 |
 |
That sounds great, Tom! When will you have your prototype ready for review? On 4/10/2015 5:00 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 >> >> > -- *Pete Tinker* West Hills, CA 91307 818-three/four/six-5213 818-six/nine/four-5213 /(cell)/