Just for the record, I like analog, but I use EQ in the digital domain all the time (in it's analog version,
which includes phase correction).
I find the accuracy and repeatability of computer based EQ a positive benefit. The eye helps the ear.
On May 11, 2015, at 12:00 AM, ARSCLIST automatic digest system wrote:
> Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 14:07:20 -0400
> From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Playing Edison Diamond discs
> Hi Jamie:
> I agree with most of what you're saying, but guys like Doug Pomeroy, who have a long track record of
> making excellent-sounding remasters from disks can read chapter and verse why doing EQ in the
> digital domain doesn't work as well. See Gary Galo's article in ARSC Journal, too. That said, I'm
> not averse to taking something back out to analog, I've always had good luck with it, so I don't see
> that as taboo (ie do what you suggest -- a flat transfer and your 45/45 processing in the digital
> realm, but then I'd take it back out to analog for proper de-emphasis EQ). I also don't think it's
> possible to totally remove surface noise and, in the case of heavily damaged grooves, all the ticks
> and pops without serious, horribly audible digital artifacts. So going for "total removal of the
> disk medium" is a fool's errand, there comes a point where what's left is too thin sounding or
> inherently distorted so it's more annoying tham some surface noise masking the harsh distortion. The
> worthy goal that you're espousing, using modern digital tools, is to get as much music content out
> of the grooves and cancel out as much noise as possible.
> By the way, the description you wrote "the stylus is unyielding and gouges its way through pinch
> effect" exactly describes such record-wreckers as the GE variable reluctance cartridge. Those kinds
> of cartridges (including the cheapo 3-gram trackers included in the console systems) cored out the
> grooves on many a 1950's and 60's mono record, making them not worth buying even in the dollar bins
> at record stores.
> -- Tom Fine
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jamie Howarth" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 6:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Playing Edison Diamond discs
>> I think what frustrates the discussion is that digital it is possible to exactly duplicate what you
>> are achieving mechanically plus a whole lot more.
>> It's not that the stylus is unyielding and gouges its way through pinch effect (one hopes). It's
>> simply not wired to communicate what it's doing in that axis. There is nothing magical about 45/45
>> coil placement that makes it suck compared to 90/0... You want to use the GE? Terrific. It still
>> moves vertically it just couples the entire mass of the tone arm and bearing to that motion rather
>> than absorb it locally in the cantilever. Terrific.
>> To each his own.
>> Every iota of geometry in the groove/stylus interface can be deduced from 45/45. All of the
>> mechanical noise cancellation or the facsimile thereof achieved via wiring for 90/0 can be
>> achieved digitally, and then some.
>> I'll bet Ortofon says nothing about doing the declick and cleanup from a non-de-emphasized
>> digitization but it's a good idea before all the bass boost and treble rolloff. Do the RIAA or
>> whatever curve afterward. Slap some on in the monitor so you know what you're listening to. But
>> preserve and restore right off the cartridge. Don't bake in anything that loses information.
>> Please pardon the misspellings and occassional insane word substitution I'm on an iPhone
Audio Restoration & Mastering Services
193 Baltic St Brooklyn, NY 11201-6173
[log in to unmask]