Great points, Jamie, but standars wisdom is to do the phono-EQ curve
analog, before digitizing. I know, there are those who claim software can
do it all, but many people will disagree.
On May 8, 2015 6:27 PM, "Jamie Howarth" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 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.
> 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
> 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
> > 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
> > 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