I have been using Dartpro MT - I like it because it has a "Filter builder" -
the program doesn't like 24 bit but I transfer at 24/96,000 , resample to
16/96000 then decrackle starting with a setting of 50 repeating the process
with an increase each time by another 10 i.e. 50, 60, 70, 80 (maximum) if
more noise is still there, I run repeatedly at 80 until the reported
interventions get to a number of 4000 or so. I can then manually remove any
clicks that are left.
I don't use the denoise or dehiss, preferring to use declick at very low
settings (78's don't have hiss - what you hear as hiss is the combination of
many little clicks.
I start with a setting of 2 then 4 then 6 . I leave the settings the same
then just find whether 1 or 2 or 3 passes will polish the higher noise away.
Decrackle doesn't affect the high frequencies but declick does. This process
takes a little time but I almost never find that any distortion is
introduced to the sound. I hate getting to the end of the record where the
really growly trumpet sound is a distorted mess, and this workflow prevents
that. - Mickey Clark
-----Original Message-----
From: George Brock-Nannestad
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2017 10:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cleaning up records, (was) Finding dates for 78's
From: George Brock-Nannestad
Brewster, first of all my deepest respect for the initiative that is making
so
much available that would never see a re-issue. I have my strong
reservations
about re-issues because there are so few sound restorers that I respect, and
because they as well as those who do a shabby work have to work to the
dictum
of the re-issuing entity "we are not in the business of selling noise".
Hence I much prefer undoctored transfers that anybody may doctor to their
liking, because that does not impose any taste on anybody else. I do not
agree
that it is good that many have been restored. That said, it would depend on
what the Internet Archive aims at.
If it is catering to the general and still not very informed public, then I
sadly agree -- restoration may be necessary. However, if you intend to make
source material available to the discerning academic, then you must also
provide a non-restored version. Remember that what was previously in musical
and academic circles considered trash may be a fascinating object for
research,
and that research has to have the best conditions.
The work of George Blood is fascinating and unprecedented, because we are
ourselves permitted to decide which stylus to use -- the stylus decides both
noise and distortion. We even have the possibility (with suitable editing
software) to make a composite compromise, because the time function is
exactly
the same for all versions (which the use of consecutive transfers may not
provide).
There is free- or shareware available that will handle virtually all
problems
with record noise, the only thing is for general public use we need good
instructors to write good and simple instructions for how to use this
software.
I am specifically thinking of the ClickRepair suite of software from
Australia.
One thing that I have not found out yet is how to find specific records in
archive.org. Perhaps I, too, need "good and simple instructions for how to
use
it".
Keep up the good work,
George
------------------------------------
From: Brewster Kahle <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cleaning up records, (was) Finding dates for 78's
Date sent: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 07:50:00 -0700
> Cory, Ted and others-
>
> On restoration-- what do you suggest for restoration?
>
> Already people have posted 50k 78's to the Internet Archive, many of
> which have been restored, which is good.
>
> A new push is to transfer 100's of thousands of sides to build a
> reference collection for preservation, research, and discovery. Best
> case we bring millions online to get closer to the estimate, I heard
> from David Seubert, of 3M sides recorded in that format.
>
> I am listening to them raw and having a blast, but as you all know the
> surface noise can be quite high, especially on our earlier records.
>
> I am hoping that if we do the transfers very well and very consistently
> then there may be some people willing to invest the time to develop
> tools/techniques made possible by having different stylii and high
> bitrate samples of the discs. This kind of research is what this
> project is for. But this is a hope at this point.
>
> For the record, here are the sides that have been digitized so far:
> https://archive.org/details/georgeblood each have 9 flacs in 96kHz/24bit
> format that are downloadable to aid research and preservation.
>
> Any suggestions, especially ones that could be applied economically,
> would be most welcome.
>
> -brewster
>
>
>
>
> On 7/8/17 10:59 PM, Corey Bailey wrote:
> > Hi Brewster,
> >
> > As one who transfers the analog audio from discs (and audio tape) and,
> > does restoration work on a copy of the digital files, I can tell you
> > that each and every record is somewhat different. I've done hundreds,
> > literally, from instantaneous discs (cardboard laminated Recordio's to
> > one-off lacquers) to LP's and each one requires some sort of
> > individual attention if you want to maintain the original integrity
> > and musicality of the recording. Yes, one winds up with some custom
> > settings but each disc will, no doubt, require some individual
> > tweaking. Batch processing is a nice thought though. One that I wished
> > would work on several occasions.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Corey
> > Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
> > www.baileyzone.net
> >
> > On 7/8/2017 10:10 PM, Brewster Kahle wrote:
> >> Lou,
> >>
> >> We hope the transfers will be good for researching different cleanup
> >> approaches, basically be a good reference collection for this kind of
> >> work.
> >>
> >> We dont have funding at this point for cleanup, but hopefully it comes
> >> through us or others.
> >>
> >> I was thinking with a consistent collection of hundreds of thousands of
> >> sides, we could attract some advanced techniques to be tried... dont
> >> know if it makes sense, but we might be able to do "semantic"
> >> restoration:
> >>
> http://blog.archive.org/2017/06/03/dreaming-of-semantic-audio-restoration-at-a
> -massive-scale/#comments
> >>
> >>
> >> -brewster
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/7/17 12:01 PM, Lou Judson wrote:
> >>
> >>> Wow, Kitty Carlisle sining? I thought she was just a game show
> >>> contestant....
> >>>
> >>> Nice transfers. If there was funding I could take time from my work
> >>> to do cleanup, which I love to do. But at the moment, I donīt have
> >>> time to cleanup my studio! :-)
> >>>
> >>> <L>
> >>> Lou Judson
> >>> Intuitive Audio
> >>> 415-883-2689
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 7, 2017, at 11:45 AM, Brewster Kahle<[log in to unmask]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> We just got the new ~3000 78rpm transfers from george blood's
> >>>> company--
> >>>> fun! We have a script that leverages the dates on
> >>>> 78discography.com and
> >>>> discogs.com to put dates on them.
> >>>>
> >>>> We got just under 1/2 of them to have dates:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://archive.org/search.php?query=shiptracking%3A%2216651_16727_16776_16831
> %22%20AND%20date%3A%2A
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> and these don't have dates:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://archive.org/search.php?query=shiptracking%3A%2216651_16727_16776_16831
> %22%20AND%20NOT%20date%3A%2A
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> If you are interested in researching any of these for dates, genres,
> >>>> anything that you find fun, and put the information in the review.
> >>>> There are interns at the Archive of Contemporary Music doing this--
> >>>> we
> >>>> have a slack channel for anyone that wants to join in. For those
> >>>> that
> >>>> get really into it, we can grant privs to edit the items themselves.
> >>>>
> >>>> -brewster
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
|