 |
 |
Yes. But you want to order the extra card with it, so you can input a line level signal before the EQ stage. Otherwise, you can't. Best, John Haley On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 10:08 AM, John Schroth <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi Tom: > > That would be the KAB MKII. Front panel controls for cartridge loading at > the first amplification stage, gain adjustments on the back end, passive > eq, output of both pre-eq and post eq at the same time, also a lot of other > nice features. > > https://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/phonpre.htm > > Regards, > > John Schroth > MTS > > > On 4/10/2015 8:00 AM, Tom Fine wrote: > >> I don't disagree in theory with Paul's idea about a flat transfer. What >> I'd like to see built and marketed is a disk preamplifier that does the >> initial impedence and capacitance match with the cartridge and the first >> stage of amplification, then offers bridged output off that stage, goes on >> to do a passive EQ with all the turnover and rolloff options, and then an >> output stage. So, a person could play a disk once (efficient workflow), >> make a flat transfer to a separate digital file, and do the EQ to the best >> of their expertise and taste -- so there is immediately a usable/listenable >> copy for researchers, library clients, online, reissue or whatever. The >> idea of making two passes doesn't fit budget-constrained workflows, and >> many of us are not at all sold on digital EQ (which also takes extra time >> and extra steps after playback, again inefficient). The device I describe >> offers the best of both worlds -- you get that flat transfer to archive and >> do whatever in the digital domain at some later time, but you end up with a >> listenable/usable sound file at the same time. >> >> It seems like such a preamp would not be a hard thing to design and >> build. If one hates passive EQ, that's fine too, you could have an active >> EQ stage or stages with self-contained feedback loops like an equalizer >> module on a 1970s recording console (they were gain-neutral and >> self-contained). >> >> -- Tom Fine >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stamler" <[log in to unmask]> >> To: <[log in to unmask]> >> Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 8:04 PM >> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Disasters at Commercial Archives >> >> >> On 4/9/2015 2:12 PM, Tom Fine wrote: >>> >>>> TOTALLY AGREE WITH CLARK! And yes, I'm "shouting!" Find the best >>>> possible source of the media you want to transfer. CLEAN IT with >>>> knowledge and care. Play it with the right stylus, at the right speed >>>> and with the right EQ curve (and often "right" is what sounds best >>>> because there is very little concrete documentation of recording curves >>>> especially in foreign markets and especially in non-studio recordings). >>>> Transfer it at high resolution, then be conservative and tasteful with >>>> your digital restoration tools. This all sounds logical and common sense >>>> based. But listen to most of the CDs reissuing 78s and you hear that few >>>> people follow these steps, few people have good taste with using >>>> "restoration tools," and many people seem to think consumers either >>>> can't hear garbage work or don't care because they expect terrible sound >>>> from 78s. >>>> >>> >>> Or they think the public hates hiss and scratches so much that they're >>> willing to put up with mangled music. >>> >>> A hearty amen to all the sentiments Clark & Tom expressed, except that >>> I'd make a flat transfer and archive that. >>> >>> Peace, >>> Paul >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>> http://www.avast.com >>> >>> >>> >> > > --- > This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus > protection is active. > http://www.avast.com >