size and the remote, for stealthing purposes. Add to that that if I am using an external A/D, I will trust a coax or 7 pin connection over optical any day...

we all have different opinions, but this view of JB3 being vastly superior is completely overblown

JackoRoses · « **Reply #25 on:** February 22, 2005, 12:25:34 PM »

I like the warmth of analog decks myself, been thinking of running a
portable cassette deck with my current setup just for giggles.
Anyone have a portable cass deck they want to part with?

kfrinkle · « **Reply #26 on:** February 22, 2005, 12:29:13 PM »

Quote from: nickgregory on February 22, 2005, 12:24:50 PM

no one has any clue how long DVD-Rs last...they havent been around long enough...as for stealthing...I disagree wholeheartedly, the JB3 doesnt touch the D100 in terms of size and the remote, for stealthing purposes. Add to that that if I am using an external A/D, I will trust a coax or 7 pin connection over optical any day...

we all have different opinions, but this view of JB3 being vastly superior is completely overblown

I would consider them equal (but I msut admit, I do lean more towards the JB3). Addiing a remote to the JB3 for recording purposes would kick some serious ass.

hexyjones · « **Reply #27 on:** February 22, 2005, 12:40:40 PM »

Quote from: nickgregory on February 22, 2005, 12:24:50 PM

no one has any clue how long DVD-Rs last...they havent been around long enough...as for stealthing...I disagree wholeheartedly, the JB3 doesnt touch the D100 in terms of size and the remote, for stealthing purposes. Add to that that if I am using an external A/D, I will trust a coax or 7 pin connection over optical any day...

we all have different opinions, but this view of JB3 being vastly superior is completely overblown

I dont think anyone really expects any format to last forever...I'm not a "format-ist"...

Any DAT you want to last will need to be transfered to a more stable media...eventually...the sooner the better...

The JB3 doesnt touch the D100 in price either...

I was really referring only to the archival argument...obviously cetain devices have their strengths...

Nick Graham · « **Reply #28 on:** February 22, 2005, 12:50:07 PM »

Quote from: corkscrew on February 22, 2005, 12:22:21 PM

Quote from: Nick Graham on February 22, 2005, 11:30:26 AM
I was, and in a way still am, one of the biggest supporters of the JB3. With that being said, I've recently switched back to DAT. After taking a more "official" role as archivist for a local band, I prefer actually having a physical copy of the show when I leave. Having that tape in my back pocket gives me a since of security I'd lost when using a JB3. You also have to figure that there are 15 year old DAT decks still in the field today. JB3s were only introduced like 2 years ago, their reliabilty over time hasn't been proven yet. They've also been discontinued, so service/repair work will likely be impossible.

All other things considered though (speed of transfers,ease of use, etc.) the JB3 could easily be considered superior.

That makes no sense what so ever...

Its not like you NEED the JB3 to listen to the recordings...record with them as long as they will last...put another hard drive in - start over...there is almost nothing to wear out...they are the same drives used in thousands of laptops...what do you want "proven"?

The vast JB3 user community has amassed a large archive of repair and maintainence information that addresses most issues anyone will likely encounter...and then some!

What doesn't make sense? And at what point did I mention anything about listening to the JB3? Are you sure your response was even directed at my post?

I said I like to have a physical copy when I leave shows. That was pretty much my argument for DAT.

As far replacing the harddrive, there's a lot more that can go wrong than HD failure. And even still, if the HD did "fail", whats to say that files already on it would be retrievable.

Some of us just like having a tape...trusting stored files isn't good enough. No right or wrong....

hexyjones · « **Reply #29 on:** February 22, 2005, 01:09:49 PM »

Quote from: Nick Graham on February 22, 2005, 12:50:07 PM

Quote from: corkscrew on February 22, 2005, 12:22:21 PM
Quote from: Nick Graham on February 22, 2005, 11:30:26 AM
I was, and in a way still am, one of the biggest supporters of the JB3. With that being said, I've recently switched back to DAT. After taking a more "official" role as archivist for a local band, I prefer actually having a physical copy of the show when I leave. Having that tape in my back pocket gives me a since of security I'd lost when using a JB3. You also have to figure that there are 15 year old DAT decks still in the field today. JB3s were only introduced like 2 years ago, their reliabilty over time hasn't been proven yet. They've also been discontinued, so service/repair work will likely be impossible.

All other things considered though (speed of transfers,ease of use, etc.) the JB3 could easily be considered superior.

That makes no sense what so ever...

Its not like you NEED the JB3 to listen to the recordings...record with them as long as they will last...put another hard drive in - start over...there is almost nothing to wear out...they are the same drives used in thousands of laptops...what do you want "proven"?

The vast JB3 user community has amassed a large archive of repair and maintainence information that addresses most issues anyone will likely encounter...and then some!

What doesn't make sense? And at what point did I mention anything about listening to the JB3? Are you sure your response was even directed at my post?

I said I like to have a physical copy when I leave shows. That was pretty much my argument for DAT.

As far replacing the harddrive, there's a lot more that can go wrong than HD failure. And even still, if the HD did "fail", whats to say that files already on it would be retrievable.

Some of us just like having a tape...trusting stored files isn't good enough. No right or wrong....

As far as "listening" - I just meant - you dont need the JB3 after the initial recording...I can only play a dat tape on one thing...

Isnt a DATA format preferable for archiving...?

You could store your JB3 transfered wavs as data files on a DDS drive/tape and have the best of both worlds...

As far as the "when I leave the show" argument...well - you got me on that one...I concede.

Nick Graham · « **Reply #30 on:** February 22, 2005, 01:16:55 PM »

Quote from: corkscrew on February 22, 2005, 01:09:49 PM

As far as "listening" - I just meant - you dont need the JB3 after the initial recording...I can only play a dat tape on one thing...

Isnt a DATA format preferable for archiving...?

You could store your JB3 transfered wavs as data files on a DDS drive/tape and have the best of both worlds...

As far as the "when I leave the show" argument...well - you got me on that one...I concede.

Check. Understand now...

Many valid points for both, be glad we've all got a choice. At least we're not having to use analog!

nickgregory · « **Reply #31 on:** February 22, 2005, 02:14:07 PM »

Quote from: corkscrew on February 22, 2005, 01:09:49 PM

Isnt a DATA format preferable for archiving...?

a DAT tape is data, just like a JB3...bits are bits, no matter what their on

kfrinkle · « **Reply #32 on:** February 22, 2005, 02:16:22 PM »

I will trust my data to DVDs, not tape, but that is just me. Either way, one should always back up your back ups every 5-10 years.

nickgregory · « **Reply #33 on:** February 22, 2005, 02:17:40 PM »

Quote from: kfrinkle on February 22, 2005, 02:16:22 PM

I will trust my data to DVDs, not tape, but that is just me. Either way, one should always back up your back ups every 5-10 years.

not to drive this argument out but DATA tapes have been used for far longer than DVDs have been in existence, and any statements as to the life of DVDs is an estimate at best as they have not been around longer to prove that in....

hexyjones · « **Reply #34 on:** February 22, 2005, 02:40:27 PM »

Quote from: nickgregory on February 22, 2005, 02:14:07 PM

Quote from: corkscrew on February 22, 2005, 01:09:49 PM
Isnt a DATA format preferable for archiving...?

a DAT tape is data, just like a JB3...bits are bits, no matter what their on

well - yes and no...I think...

An Audio DAT only gets to go past the head once(theoretically) and must do so at a rate that will produce a real time data stream...

A data DAT - I think - (someone -t me if Im wrong)...is more like a big slow hardrive...and handles data in more in a more exact way...

wbrisette · « **Reply #35 on:** February 22, 2005, 02:46:29 PM »

Quote from: kfrinkle on February 22, 2005, 11:21:53 AM

Perhaps that is why i have 2 JB3s right now.

That, or the spare parts should one break. The JB3 is a fine piece of gear, but ultimately it's not the answer either. However, it is part of the growth chain. I see all the new small recordable devices as part of the same chain that will at some point give people who can't afford several thousand dollars the same playing field as those more expensive devices.

There are pluses and minuses to not running tape, I do in some ways missing having tape, but then again, it is also nice not to have to spend 2 hours transferring a 2 hour show to the computer. The minus however is we don't know how long DVDs or CDs will really last.

Wayne

Todd R · « **Reply #36 on:** February 22, 2005, 04:30:27 PM »

Quote from: wbrisette on February 22, 2005, 02:46:29 PM

The minus however is we don't know how long DVDs or CDs will really last.

True, I suppose, but I am more worried about whether there'll be a windoze se-nt-xp version 197.b3 that will read shn files and flac files in the year 2020. I've got my masters stored on cdrs on cd spindles in a cool, dry place (very dry actually here in CO). And my bet is that they are much more likely to last longer than the programs that can read them will continue to be available on whatever passes for bill gates' latest hoax perpetrated on the american people. This all assuming that I am too lazy to keep transferring them into new and improved codec formats, which is a pretty safe bet.

kfrinkle · « **Reply #37 on:** February 22, 2005, 04:33:23 PM »

I write all my recordings to dvd in wav format with an md5 checksum. I got the DVDs for it, and I think it best, because yes, in the end, FLAC might go out of style 15 years from now (I know I dont even touch SHN anymore....)

Todd R · « **Reply #38 on:** February 22, 2005, 04:33:52 PM »

Oh yeah, and this is all assuming there'll be some kind of optical drive in a pc in 2020 that can read CDRs after DVDs have already run their course and we're using some kind of sub-micron solid state RAM thingamajiggy.

Nick Graham · « **Reply #39 on:** February 22, 2005, 04:41:30 PM »

Quote from: Todd R on February 22, 2005, 04:33:52 PM

Oh yeah, and this is all assuming there'll be some kind of optical drive in a pc in 2020 that can read CDRs after DVDs have already run their course and we're using some kind of sub-micron solid state RAM thingamajiggy.

Exactly, but I'll still have my Tascam home deck for DAT transfers

kfrinkle · « **Reply #40 on:** February 22, 2005, 04:42:37 PM »

True, originally I had all my shit backed up to CDR. Then I went and put it on DVD. Now I even have a backup copy of alot of my shit on a hard drive ( I got 750gb of hard space, almost always full). When the next best thing comes out, youre damned right I am gonna move to that!

Author Topic: DAT VS. NJB3 (Read 8916 times)

Depechemode1993

Depechemode1993

Depechemode1993

Depechemode1993

Depechemode1993

Depechemode1993

hexyjones

hexyjones

hexyjones

hexyjones