Recording disks at 16 2/3 rpm wasn't a good idea either.

I think I'd take 33 1/3 rpm on a good turntable than a 16 2/3 rpm 
turntable from back in the day. The quality is limited in either event.

You could use 176.4 and then change the sample rate to 88.2 to provide a 
slightly wider bandwidth for the de-click algorithms to see, but I doubt 
it would provide much difference.

As to the EQ curve, I recall there was no EQ adjustment between 16, 33, 
and 45 on any of the old turntables I had that incorporated the tell the truth, there wasn't at 78, either, so perhaps that's 
not a fair assessment.

However, neither IASA TC-05 nor the 1964 NAB standard seem to address 
this question.

My suggestion is to use RIAA and then trust your ears in a derivative copy.



On 2017-11-19 5:39 AM, Ted Kendall wrote:
> Playing discs at a higher speed than they were recorded is seldom a good 
> idea.
> On 19/11/2017 07:04, don ward wrote:
>> A  transfer project is sitting on my desk needing my attention.
>> 16 rpm music discs from car stereo and some theatre intermission music.
>> I plan to play them with a .5mil conical stylus at 33 with a  
>> unequalized pre amp.
>> Computer sample rate of 88,200 then resample at 44,100 gives me the 
>> equivalent of 16 rpm.
>> Ok  NOW .......... whats the playback curve for 16 rpm music discs  
>> ?    the disc recording standard would serve just as well.
>> My ear has it sounding pretty much like mono lp/45  but i was curious 
>> what the standard was.
>> many thanks
>> cordially
>> don ward
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
Aurora, Ontario, Canada                             647 479 2800
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.