Print

Print


A very effective analog device for 78 transferring was (and to some degree still is) the various models of the Packburn (by ARSC members Tom Packard and the late Dick Burns).  A multi-function unit, among other things, it contained a switcher (to choose the quieter of the two groove walls), a blanker (to suppress or reduce loud clicks), and a dynamic filter.  Although the blanker could be negatively affected by music transients (such as a piano chord, or a drum hit), causing the unit to "spit", it was highly effective in reducing surface clicks and pops.
Another analog unit that was very popular in 78 work, was the UREI 565, or "Little Dipper".  This was a stationary filter unit that could notch filter audio frequencies, and roll-off the top and bottom end adjustably very effectively.  
Burwen made a professional unit that was a very effective dynamic filter.  
These units were often used by remastering professionals (such as Ward Marston, Seth Winner and myself, among many others) to reduce surface noise of all kinds when transferring 78s.
Another method of removing ticks was to scrape the oxide of the tape transfer over a loud tick, until the tick was inaudible.  Although I personally never used this method, I was told it was quite effective.
As far as transferring metal parts as opposed to shellac pressings, I agree with Tom for the most part.  Metal parts are far preferable in most cases, but not in all.  If a metal part is sonically worn, or "buffed" (polished so that the high frequencies have been removed), a well-pressed, good condition shellac will sound far superior.  Also, some shellac pressings (especially on vinyl or some RCA 'z' pressings) are so quiet that they can be as quiet as metal parts, and they will track significantly better than metals, because metals are rarely flat.  In those instances, I prefer shellacs to metal parts for a 78 transfer project.
Jon Samuels

--- On Mon, 10/1/12, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Reducing crackle from 78 rpm records the analogue way on 70's reissue LP's
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Monday, October 1, 2012, 1:38 PM

This was one way it was done. The other way was using excellent condition metal parts, more of which seemed to exist back in the day. With modern methods, when you buy something like a Mosaic box set -- which has some metal parts and also uses mass media shellacs -- you can really hear why it's such a good idea to track down the very best source material possible and not assume digital or analog "repair" can save the sound. A modern transfer of a metal part that's in good condition can sound shockingly realistic, very close to what the microphone was hearing except for a sharp rolloff of the top end. When you have to use commercially-issued shellacs -- even those that weren't tortured with steel needles at many grams of tracking force -- you lose so much quality because of loud surface noise, ticks and pops and the like. Modern digital remedies, when used conservatively, can help with this. The old-school guys had a different idea of EQ vs. modern
 transfer guys. I think the older generation concentrated more on the bass up into the midrange and figured there was little to no high treble to mess with, so they'd roll it off to cut the surface noise. Modern engineers, the really good ones, seem to use spectrum-analysis tools to figure out where there's more music and where there's more noise and then EQ accordingly. The results can sound "nasal" to some ears (including my own), and I think some modern reissues aren't putting in all the bass that exists on the disks, but it's good not to have microsecond lapses from razor edits and too-sharp cutoff of treble information. That said, there are older reissues where metal parts existed and were in good shape that smoke modern attempts at the same material without access to metal parts (lost, stolen, destroyed, etc).

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- From: "James Roth" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Reducing crackle from 78 rpm records the analogue way on 70's reissue LP's


Hello all.

In the 70's I work at "Club 99" [operatic reissue) records.
I would use a razor blade and a splicing block to "de-click" the tape transfers of some very scratchy 78s.
It would take about 3 hours to de-click a 4-minute aria - verrrrry tedious.
Then, we would take the tape to our sound engineer in Manhattan, David Hancock (RIP) and he would so some expert EQ.

Regards,
Ben Roth


-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jan Myren
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 12:22 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Reducing crackle from 78 rpm records the analogue way on 70's reissue LP's





HI!



I spent the week-end going through my collection of 70's and 80's compilation albums of old jazz records remastered by John R.T. Davies and Robert Parker.



I must say I am a bit impressed by the way they were able to suppress noise and especially the crackle form the old 78's they used.



May anybody remember (or know) how they did that and what kind of machines they used back in the analogue days?



All the best

Jan