LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


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 2015

ARSCLIST May 2015

Subject:

Re: Playing Edison Diamond discs

From:

"Richard L. Hess" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 8 May 2015 20:15:13 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (152 lines)

I have said from the beginning I know what I don't know about disc 
reproduction and I'm not sure I have the time to learn...so that is why 
I keep drawing parallels from disc to tape.

Here's another one: In playing full-track mono tapes, a good friend told 
me "don't knock it until you try it." Well, I'm doing a 1951 full-track 
tape that is a home recording, but the person worked in a radio station 
(may have owned it). It's full track mono at 7.5 in/s and it is one of 
the cleanest recordings of this type I have heard. The only negative is 
some hum and a few harmonics, but RX4 should remove that without too 
much damage.

I redid a good percentage of the Mullin-Palmer tapes after installing 
the full-track head back in 2001-2002.

Anyway, while it is theoretical that the 45/45 cartridge can do 
everything just like summing an NAB stereo head can supposedly get most 
of the sounds. DIN stereo is even better. BUT the full-track head wins.

A lot of my azimuth investigations for summing two stereo channels 
revolves around trying to get the best reproduction possible from mono 
tapes when there are no really good mono cassette players (on the scale 
of a Nakamichi Dragon).

So, when I read Goran's article, I thought I'd investigate the mono 
Ortofon...and compare it to my Stanton 681s...which I really like and 
have for over 40 years.

Cheers,

Richard


On 2015-05-08 6:27 PM, Jamie Howarth 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. 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
>
-- 
Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
Aurora, Ontario, Canada                             647 479 2800
http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.

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

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