Hi Dave:
What are you tracking at? The groove-gougers, including those using the old GE VR cartridges
probably did the most damage by tracking too heavy. As far as I know, the VR's can't track any lower
than 2 grams, but that should be OK if the alignment is A-OK and the tonearm is in working
condition.
For 78's, I think the wider grooves are somewhat heartier, so you can track heavier and use a less
compliant cartridge without doing damage. After all, the records were designed to stand up to at
least a couple dozen plays with a steel needle tracking at a half-pound or so!
That said, I just don't think a circa 1950 cartridge has the technology to translate into electric
signals all of the information in the grooves. I just wouldn't go there, but I'm glad you guys using
the antiques are getting good results.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Burnham" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 12:28 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Playing Edison Diamond discs
> As I've said previously, I used the VRII successfully for many years with no complaints. Certainly
> I would never play a stereo LP with this cartridge, not even a mono compatible one, but I never
> noticed damage to a mono LP or a 78 from using it.
>
> db
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On May 11, 2015, at 12:01 AM, Clark Johnsen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Agree totally with Tom -- in his first paragraph.>>
>> Beyond that, into the second one, he shifts from how well a cartridge (the
>> VRII) might play a record, into how it might wear a record out. Those are
>> two separate topics. While I myself have not experienced the wear-out,
>> owing to my discreet reluctance (not variable) to press ahead with repeated
>> playing, I can and do attest to its ability however to get great sound out
>> of 78s on the first playing. And on the second. Which is all one needs to
>> capture the signal.
>>
>> While I've said this before, perhaps it's worth repeating: As a
>> practitioner of "high-end audio" record playing, I have applied many of
>> those unusual procedures to my beloved 78s, to success. Nowhere online have
>> I seen anything about these practices, so what should I do with this
>> abstruse knowledge? Seriously. I'm asking.
>>
>> Please don't say, Make a cassette. Or, Make a CD. (I can't, anyway.) One
>> big improvement lies in the enhanced linearity of the bass, which requires
>> a full-range reproduction system to appreciate, which most folks don't
>> have. (Just sayin'.)
>>
>> clark
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> On May 8, 2015, at 4:56 PM, "Goran Finnberg [log in to unmask]" <
>>>>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dough Pomeroy:
>>>>>
>>>>> You are not the only responder to
>>>>>> have stated that a mono mix should
>>>>>> be made before de-clicking and other
>>>>>> noise removal work is done. I have
>>>>>> heard this view stated in the past, but
>>>>>> I can't agree.
>>>>>
>>>>> And now for the ultimate way to recover the most from any lateral cut
>>>>> mono disk record:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://ortofon.com/hifi/products/cartridges/2m-series/2m-mono-se
>>>>>
>>>>> "Why should you use a dedicated mono cartridge for playing vinyl mono
>>>>> records?
>>>>>
>>>>> On a mono record the signal is cut only in the lateral dimension whereas
>>>>> a stereo record is cut at +/- 45 degrees into the opposing groove-walls,
>>>>> see figure to the right.
>>>>>
>>>>> A stereo cartridge will be able to replay stereo and mono records,
>>>>> because mono is a special version of stereo where the right and left
>>>>> channels are identical.
>>>>>
>>>>> While a stereo cartridge can play mono records it can’t achieve the same
>>>>> signal precision between the two channels. A mono cartridge produces but
>>>>> one signal that is directed to both channels in the system. A mono
>>>>> cartridge playing a mono record produces a more forceful and stable image
>>>>> with a fuller, more impactful sound.
>>>>>
>>>>> Another big advantage in using a mono cartridge to play mono records is
>>>>> the absence of response to vertical movement. This means that a mono
>>>>> cartridge is basically immune to the pinching effect which comes into
>>>>> action when the stylus is pushed vertically upward in very narrow grooves.
>>>>> Also the response to dust, dirt and wear is reduced substantially. The
>>>>> final result will be a clean and noiseless reproduction of the mono record.
>>>>>
>>>>> The listening experience will be significantly improved when using a
>>>>> high quality true mono cartridge for the replay of your mono records."
>>>>>
>>>>> End Quote Ortofon.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1/ Complete removal of the pinch distortion that can reach up to 30 %
>>>>> second harmonic when played by a stereo cartridge.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2/ Free removal of dust dirt ticks and scratches and audible distortion
>>>>> caused by wear.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3/ Up to 20 dB less rumble by using an only horisontal sensing replay
>>>>> device that excludes the vertical component where all the rumble hides..
>>>>>
>>>>> Makes the uses of digital click/crackle/hiss removal tools much more
>>>>> effective.
>>>>>
>>>>> So ditch all your stereo catridges and play the disks as they were meant
>>>>> to be played !!!
>>>>>
>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I find the best contemporary digital
>>>>>> de-clickers are so good that they
>>>>>> fully remove the distortions caused
>>>>>> by scratches. Once these and other
>>>>>> defects are replaced by sound
>>>>>> synthesized from surrounding audio,
>>>>>> they effectively vanish and do not
>>>>>> depend on mixing for removal.
>>>>>
>>>>> By using a true lateral responding device only then the digital noise
>>>>> removal tools work much faster since there is less to do.
>>>>>
>>>>> As you have mentioned, the stereo
>>>>>> transfer of a lateral recording allows
>>>>>> distorted areas on only one groove
>>>>>> wall to be manually replaced by a
>>>>>> less distorted section from the
>>>>>> corresponding section from the
>>>>>> opposite wall, and this is indeed a
>>>>>> powerful tool.
>>>>>
>>>>> And you have lost 3 dB S/N that is free when using a lateral responding
>>>>> device only.
>>>>>
>>>>> A mono mix prior to de-clicking just
>>>>>> combines the non-vertical noise from
>>>>>> both channels. I find processing the
>>>>>> stereo before making the mono to
>>>>>> be a superior approach, but I understand
>>>>>> there are those who disagree.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus the noise increases 3 dB because it is not correlated ie is not in
>>>>> phase between L/R.
>>>>>
>>>>> The audio signal, is identical on the left or right track thus when
>>>>> combined increases by +6dB thus we always gain +3 dB net by using a lateral
>>>>> responding device which we get by summing L+R.
>>>>>
>>>>> It´s free. to do.
>>>>>
>>>>> But then the very best to get the most out of any lateral recorded disk
>>>>> is a lateral responding, mono only, cartridge as stated by Ortofon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because then we remove all the imperfections in using a stereo cartridge
>>>>> trying to extract the audio from lateral cut disks.
>>>>>
>>>>> The EMT OFD65 with a truncated elliptical is very good for 78´s.
>>>>>
>>>>> And it is a lateral responding only device too.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Goran Finnberg
>>>>> The Mastering Room AB
>>>>> Goteborg
>>>>> Sweden
>>>>>
>>>>> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>
>>>>> Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough to
>>>>> make them all yourself. - John Luther
>>>>>
>>>>> (\__/)
>>>>> (='.'=)
>>>>> (")_(") Smurfen:RIP
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
|