I hope this thread does not suggest any nostalgia for the technique, which
was *faute de mieux* at best and invariably produced audible artifacts.
Vinyl noise may have masked some of them but masters manually de-clicked
proved useless for digital reissue. Digital noise reduction strategies now
make the tiresome task of removing bits of tape and splicing back together
seem as quaintly outmoded as the washboard and the butter churn.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> This was one way it was done. The other way was using excellent condition
> metal parts, more of which seemed to exist back in the day. With modern
> methods, when you buy something like a Mosaic box set -- which has some
> metal parts and also uses mass media shellacs -- you can really hear why
> it's such a good idea to track down the very best source material possible
> and not assume digital or analog "repair" can save the sound. A modern
> transfer of a metal part that's in good condition can sound shockingly
> realistic, very close to what the microphone was hearing except for a sharp
> rolloff of the top end. When you have to use commercially-issued shellacs
> -- even those that weren't tortured with steel needles at many grams of
> tracking force -- you lose so much quality because of loud surface noise,
> ticks and pops and the like. Modern digital remedies, when used
> conservatively, can help with this. The old-school guys had a different
> idea of EQ vs. modern transfer guys. I think the older generation
> concentrated more on the bass up into the midrange and figured there was
> little to no high treble to mess with, so they'd roll it off to cut the
> surface noise. Modern engineers, the really good ones, seem to use
> spectrum-analysis tools to figure out where there's more music and where
> there's more noise and then EQ accordingly. The results can sound "nasal"
> to some ears (including my own), and I think some modern reissues aren't
> putting in all the bass that exists on the disks, but it's good not to have
> microsecond lapses from razor edits and too-sharp cutoff of treble
> information. That said, there are older reissues where metal parts existed
> and were in good shape that smoke modern attempts at the same material
> without access to metal parts (lost, stolen, destroyed, etc).
> -- Tom Fine
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Roth" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 1:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Reducing crackle from 78 rpm records the analogue
> way on 70's reissue LP's
> Hello all.
> In the 70's I work at "Club 99" [operatic reissue) records.
> I would use a razor blade and a splicing block to "de-click" the tape
> transfers of some very scratchy 78s.
> It would take about 3 hours to de-click a 4-minute aria - verrrrry tedious.
> Then, we would take the tape to our sound engineer in Manhattan, David
> Hancock (RIP) and he would so some expert EQ.
> Ben Roth
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]**GOV <[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Jan
> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 12:22 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Reducing crackle from 78 rpm records the analogue way
> on 70's reissue LP's
> I spent the week-end going through my collection of 70's and 80's
> compilation albums of old jazz records remastered by John R.T. Davies and
> Robert Parker.
> I must say I am a bit impressed by the way they were able to suppress
> noise and especially the crackle form the old 78's they used.
> May anybody remember (or know) how they did that and what kind of machines
> they used back in the analogue days?
> All the best
Dennis D. Rooney
303 W. 66th Street, 9HE
New York, NY 10023