Hi Mickey:
Do you know off-hand what is the pitch shift to get a 33 1/3 transfer to 78 pitch? Soundforge has a
pitch-shift tool, so I could definitely try this.
What you're saying makes some sense but if you're doing for-release transfers, why not own a
various-curves preamp like the TDL Restoration Preamp or something more fancy? Or a mastering
equalizer?
I start with the TDL, then usually feed the output to an equalizer to nip and tuck here and there.
I've found that if you nip and tuck the midrange to get the most natural tonal balance, the bass and
treble will fall into line. Some discs need treble taming to get rid of noise, and if you use a
parametric you can usually tune up above any significant musical information. I've heard claims of
high treble content on 78s, but I have never seen it on a spectrum graph. The mics of the day
weren't capable of gathering information at the frequencies claimed, and horn systems weren't
sensitive enough to pick up any high-treble information.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mickey Clark" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2013 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record Equalization
>I get around the RIAA curve by recording slow. High frequencies on a 78 when played at 33 1/3 will
>be presented to the RIAA circuitry at just under a third of their original frequency. i.e. 10,000
>cycles at 78 will be just over 3,000 cycles at 33 1/3 which means less suppression of the high
>frequencies at playback.
>
> The result is a fabulous kick of bass and depth , and clarity and transparency for the high
> frequencies. I have digitized thousands or recordings this way and am satisfied that it works for
> most recordings - but not all. e.g. Columbias - notably 'Gentlemen Prefer Blondes' is one of these
> exceptions.
>
> Once you play a 78 through an RIAA preamp at full speed, you kill much of the high frequency
> information and you cannot equalize it to get it back-Anyone interested in a sample to illustrate
> this, please advise me and I can send an example. I have covered everything from symphonic, opera,
> blues, jazz and spoken word and have samples I can send as mp3's. The link below is a slow
> transfer of the Gigli/Caniglia version of Verdi's Requiem. I did adjust the bass eq slightly to
> smooth it out, as there was a bit of a hump in the curve before eq. the trble is kept intact - all
> the best to the group and a Merry Christmas to All-Mickey Clark
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Verdi-Requiem-CDN255-Royal-Serafin/dp/B004YZCJTW/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1387645955&sr=8-2&keywords=verdi+requiem+m.c.productions
>
>
> Mickey
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Doug Pomeroy" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 1:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record Equalization
>
>
>> The Radiotron Handbook entry shows only one curve "used by R.C.A. Victor for 78 r.p.m. shellac
>> discs, 45 r.p.m. and 33 1/3 r.p.m. fine groove" discs. As there was no RCA Victor before 1929,
>> this does not tell the whole Victor story and does not answer the specific question Steve Smolian
>> asks (about electrical Victors made in the short period before November of 1925).
>>
>> Maxfield and Harrison's 1926 paper describing the Western Electric system clearly indicates a
>> bass turnover of 200 Hz and pre-emphasis ("constant acceleration") above "approximately 4000 Hz".
>> This was before electrical record players were widely available and this curve was developed in
>> consideration of playback by acoustic record players.
>>
>> As has been mentioned, Victor raised the bass turnover over the years from 200 Hz to 300 Hz and
>> finally to 500 Hz. Nick Bergh knows the cutting equipment used and speaks with authority on the
>> subject of EQ. I showed him a Victor ledger sheet from December 1926 which includes a column
>> marked "Eqlzr." and it only shows the words "on" or "off" which doesn't tell us what we'd really
>> like to know! It's safe to say that at Victor, experiments with various cutting equalizations
>> were being done
>> on an ongoing basis.
>>
>> Doug Pomeroy
>> Audio Restoration and Mastering Services
>> 193 Baltic St
>> Brooklyn, NY 11201-6173
>> (718) 855-2650
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>>
>>> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 18:36:58 +0000
>>> From: "Gray, Mike" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Subject: Re: Record equalization
>>>
>>> From Radiotron Designer's Handbook, 4th Ed. 1953, p. 728, item 17.5:
>>>
>>>
>>> "There is no 'optimum' cross-over frequency because the choice is necessarily a compromise.
>>> Where distortion is the principal criterion, a low cros-over frequency from 250 to 350 c/s will
>>> be adopted for standard groove 78 r.p.m. Where needle scratch is troublesome with 78 r.p.m. a
>>> high cross-over frequency of say 500 c/s may be adopted."
>>>
>>>
>>> On page 730, under Practical recording characteristics:
>>>
>>>
>>> "There does not appear to be any generally accepted definition of published recording
>>> characteristics."
>>>
>>>
>>> In the two figures on this page, European characteristics show several cross-over points,
>>> ranging from 300 Hz (Decca ffrr)
>>> to 600 Hz for EMI 78 rpm. Note that there is no pre-emphasis at all for the EMI discs, which are
>>> 'flat' up to 10 Khz.
>>>
>>>
>>> American 78s, however, show a boost of ca. 12 db at 10 KHz ...
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Gray
>>
>
>
> ---
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
