Hi Jamie:

I agree with most of what you're saying, but guys like Doug Pomeroy, who have a long track record of 
making excellent-sounding remasters from disks can read chapter and verse why doing EQ in the 
digital domain doesn't work as well. See Gary Galo's article in ARSC Journal, too. That said, I'm 
not averse to taking something back out to analog, I've always had good luck with it, so I don't see 
that as taboo (ie do what you suggest -- a flat transfer and your 45/45 processing in the digital 
realm, but then I'd take it back out to analog for proper de-emphasis EQ). I also don't think it's 
possible to totally remove surface noise and, in the case of heavily damaged grooves, all the ticks 
and pops without serious, horribly audible digital artifacts.  So going for "total removal of the 
disk medium" is a fool's errand, there comes a point where what's left is too thin sounding or 
inherently distorted so it's more annoying tham some surface noise masking the harsh distortion. The 
worthy goal that you're espousing, using modern digital tools, is to get as much music content out 
of the grooves and cancel out as much noise as possible.

By the way, the description you wrote "the stylus is unyielding and gouges its way through pinch 
effect" exactly describes such record-wreckers as the GE variable reluctance cartridge. Those kinds 
of cartridges (including the cheapo 3-gram trackers included in the console systems) cored out the 
grooves on many a 1950's and 60's mono record, making them not worth buying even in the dollar bins 
at record stores.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jamie Howarth" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 6:27 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Playing Edison Diamond discs

>I think what frustrates the discussion is that digital it is possible to exactly duplicate what you 
>are achieving mechanically plus a whole lot more.
> It's not that the stylus is unyielding and gouges its way through pinch effect (one hopes). It's 
> simply not wired to communicate what it's doing in that axis. There is nothing magical about 45/45 
> coil placement that makes it suck compared to 90/0... You want to use the GE? Terrific. It still 
> moves vertically it just couples the entire mass of the tone arm and bearing to that motion rather 
> than absorb it locally in the cantilever. Terrific.
> To each his own.
> Every iota of geometry in the groove/stylus interface can be deduced from 45/45. All of the 
> mechanical noise cancellation or the facsimile thereof achieved via wiring for 90/0 can be 
> achieved digitally, and then some.
> I'll bet Ortofon says nothing about doing the declick and cleanup from a non-de-emphasized 
> digitization but it's a good idea before all the bass boost and treble rolloff. Do the RIAA or 
> whatever curve afterward. Slap some on in the monitor so you know what you're listening to. But 
> preserve and restore right off the cartridge. Don't bake in anything that loses information.
> Please pardon the misspellings and occassional insane word substitution I'm on an iPhone
>> On May 8, 2015, at 4:56 PM, "Goran Finnberg [log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Dough Pomeroy:
>>> You are not the only responder to
>>> have stated that a mono mix should
>>> be made before de-clicking and other
>>> noise removal work is done.  I have
>>> heard this view stated in the past, but
>>> I can't agree.
>> And now for the ultimate way to recover the most from any lateral cut mono disk record:
>> "Why should you use a dedicated mono cartridge for playing vinyl mono records?
>> On a mono record the signal is cut only in the lateral dimension whereas a stereo record is cut 
>> at +/- 45 degrees into the opposing groove-walls, see figure to the right.
>> A stereo cartridge will be able to replay stereo and mono records, because mono is a special 
>> version of stereo where the right and left channels are identical.
>> While a stereo cartridge can play mono records it can’t achieve the same signal precision between 
>> the two channels. A mono cartridge produces but one signal that is directed to both channels in 
>> the system. A mono cartridge playing a mono record produces a more forceful and stable image with 
>> a fuller, more impactful sound.
>> Another big advantage in using a mono cartridge to play mono records is the absence of response 
>> to vertical movement. This means that a mono cartridge is basically immune to the pinching effect 
>> which comes into action when the stylus is pushed vertically upward in very narrow grooves. Also 
>> the response to dust, dirt and wear is reduced substantially. The final result will be a clean 
>> and noiseless reproduction of the mono record.
>> The listening experience will be significantly improved when using a high quality true mono 
>> cartridge for the replay of your mono records."
>> End Quote Ortofon.
>> 1/ Complete removal of the pinch distortion that can reach up to 30 % second harmonic when played 
>> by a stereo cartridge.
>> 2/ Free removal of dust dirt ticks and scratches and audible distortion caused by wear.
>> 3/ Up to 20 dB less rumble by using an only horisontal sensing replay device that excludes the 
>> vertical component where all the rumble hides..
>> Makes the uses of digital click/crackle/hiss removal tools much more effective.
>> So ditch all your stereo catridges and play the disks as they were meant to be played !!!
>> :-)
>>> I find the best contemporary digital
>>> de-clickers are so good that they
>>> fully remove the distortions caused
>>> by scratches. Once these and other
>>> defects are replaced by sound
>>> synthesized from surrounding audio,
>>> they effectively vanish and do not
>>> depend on mixing for removal.
>> By using a true lateral responding device only then the digital noise removal tools work much 
>> faster since there is less to do.
>>> As you have mentioned, the stereo
>>> transfer of a lateral recording allows
>>> distorted areas on only one groove
>>> wall to be manually replaced by a
>>> less distorted section from the
>>> corresponding section from the
>>> opposite wall, and this is indeed a
>>> powerful tool.
>> And you have lost 3 dB S/N that is free when using a lateral responding device only.
>>> A mono mix prior to de-clicking just
>>> combines the non-vertical noise from
>>> both channels. I find processing the
>>> stereo before making the mono to
>>> be a superior approach, but I understand
>>> there are those who disagree.
>> Thus the noise increases 3 dB because it is not correlated ie is not in phase between L/R.
>> The audio signal, is identical on the left or right track thus when combined increases by +6dB 
>> thus we always gain +3 dB net by using a lateral responding device which we get by summing L+R.
>> It´s free. to do.
>> But then the very best to get the most out of any lateral recorded disk is a lateral responding, 
>> mono only, cartridge as stated by Ortofon.
>> Because then we remove all the imperfections in using a stereo cartridge trying to extract the 
>> audio from lateral cut disks.
>> The EMT OFD65 with a truncated elliptical is very good for 78´s.
>> And it is a lateral responding only device too.
>> -- 
>> Best regards,
>> Goran Finnberg
>> The Mastering Room AB
>> Goteborg
>> Sweden
>> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>> Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough to
>> make them all yourself.    -   John Luther
>> (\__/)
>> (='.'=)
>> (")_(") Smurfen:RIP