Conference cookie::notes$archive:cd_v1

Will the Marantz unit have copyguard circuitry?

--PSW

    Not from what I read (July "Audio").
    			Steve

    what will copy guard circuitry do? Will it prevent me copying
    pre-recorded DATs or will it stop me recording LP/CD to DAT? If
    the latter then I fail to see how anyone could sell DAT with copyguard
    circuitry.
    
    Richard Briggs
    UK SWAS
    

    
    The copyguard is *supposed* to prevent copying of CDs with an
    "anti-copy" signal on them.  It might be possible to so encode LPs
    as well???  
    
    The controversy is whether or not non-encoded material will trip
    the circuit (detractors say yes) and if the sound quality is
    compromised (again, detractors say yes).
                         
    CBS Labs, who invented the circuit, have been loath to provide full
    information so as to prevent pirates from developing cracking schemes.
     
    As far as not being able to sell DAT machines with copyguard, *HEY*
    now you're getting the whole idea. The record companies want to
    kill DAT to protect their record high profits.
    
    

    I can't site any reference for this information, but I know that
    I've either read or heard that the plan is for ALL prerecorded material
    to include the 60 db notch at 3.8Khz.  This would preclude the DATs
    from copying ANY subsequent releases, making it only useful for
    recording your own oldies or live music.
    

    If I'm not mistaken, I remember a previous note that stated that
    the protection would only apply to digital to digital recording.
    
    If I can record the audio output of my CD player into my DAT, the
    results will be as good as my ears can detect.
    
    Jeff

    Re: .6
    
    Unfortunately, the CBS proposal is for an "analog" protection scheme
    that would hit you no matter how many steps you went through in
    the middle.  LPs, cassettes and CDs could be mangled in this fashion
    and you'd be unable to record the music on your DAT deck, if it
    had "the chip".
    				Steve

Indeed, it is for an "analog" protection scheme. Since this scheme 
destroys information on the recording, no system will ever be able to get it
back.  Detractors  say  that  losing 3800 Hz to 4000 Hz will muck up a real,
useful  part  of  the  sound spectrum, not to mention affecting harmonics of
other audible tones.

And, I understand this proposal is quite serious. A friend called to warn me
that  it  is  before the senate as S506 and if you care about the quality of
your  recorded  music  (analog  as  well  as digital) you will write to your
congressman/senator and complain.

    
    Let me see if I understand this:
    
    	The DAT recorder will have a -60db notch at 3.8Khz, so ANY incoming
    analog signal will have that section of the material attenuated
    to inaudibility? And prerecorded DAT's will have 3.8Khz pushed UP
    60db?
    	Does this mean you can't record ANYTHING on a DAT?
    
    	Do these fools think that this will have "no audible impact"?
    Do they think they can make filters that steep that don't ring or
    distort?
    
    			YECH!
    

    Re .9
    
    The DAT will NOT have a 60 db attenuator on its' input.  ALL
    prerecorded (I mean ALL LP's, Cassettes, CD's AND DAT's) material
    will have a 60 db notch centered approximately at 3.8Khz.  Your
    DAT deck will be unable to record from any of these Copy Guarded
    sources.
   
    You will be able to copy prerecorded material produced before the
    advent of Copyguard or live material.  Nothing else.
    

    

>    You will be able to copy prerecorded material produced before the
>    advent of Copyguard or live material.  Nothing else.

You will be able to listen to prerecorded material produced before the
advent of Copyguard or live material.  Nothing else.

BTW, this copyguard circuitry is supposedly intended to be required on *all*
recorders, not just DATs.  The record industry is supposedly all worried about
those dual-cassette boom-boxes.

On last week's Audiophile Edition on NPR it was reported that the Copyguard
standard was turned over to the National Bureau of Standards; everyone hopes
that it will be turned down there and die.

/john

    
    Re: .10
    
    It sure starts making DAT look like a waste of time ... one of its
    so-called benefits is that you can copy "copies" without any loss
    of information, so when you tape starts to wear thin you just re-
    record it on a new tape. If DATs are copy protected against themselves
    then why buy them in the first place, there ain't going to be anything
    worth recording at high quality.
    
    S'pose they will be putting a copy protect on the record side of
    the players next ;-)
    
    mb

    
    This may sound asinine, but I am about ready to stop buying records,
    CDs, etc. if this copyguard crap goes into effect.
    
    As painful as that might be, the industry has consistently overlooked
    surveys (some of which they paid for) saying most taping is done
    by the people who buy the most records.
    
    I tape like crazy, I also buy over 50 records a year and in my salad
    days bought around 300 a year! 
    
    If this bull***t goes through Congress, I think a boycott is in
    order.

     I used to tape albums quite a bit to be used in the car when I
    couldn't stand the radio.  Now that I've found something that I
    like, I do it much less than I used to.
    
    What I DO now with taping is make collections of various artists
    because I don't really like listening to the same artist for 45
    minutes.  This copygaurd stuff is really going to piss me off, and
    I'll probably stop buying records if it happens.  I buy over 100
    albums/CD's per year, and see no problem with what I do. 
    
    Looks like it's time to write my congressman.
    
    -bill

    
    	And if I play a copyguarded LP or CD on my current table or
    CD player, what will it sound like? Mud? 
    
    	So even if I don't record, I'll get to have my $K stereo sound
    like a K-mart special? Is this the record companies' means of
    retaliating against those of us who've been complaining about their
    sound for years? 
    
    		"You think our stuff sounds bad now! Just wait!"
    
    				-eric

>    	And if I play a copyguarded LP or CD on my current table or
>    CD player, what will it sound like? Mud? 

You misunderstand.  There are no modifications planned for listening to
copyguarded LPs or CDs.  CBS claims you won't hear the difference.

/john

    
    What does the audio-equipment-manufacturing community have to say about
    all this ? As they are trying to sell their gear in terms of how good
    it sounds, surely they see copyguarding as a threat to their future
    profitability ? I.e., if all hi-fi gear sounds like sh*t because of
    copyguarded source material, people aren't going to bother spending as
    much on it. 
    
    
    Trev

    re .16
    
    I think that maybe you misunderstand.  If this system is used, all
    prerecorded material will be degraded.  You can't insert a 60db
    notch in the middle of the audio spectrum and have it go completely
    unnoticed.
    

>    I think that maybe you misunderstand.  If this system is used, all
>    prerecorded material will be degraded.

I understand fully.  My reply was to someone who, based on his question about
"current players", appeared to think that new players were going to be able
to compensate for the degradation.

That is not the case.  Nothing can reinsert information which has been removed.

/john

    My reading of S506 indicates that not only will it be difficult
    to re-insert the missing material- it will be illegal to do so,
    and illegal to build/buy/posess/sell a box that reinserts it.
    	
    What a crock.  I'm writing Kerry.  Time for a nastygram.
    

    ... all these discussions are about the left-hand side of the Atlantic,
    does anyone know what us over in 240v land (UK) can expect???
    
    US law doesn't apply over here (except for DEC export licensing!!),
    so will we be free of copyguard, and if so what is to stop everyone
    buying all their CDs etc over here, thus totally destroying the
    US music market???
    
    Perhaps an addendum to the law will appear, making it illegal to
    listen to non-distorted music!!
    
    mb

Pardon me, but I'm losing track of all this.
Can I have a review of the matter?
Copyguard puts at 60dB notch at 3.840KHz....
    Where? In all normal source material?  
    What are the backwards and forwards compatibility issues?
    (Old media on new machines and new media on old machines.)
The information at 3.840KHz goes away....
    someplace, but there must be a plan  to restore it independent
    of the recording process....
The copyguard circuitry is in DAT machines....
    which are just like analog devices from the outside, capable of recording
    line or mic signals.  Is there any digital to digital path?

A recap, please....

- tom]

>    ... all these discussions are about the left-hand side of the Atlantic,
>    does anyone know what us over in 240v land (UK) can expect???

Check out what's going on in the EC Parliament.  At least one proposal
has been discussed:  go to a two-tier pricing system, with a lower price
for non-copyguarded and a higher price for copy-guarded material.

If it happens here, it will probably happen there.

>   if so what is to stop everyone buying all their CDs etc over here,
>   thus totally destroying the US music market???

Not everyone can afford to fly over there to buy individual items.  U.S. law
already prohibits the commercial importation of any intellectual property
licensed to U.S. companies.

/john

>Copyguard puts at 60dB notch at 3.840KHz....

Right.

>    Where? In all normal source material?  

Yes.  Or at all source material from record companies who feel like screwing us.

>    What are the backwards and forwards compatibility issues?
>    (Old media on new machines and new media on old machines.)

This only changes the media.  Players are not changing.

>The information at 3.840KHz goes away.... someplace, but there must be a plan 
>to restore it independent of the recording process....

Wrong.  It's gone.  For good.  What's gone can't be restored.

>The copyguard circuitry is in DAT machines.... which are just like analog
>devices from the outside, capable of recording line or mic signals.  Is there
>any digital to digital path?

This will depend on the machine, just as with CD players (some of which already
have digital outputs).  If there is a rate difference, then the digital output
of a CD would have to go through a rate converter (a big hairy fast fourier
transform) before it could be put into the digital input of a DAT recorder.

Copyguard would be in the *digital* portion of the DAT recorder, so that it
would not be bypassed when making digital copies, either as above or of pre-
recorded material released on DAT.

** Write to your senator, if you are a U.S. voter.  See note 783.21 **

/john

    I really think that we are all worrying about nothing.  Stop and
    think of the ramifications of ALL pre-recorded music having a copyguard
    process encoded on it.  
    
    Most of the taping done in homes (most of the market) is taping
    prerecorded music.  Not much live taping is done in homes, probably
    only 1 percent or less... If this went through, you would kill the
    entire home recorder business.  Who is going to spend $500 or more
    on a home recorder if you can't tape any records, FM or CDs??? 
    Not me or anyone I know!  And it will hurt sales of classical music
    as the purists will say they can here the difference (although it
    will probably be slight, you probably would be able to hear subtle
    differences in strings, solo voices and such).
    
    Probably half of Congress has a home tape recorder.  You think they
    want to obsolete all their fun too?
    
    I just don't think killing an industry to add a 10% profit to another
    is ever going to play in Congress, let alone Peoria....
    
    Jim
    

    
    I think that we *do* have something to worry about it.  It has been
    reported that since people in the audio industry have heard the
    copyguard circuit and dislike it, that there is  less momentum for
    it in Congress.
    
    Obviously, audio equipment manufacturers are miffed and well they
    should be.  Seems like there is a lack of cooperation between the
    record industry and the audio industry, much of it centered around
    taping.
    
    Recall that as recently as ten years ago, most home stereos had
    no tape facilities.  Now almost any home stereo system has at least
    one tape deck and many have more.  A lot of this has to do with
    the fact that cassettes are much easier to deal with than open-reel
    or eight-tracks were and the evolution of portable cassette players
    which basically began in the early seventies when Sony began selling
    the first boom boxes, to be followed by the Walkman.
    
    However, to get back on track, there *is* a bill which is being
    considered to force the use of copyguard circuits in tape recorders,
    and if we do not voice our opposition it *might* get passed.  
    
    Apathy now could be very expensive later.
    
    As far as killing one industry to protect another, how about auto
    import quotas or the Chrysler bailout, etc. etc.   
    
                                                 

    
    Remember the "royalty" tax/fee that was proposed for blank tape
    a while back? I have a feeling this whole copyguard thing is just
    a way to bring that back into being. I believe that what will happen
    is that record companies will offer two versions of every album/CD.
    One with the copyguard code embedded preventing recording. The
    second will be absent the copyguard code but with an extra "recording 
    fee/license" on the price. This extra fee will then give you legal
    permission to make recordings. 
    
    I don't really think the record companies want to prevent us from
    making recordings. They just want us to pay them for it. And this is
    how they're going to get the tax/fee imposed. 
    
                 

How about returning copyguarded CDs to the store where they were bought for
"a new one".  If enough people did this the store would be returning
hundreds of "defects" to the manufacturer.

					Tim

    RE :.27
    
    Do you really believe record companies will produce TWO versions of
    EVERY recording - one with, and one without copyguard?  One of the
    biggest cost for recording companies is producing the master.  This
    scheme would require two master, two sets of labling, packaging etc.
    That amounts to a EXTREAMLY HIGH cost!  Record companies would never
    accept this plan.
    
    
    						-Paul
     

>    Do you really believe record companies will produce TWO versions of
>    EVERY recording - one with, and one without copyguard?

This is precisely the European Community proposal!

/john

    
    The best way to fight the stuff.......
    
    Don't buy it !!!!!!
    
    Can you imagine if everyone boycotted this stuff, didn't buy one
    thing with this copy guard stuff.
    
    		SUPPLY AND DEMAND  very powerfull stuff.
    
    Too bad everybody can't join together on something like this eh.

	I called the 800 number, too.  Here is the letter they include in
the mailing.  It seems a little weak to me, yet clear and to the point.
Anyway, if each person that reads this can afford $0.66 and three envelopes
it could just be worth it.

	They also recommend that you write your newspaper.  They say:

"A letter to the Editor of your local newspaper can be a very effective way
 of making your voice heard on home taping legislation.  Not only does a
 published letter state your opposition, it also alerts your neighbors to
 an issue that will affect them.  Your elected representatives often monitor
 local papers to learn which issues concern their constituents -- Your letter
 tells them you consider this topic an important one.

	You might want to include some of the following points in your letter:

	- DATs will not make perfect clones of the original recordings
	- Consumers will not want to buy DAT recorders disabled by anti-taping
		micro chips
	- The anti-taping technology will affect the quality of the sound of
		prerecorded music
	- The many different ways blank tape and recorders are used
	- What royalty tax will actually cost consumers
	- Why you think a royalty tax would be unfair"

If I find the correct note in the Audio notesfile I'll post this there, too.

Dan

The addresses for MA are:

The Honorable Joseph Early
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.  20515

The Honorable Joseph Early
U.S. Senate
Washington, D.C.  20510

The Honorable Edward Kennedy
U.S. Senate
Washington, D.C.  20510

For those in other states check in your telephone directory blue pages or
put a reply in here with the state and I'll put in you Reps or Senators.



Dear Representative Joseph Early,
{Dear Senator John Kerry,}
{Dear Senator Edward Kennedy,}

	I am writing to let you know that I am against any legislation
that would tax or disable audio or video recorders.  Taping at home for
personal use has been legal for years, and there is no reason why Congress
should change this.

	A royalty tax would unfairly penalize my interest in, and support of,
popular music.  When I buy an album and preserve it on tape, or make copies
to play in my car or on lmy Walkman, I am not taking sales away from the record
companies.  In fact, I believe that just the opposite is true: I usually end up
buying more records, tapes and CDs.

	An anti-taping chip would unfairly restrict my use of my audio or
video recorder.  I don't think that the recording industry should tell me
what I can or can't tape at home for my own personal use and enjoyment.

	Home taping is largely responsible for the record profits that the
recording industry has enjoyed in recent years.  Please vote against any
legislation that would interfere with my right to tape at home for my own
personal use.

					Sincerely,

I recently cancelled my membership in the CBS record club (see 67.64).
I wrote them a letter, listing among the reasons CBS' involvement
in "copyguarding".  Here was the club's response to this, from
"Douglas Mitchell, membership director".

"We regret your decision to cancel your membership, but want to
take this time to express our position in this matter.

"The master quality duplication of copyrighted recordings by persons
using the Digital Audio Tape (DAT) recorders adversely affects the
income and threatens the rights, careers and incentives of artists,
music publishers, composers, and record producers.  CBS Records Technology
has developed a system called 'Copy Code' to protect these rights.

"This system has been exhaustively tested and endorsed by a special
engineering committee of the Recording Industry Association of America
(RIAA).  In addition, the International Federation of Phonographic
Industries (the European equivalent of the RIAA) has endorsed Copy
Code.  Copy Code encoding does not degrade the sound of recorded
product, and the notch cannot be heard by listening to the
recording.

"A further judgement about the efficacy of the Copy Code system
will be made by the National Bureau of Standards, which has
been instructed by Congress to provide an impartial test of
the full system.  A number of major recording companies have announced
that they will not encode their product until the Congress enacts
legislation requiring inclusion of a Copy Code decoder in all
digital audio tape recordes imported into and/or sold in the United
States.

"The compact discs currently sold by Columbia House are not encoded.
It has always been, and will continue to be, the policy of Columbia
House to provide our members with the musical performances of
outstanding artists manufactured according to standards that assure the
best playback of these performances that technology permits."

Jim Stratton

    re: .33
    
    Did I miss something or does this statement...
    
>    "The compact discs currently sold by Columbia House are not encoded.
> It has always been, and will continue to be, the policy of Columbia
> House to provide our members with the musical performances of
> outstanding artists manufactured according to standards that assure the
> best playback of these performances that technology permits."

    ...pretty much _admit_ (albeit tacitly) that Copyguard goofs-up
    the sound quality of the disc?  It would be nice if CBS could make
    up their minds on this issue: is Copyguard audible (and thus "bad")
    or not?  Scheeezzeess!
    
    <sigh>,
    David.

    Well, SONY bought CBS Records today. Copyguard is DEAD, DEAD, DEAD!

    Ah, the Second Law of Big Business:
    
    	If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em!
    
    (What's the First Law, you ask?)
    
    	It's immoral to allow a sucker to keep his money.
    
    --- jerry

    re:.35
    
    Is Sony really going to shelf Copyguard?  Has Sony stated this
    anywhere in print?  I'm all for shelving it, I just hope Sony
    also is!
    
    And if this is true, where does that leave Congress on doing their
    testing and law making?

Don't jump so quickly -- there are two very distinct parts of Sony:

	the music publishers
	the equipment producers

They were at odds over this issue before this; they may still be.

    From the Rocky Mountain News business section:
    
    
    CBS Inc. announced yesterday it will sell its worldwide record
    division to Sony Corp. of Japan for about 2 billion dollars.
    
    The deal is expected to close in early 1988 pending the necessary
    governmental approvals, CBS said in a statement.
    
    ....
    
    CBS president and chief executive Laurence A. Tisch said Sony 
    presented "a very attractive offer in terms of value to the 
    shareholders, while it also provides an important source of capital
    and allows us to focus all of our energies and resources on our
    core business of broadcasting."
    
    Under Tisch, CBS has undergone a major restructuring since last
    fall, selling its magazine, book and music publishing units for
    about 1.2 billion dollars.  He was reported to favor selling the
    records group if the price were right because of the inherent
    volatility of the records business.
    
    ....
    
    The records group has been increasingly profitable in recent
    years, helped by hits from entertainers such as Michael Jackson,
    Bruce Springsteen, Ricky Skaggs and Cyndi Lauper.
    
    ....
    
    CBS chairman William S. Paley said that CBS records "has contributed
    so importantly to the history of music in our times.  I am pleased
    to note that Sony has earned a global reputation for excellence
    and is a company with which CBS has had a long and productive relationship."

    		From New York (AP) -- reprinted without permission.
    
    =ken
    

    RE .33

    I also quit CBS/Columbia House recently.  I cited lack of material,
    high price, annoyance of sending back cards each month, sales tax (they
    seem to be charging more than Mass. 5%), and CBS's stand on
    copyguarding.

    I got back one letter acknowledging my cancellation and offering the
    "positive option" (only send back the card if you want something).  I
    then received the same form letter as .33 about copyguard.  Maybe the
    message will get through if enough people hit them in the pocketbook.
    Let's hope Sony kills copyguard.

    ---Phil

    The last reply in this note is from Nov. 87.  Is DAT dead?

    
    DAT is alive and well in the pro audio sector.  Sony, Technics and
    others are marketing machines through pro audio dealers, prices
    starting around $1500.  Blank tapes from Maxell and others starts
    at about $10 a tape.
    
    The manufacturers appear to be holding off on the consumer market
    until the legal questions get cleared up.   Until then, the prices
    will be high and the availability limited.
    
    

    Tower Records in Boston has a few ( *very* few ) items available
    on DAT.  The price is about $32 per DAT tape.  I can't think of
    any music I want that badly, but I'm sure the price will come down
    eventually.  I'm certainly not planning to stop buying CDs in the
    forseeable future.
    
    B