Yes, those devices..it doesn't matter if you agree or not. It's simply not accurate to claim that DBX of all people misattributed upwards compression as upwards expansion. The dynamic range expander devices like the 118 etc do upwards expansion in how everybody understands that term. The only device DBX has ever put out with actual upwards compression is the DBX Quantum which is an entirely digital multiband compressor similar to the TC finalizer which also did upwards compression and is also entirely digital. You aren't going to find an analog upwards compressor(Orbans AGC work kind of like upwards compression though in some of their units from the 80ies), and if there is one out there, especially around the time of VCA dynamic processor circuits, it's incredibly rare. Just to clarify though, the 118 etc units do upwards expansion and downwards compression. Not upwards compressionLook at the image he posted, where it says 'upward expander'.No it isn't117, 118, 1BX, etc.and if you are talking about the device i think you are talking aboutWe're talking about 1971 technology, after all. I'm not saying it was a good idea.It just doesn't make sense with hardware given that the noisefloor is going to be your bottleneck trying to shrink crest factor that way.Just because I'm saying something is industry standard doesn't mean I agree with it. McDSP themselves/himself might not even agree with it. But his most famous users know what he means when he says it because they know the original hardware, so using that term is smart marketing.If you was going to try ascribe an expander in such a way to distinguish upwards compression then the only other terminology that would make sense is the terminology that Flux coined. They refer to upwards compression as "de-expansion" and upwards expansion as "de-compression"
Statistics: Posted by TIMT — Thu Oct 17, 2024 4:16 am