LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  May 2009

ARSCLIST May 2009

Subject:

SV: [ARSCLIST] Equaliser for playback of 78's

From:

"[DK6400] Brian H. Baldersbæk" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 24 May 2009 02:00:51 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (180 lines)

Hi Jan.

Instead of altering the bandwidth with not-so-good hardware, I'd recommend a
way of getting your signals as unaltered as possible, into a computer and
manipulate it from there.

Have you considered using Audacity or other Open Source software for your
projects ?

The reason for bringing computers into this, is because a lot if not all
restored old recordings are picked up in an analogue manner and afterwards
restored/altered/processed/enhanced by the skills of audio technicians using
computers and software.

I'd say, go with computers for your projects. Good luck.

--
Venligst/Kindest regards/Mfg
____________________________________________
Brian Hougaard Baldersbæk




->-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
->Fra: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
->[mailto:[log in to unmask]]På vegne af Jan Myren
->Sendt: 23. maj 2009 20:23
->Til: [log in to unmask]
->Emne: [ARSCLIST] Equaliser for playback of 78's
->
->
->HI again!
->
->Thanks for many really interesting replys!
->
->By the way I got an EQ, a Technics Stereo Universal Frequency
->Equaliser, the
->SH-9010. Guess it's a vintage, but still great unit.
->
->Look here:
->http://www.stereomanuals.com/vintagetechnics/equalizers/sh9010.htm
->
->This has 2x 5 bands; 60 / 240 /1 k / 4k / 16Khz and +/- 12 dB and can also
->adjust bandwith and frequency. Each "band" can be adjusted
->separately, so it
->is really flexible.
->
->Do you think it may be an idea to "slider" the 16Khz all the way down?
->By the way I have connected it after a Packburn 323A audio noise
->suppressor.
->
->What do you think about this?
->
->Best regards
->Jan
->
->
->
->
->
->-----Opprinnelig melding-----
->Fra: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
->[mailto:[log in to unmask]] På vegne av Tom Fine
->Sendt: 23. mai 2009 13:10
->Til: [log in to unmask]
->Emne: Re: [ARSCLIST] DBX for playback of 78s
->
->One man's opinions, experiences, YMMV, etc. ...
->
->Steve is right that a graphic EQ is helpful, and I also think a
->preamp with
->adjustable turnover and
->rolloff is very necessary. Dial in what sounds best for casual listening,
->dial in what's truest to
->the source for archival tranfers. On later-era 78's, there can be musical
->content at 12K and even
->higher. For acoustic era, there is nothing even at 8K in almost all cases.
->The thing is, not graphic
->EQ just lops off at the stated frequency, they all have a curve that bends
->up or down over a bunch
->more frequencies below and above the target frequency, so tune by ear.
->
->A box of shellacs picked up at a 2nd hand store are just not
->going to sound
->like a modern reissue CD
->made from metal parts. You will never achieve the low noise level and low
->distortion level of
->primary source material. Manufactured shellacs vary in quality from quite
->amazingly clear to fuzzy
->noise-hash messes. It depends on the manufacturer and manufacture date and
->how the thing has been
->stored these many decades.
->
->Of course, cleaning a shellac before playing is key. Deep cleaning the
->groove eliminates many ticks
->and pops and can reduce background hash. You can use a
->vacuum/scrub machine
->(use the appropriate
->cleaning fluid and change the brush and vacuum pad before doing LPs), or a
->simple soft sponge and
->Ivory dish soap works. Rinse thoroughly and pat dry. And of course wet the
->record before sponge-ing
->it. Those blue shammy clothes sold at record-sleeve online stores are a
->great finish-dry cloth.
->Store the cleaned records in new sleeves; as kewl as those ancient
->brown-wrinkled sleeves are, they
->are not appropriate for storage after decades of dust and casual storage.
->
->Steve is also right about bass content. It's usually a compromise between
->rumble reduction and
->legitimate bass content, tune to ear's preferences.
->
->As for dbx (Jan was obviously asking about the companders like
->3BX and 2BX,
->not the closed-loop NR
->system), and the Phase Linear 1000 for that matter, they can help if used
->very carefully, especially
->on non-music content like transcriptions. Very conservative, very careful,
->they can reduce
->background hash a little bit. But, any modern digital NR will do a better
->job if used properly.
->
->Again, one man's opinions, experiences, YMMV, etc.
->
->-- Tom Fine
->
->----- Original Message -----
->From: "Steven C. Barr" <[log in to unmask]>
->To: <[log in to unmask]>
->Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 10:55 PM
->Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] DBX for playback of 78s
->
->
->> ----- Original Message -----
->> From: "John Eberle" <[log in to unmask]>
->>> Here is my take on this : DBX Noise reduction is an encode in
->recording
->>> and decode in playback system designed to reduce tape noise in
->>> professional recording studios . There was an attempt by DBX
->to interest
->the  record
->>> industry in a version designed to be used in the mastering of
->45s and lps
->and
->>> the decode unit was to be incorporated
->>> into the preamp or the playback  system . The company I was working for
->at
->>> the time , Nashville Record  Productions in Music City USA was given an
->>> onsite demo of this system and it was  considered by many
->>> in the industry for adoption as it was quite effective.
->>> The big drawback to the DBX record system and the reason for  its'
->>> lack of acceptance was that the DBX encoded record was most unpleasant
->to
->>> listen to on a playback system that did not have the DBX
->>> decoder ; making  compatibility in the market place a big problem
->>>
->> I always found that the most useful tool for listening to 78rpm
->phonorecords
->> was a standard (and cheaply available these days) 10-band equalizer.
->> Obviously, more advanced eq's (if one can afford them?!) would be of
->> better use!
->>
->> At any rate, 78rpm phonorecords of the 1889-195? era basically had a
->> "bandwidth" (frequency response) of around 50-6000 kHz. THAT is
->> what is on the original recording (although it MIGHT be possible to
->> recreate "implied" notes via a computer?!).
->>
->> I always set my eq to chop the upper octave (no recorded content
->> there!) and the lower couple of octaves (three for acoustic originals!)
->> for the same reason!
->>
->> One caveat! Apparently, the bass response of early-electrical-era
->> 78's was MUCH lower than one might expect; I have MANY
->> pipe-organ recordings (Jesse Crawford et al) mage in that era
->> which exhibit AMAZING low-end content...!!
->>
->> Steven C. Barr
->

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager