|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.173.239.44
Getting close to starting this project.
Partly a cross-post, since I have similiar question on general digital forum but more focused on DSD vs. PCM...
I am debating the ripping format for my soon to start project of digitizing my 500 albums to either DSD 64 using KORD MR-1 and Music Hall 7.1 with Grado cartridge or to 24x96 PCM using a new Project Recordmaster (24x96 pcm USB output) turntable.
OR I could dub them onto reel to reel tape using my RT-909 and/or RT-707 if I get really ambitious.
I have enough good unused Ampex 456 for about 100 albums, would have to obtain more new blank tape after that...
Or maybe for my favorite top 100 albums do both reel to reel AND digitizing.
Any input on that decision greatly appreciated!!!
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
Follow Ups:
You are going to get varying opinions about DSD vs PCM. DSD is going to result in larger files and editing is normally done as PCM before converting back to DSD so you really want to stick to a sample rate that is based on a multiple of 44.1kHz.
Depending on what you are going to do with the digital files (i.e splice, make compilations or listen to the LP in its entirety), PCM will still give you the greatest flexibility once you have the PCM file and you will have smaller files - DSD uses the most storage space and restricts you to players and DACs that support native DSD or DoP.
I would recommend for best flexibility/quality compromise you set your MR-1 to 24/176.4 which will allow you to down convert to whatever you want (including 24/96 or Redbook) and you could easily convert the file to DSD64 or 128 using Audiogate without compromise because the reference clock is still based off 44.1kHz which simplifies the sample rate conversion.
Eliminating the phono stage and doing the EQ digitally has distinct advantages (apart from eliminating phono stage colouration) mainly in that the frequency components above 1kHz have lower quantisation noise proportional to the pre-emphasis amount which translates to higher resolution. The EQ is "perfect" in that you don't have component tolerancing errors and the channels are as matched as the ADC inputs are and you are not limited by the phono stage overload margin (as long as you set the ADC input gain appropriately!)
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Yup, ask a dozen vinyl enthusiasts about something and you'll get three dozen opinions. :-)I prefer to record at 24-192 PCM WAV because I don't intend to burn CDRs or down sample lower than 24-96 for play back. Disc storage is inexpensive enough and the processing demands of 24-96 PCM rendering is easily handled by even bargain players.
Regarding your comment about using digital RIAA equalization to avoid phono stage coloration: The recording is colored by all the components we're using to play a record. That's what listening to our vinyl setup is all about. I'm not recording LPs to have perfect versions of digital albums that I could otherwise purchase, I'm recording LPs in order to listen to vinyl without needing to play them on a turntable. It's for a future time when I can no longer manage a vinyl setup but can still enjoy the sound of when I did. I want the nuances of my cartridge, tonearm, turntable, and phono stage to come through loud and clear, something I'll fondly remember.
Tom
Edits: 02/14/21
Storage is indeed cheap so file size isn't such an issue, but I still feel DSD is the least useful format in terms of versatility.
Everyone has different priorities in what they are wanting to preserve, how they want to hear the music and the emotions that playing a record triggers....right down to the frustrations of playing the damn things!
My interest is definitely to preserve the grooves as accurately as possible so for me I don't want to "hear" my phono stage or cartridge for that matter. However, I fully understand that for many, it is the sound of their system they want to preserve so that they can take it with them in their pocket or demonstrate the sound through a needledrop.
"It's for a future time when I can no longer manage a vinyl setup but can still enjoy the sound of when I did."
I am definitely getting more aware of this as time marches on....ageing is a scary prospect! I also wonder what will happen with my collection ....and (worse) whether anyone will even care to have them when I'm gone!
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Take your 50 best albums, run them through an ultrasonic cleaner and then a vacuum machine with distilled water only for the best recording of vinyl.
I use a Tascam 3000 at 24-192 a double DSD (90% 24-192) speakers turned off while recording, keep levels low so you never go above 0db and you will have amazing fidelity to the original disc.
Get a really good line contact cartridge like an Audio Technica ART-9 or similar device and clean the stylus every time with the clear goop you drop the stylus into.
I have brought these USB sticks to the Munich show and no one can believe it came from vinyl. In fact at the T+A room at Axpona I blew them away with a copy of the Columbia 6 eye The Brothers Four B.M.O.C from 1959, or Frankie Laine doing Wanted Man in the KEF room.
You can make amazing recordings, it just takes a little time, Audacity, and Vinyl Studio. You can even bypass the Audacity if you get the vinyl clean enough.
HW
Have any recommendations? I own a record doctor.
Maybe I would buy one used if it were a few hundred $$ or less...There is one on the bay I could afford:
Ultrasonic Vinyl Record Cleaning Machine System Vinyl Stack Cleaner Machine
What do you think? That much better than a good cleaning with a record doctor?
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
Edits: 03/02/21
I like your ART9 cartridge recommendation. Been using one a while. :-)
I prefer PCM recordings over DSD just for the advantages in post-processing. I've been pleasantly surprised at how good a vinyl "rip" can be after the ticks and pops are gently cleaned up in Vinyl Studio.
Tom
Hello HW,
It seems that we might be on the same track. The TASCAM DA-3000 is my favorite digital recorder and the Audio Technica ART series are my favorite cartridges. I'm kind of surprise you're recommending the lower priced components. However, I found that many of the less expensive audio components can have exceptional performance. I'm glad to hear your recommendations.
Best regards,
John Elison
PS. My HW-17F is still operating with topnotch performance. It must be close to 25-years old by now.
Wow! That sounds like a HUGE task. Reasons for doing so are personal of course; moving to smaller home, moving long distance, ease of access to music, anticipating physical limitations with playback, etc.
Many years ago, decades actually, I recorded selected cuts onto quality cassette tapes. That was time consuming and lots of work. But it did allow me to select one or two cuts from an album when that was all I wanted to hear. I then sold off those records.
More recently I prepared for a long distance move. My LP collection was over 3,000. So I went through them all, making a critical decision on what I would really enjoy hearing again. About 1,000 were selected out for the move and I sold the remainder.
For one thing I didn't have time to consider digitizing. But for another, I love my LPs. I love listening to them, looking at some of the cover art, and reading the liner notes (which is possible without a magnifying glass). So even now after the move I have no interest in digitizing. I'd rather spend my time immersed in the music. But as admitted upfront, the choice is personal.
For those who do undertake digitization, and I admire their dedication to the task. But I would want to optimize condition of every record, playback component condition (stylus condition, bearing lubrication, etc.), and digital process so that I didn't compromise the end product after so much time.
"The only cats worth anything are the cats who take chances. Sometimes I play things I never heard myself." Thelonious Monk
It doesn't have to be too complicated. I have my turntable and phono stage connected to a digital recorder so when I listen to an album it's easy to record. I keep my vinyl setup in good working order so it sounds good already; no special steps needed prior to recording. It's the post processing that takes time. I've got a SugarCube SC-1 on back order and that will eliminate a bunch of the processing.Tom
Edits: 02/14/21
I think you are right!
I just made a trial recording of 89.7 classical public radio here in Vegas , using my Sony XDR-FIHD FM/HD tuner into 24x192 wav file using a KORG MR-1 and it sounds fabulous. I will try some 24x96 wav and then some DSF 64 and see if I can hear a difference.
So now I just have to get the vinyl equipment out of storage: Music Hall MF 7.1 turntable, musical fidelity phono preamp, and disk doctor record cleaning machine, and I will be in business.
First up will not be my most valued box sets (MFSL Beatles). I will do some archiving of other LPs first to make sure the table and cartridge are all good.
I put this project off for years but almost there now...
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
I was recording at 24-96 WAV at first but now record at 24-192 WAV so I have the most information to work with. I resample to 24-96 FLAC for the final conversion to my digital library except for my best LP's which stay at 24-192 FLAC. Storage space isn't a problem and I archive the WAV recordings after post-processing so I'll have them for possible future processing.I use the Normalize function in Audacity to boost the amplitude of my recordings. I find that a -1.0dB peak keeps me out of trouble; some albums can be pushed to -0.5dB if needed. Otherwise there's a big difference in volume when I'm listening to music off the NAS drive. The normalization process doesn't seem to alter the sound if you don't push it too far. I've compared digital LP recordings to quality 24-96 and 24-192 download files of the same album and the LP recordings sound great. Subtly different, but equally engaging.
I also use the Amplify function prior to normalizing to reduce the amplitude of really high peaks. (Sounds counterintuitive but that's how it works.) Otherwise those peaks are used in the normalizing process as the limit and the overall amplitude isn't increased as much as needed. It's a bit of a trial and error process to find what works best for the amount of time you're willing to invest. I only edit the highest peaks, the ones that are noticeably above average. I find that a reduction of those peaks to about -4.0dB works well. I cannot tell the difference between the unaltered peaks and the reduced peaks.
One thing I don't bother with right now is extracting each song as a single file. I record each side of an album as a single track and just clean up the needle drop and pickup at the ends of the file using Audacity. I listen to entire sides of LP albums so why not listen to them that way as digital files. I do include "LP" in the album name and "S1" and "S2" in the titles so I can see that they're LP recordings and which side of the LP it is. For example, in the metadata it would look like this...
For side 1:
Album = Time Out LP
Title = Time Out S1
For side 2:
Album = Time Out LP
Title = Time Out S2Have fun! It's a labor of love and the most difficult part was deciding to keep the turntable hooked up to the digital recorder to make recording easier. The new preamp I'm using doesn't have a TAPE OUT connection so I had to swap out the RCA cables each time I wanted to record, which meant I couldn't listen to the album while recording. But after listening to LPs while they're being recorded at 24-192 I decided the difference was so subtle, basically indistinguishable from the "straight wire" connection from the phono stage, that it wasn't really a trade-off.
Tom
PS: I still have my mmf-7 and use it occasionally. It's a good turntable and the upgraded 9cc tonearm on your mmf-7.1 is even better. If the turntable has been sitting in storage for a while you might want to replace the belt. Another thing to consider is putting the best cartridge you can budget for on the tonearm for recording. If you look at it as a per LP cost it doesn't seem so expensive. :-)
Edits: 02/14/21 02/14/21
thank you. I will experiment with the Audacity techniques you mention, I bet they will help me.
I do have both a spare MMF belt AND a spare Grado gold, if I can find them after all these years...
One question, did you use a phone preamp with RIAA?
I am wondering if just using the Audactity digital RIAA eq would work.
But would the Grado gold output be too low without using a phono preamp?
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
The Tascam recorder I use has the ability to add a lot of gain to the signal but I'd still use a phono preamp. I don't try to boost the signal too much during recording and don't mess around with changing gain for each LP to get max recording signal. I first experimented with several "hot" records to find where it got into the clipping zone and backed off just enough to keep it in the warning zone. I know that all my other LPs will be well below the clipping point. Set it and forget it since you can easily boost (normalize) the amplitude in Audacity.As for RIAA equalization, my perspective is that a good phono stage has as good an equalization function as any software package. The only real advantage to the software approach in my opinion is if you've got some old discs that didn't use the conventional RIAA curves. Or, if you want to customize the sound like a tone control. Just more post-processing to deal with if you ask me.
Edits: 02/14/21
I own and operate an audio/video transfer service and have done hundreds of jobs for customers, every audio format imaginable, including wire recordings! I also produced over 500 radio shows for a local college station, and most of the material used were WAV files, transfers of my 78/45/33 records and tapes.
I would not recommend transferring 500 albums to Reel To Reel tape. No advantage over digital transfers IMO, other than a "WOW" factor watching big reels of tape spin. Besides, it doesn't solve your storage problem.
For front end, I'm using quartz-locked direct drive Technics turntables and an array of over a dozen cartridges. The output goes into a KAB Souvenir EQS MK12 variable EQ phono preamp. From there, into a Behringer U-Phoria UMC202HD and that is in turn connected to my PC.
I use Goldwave audio editing software on the PC, and all transfers are 16/44.1 as WAV files. Some 'golden ears" claim they can hear the difference with higher resolution. I've done blind A/B tests with volunteers, they can't hear the difference nor can I.
I highly recommend "Click Repair" software. It can easily take a transfer of a lesser condition record with clicks, pops, crackle, etc... and dramatically improve the sound of the WAV file.
MY experience is that a high quality digital transfer sounds exactly the same as actual vinyl playback, based on what I hear and having done A/B testing with volunteers.
It goes without saying that garbage in = garbage out. It is critical that you use a turntable with dead accurate speed (unless you prefer an off speed "lively" sound), properly aligned cartridge, clean stylus, and clean records.
Make sure all the cables are properly routed. Take every step to eliminate ground loop hums. I'd also recommend testing your play area and how certain factors may or may not impact on recording quality. Test with dustcover open and closed. Test recordings done at no volume versus medium and high volume. You want to find potential feedback and distortion and eliminate it before beginning a big transfer project.
Good luck with the project!
I use a record doctor vacuum. Takes about 4 minutes for both sides of an LP.
I will be using a Music Hall MMF 7.1 table, Grado cartridge.
re. sampling rate. Quality of recording/mastering trumps sampling rate. I marginal recording/mastering cannot be improved by higher sample rate, but given good recording and mastering, 24x96 or more beats 16x44.1 in my experience. I will be using a KORG MR-1 recording at 24x96 at least. Might as well since the unit can record up to 24x192 or DSD 64 if I want.
I did one interesting test years ago when experimenting with dubbing LPs to reel-to-reel.
I was using a high end SS control preamp at the time. Considered one of the best pro units. I dropped the needle on the LP, started the reel to reel recording, and started spinning the LP.
After a few seconds to allow the needle to get into the music grooves, I pulled the plug ONLY on the turntable - I left everything else powered up AND the reel to reel still recording.
Then I walked around the room, clapping, speaking softly and loudly, shouting, singing, etc., while the reel to reel was still recording but the needle was sitting motionless in the record groove.
Stopped recording, then rewind, and started tape playback.
Guess what? Except for the normal level speech, I could hear almost every noise I had made while the needle was sitting dead still in the groove!
Shouting, clapping, singing, could hear it all!
Turntable was a Music Hall MMF 7.1 with Grado cartridge.
Pretty interesting experiment. Talk about microphonics. So now I know: Headphones only for monitoring when recording LPs.
And for normal listening with turntable in same room as speakers, there is likely to be audible microphonics...
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
I made recordings at 24/96 using an Alesis Masterlink and then I looked at them through a spectrum analyzer in Sound Forge software. In these first tests I didn't make any noise during the experiment because I just wanted to look at the noise floor of my phono system. Here are the graphs I made from the spectrum analyzer.
Noise Floor with Tonearm in Arm Rest
.
.
.
Noise Floor with Stylus Resting On A Stationary Record
.
.
.
Noise Floor of Both Superimposed On Each Other
.
.
.
Reference Level: 3.54-cm/s RMS Velocity (Diagonal) Right Channel
.
.
.
Noise Floor: All 3 Superimposed On Each Other
.
.
I also did the same experiment you did by playing loud music from my CD player while my stylus was resting on a stationary record. Here are the spectrum analyzer graphs of this test.
Arm Down No Music Playing
.
.
.
Arm Down Music Playing
interesting ... you actually created a 'pressure zone microphone' effect
Les Paul's early experiments amplifying guitars used needle/cartridges too
recording / transferring signals with mics sans 'in the air' monitors is really best practice as well
with regards,
This is not the same as a pressure zone microphone, which consists of an ordinary microphone located very close to a flat surface. There's nothing touching the flat surface in a pressure zone microphone. Sound waves reflect off the flat surface into the microphone's diaphragm.
I know ... that's why I said 'effect' despite being inaccurate as hell
you're right of course, the LP actually functioned as a diaphragm, the needle as the element ... far more technically accurate, my bad
of course PZM's rely on piezoelectric excitation to work yet his LP was responding to sound pressure and focusing it in [towards?] a narrow gap
anyway, glad that's cleared up thanks!
regards,
Hmm, didn't some guy named Edison fool around with an audio recording device that also used a needle?
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
I think that was Lenny Bruce
regards,
I've digitized over 1000 lps. It's a lot of work. This is a hobby, so use your time the way you want.
I record each side at 24/96 on a Tascam DA3000 with speakers off, targeting -6 peak, use iZotope RX for cleanup, normalize to -2 peak, output wav files for each side to Vinyl Studio to break into individual tracks. Vinyl Studio uses Discogs for metadata.
I've tried higher resolutions but didn't sense significant benefit.
Typical RX clean up is running declick at 0.5 on a scale of 10 on the entire side. Less is better. I've heard horns distorted by declick at high settings. If I find areas requiring higher settings, I declick those one click at a time.
declick is a good idea, will research, thank you.
how about cleaning? did you clean every LP before digitizing?
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
The declick I use is part of RX but there are other products available.
I have cleaned each lp at some point before recording. Cleaner lps need less processing after recording. I use headphones while processing. It's easier to hear low level defects. My cleaning process, while not perfect, is much better now than before I started recording....because of recording.
I prefer that the only post recording processes I need are normalize and into Vinyl Studio.
thanks, I'll need to look for a stand-alone declicker. RX definitely will not fit in my budget :(
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
ClickRepair is what you want - although it looks like the website is in-progress right now.
Also, you're going to hear a bigger difference between your analog sources (turntables) than you will between ADCs or file formats.
The quality of your vinyl-> digital transfers is only going to be as good as the weakest link in the project.This is only as important as the quality of the systems you are going to be playing them back upon.
I've transferred over 1,700 albums. I prefer playing the CD rips made on my computer via a hard drive -> rPi4 -> USB DAC to playing the CDs on my CDP (as a transport or via it's DAC). The vinyl transfers I've done are not the equal of playing vinyl directly.
However I did this so I could take my records with me and for that it's been more than worthwhile. And the improvement brought by bypassing the CD transport has made the whole effort more than worthy to me.
I've used Tascam and Sony CDRW recorders and am happy with the results above. That said when I want the highest level of fidelity I'm still going to be playing my records.
Edits: 02/11/21
I digitized a couple of my LPs using Mac/Garageband.....ok, but not wonderful
yikes! did you keep the physical vinyl media? If not, may I ask how you disposed of them?
I have pretty good system when I feel like going full monty: Transcendent Sound 25 wpc T8-LN OTL tube amp, Transcendent Grounded Grid pre, Ref3a DeCapo I speakers. I also have a Musical Fidelity class amp, A1-2008 version.
Source is most often RPI 4 with flavor of the month DAC.
Lately though I have been expermenting with chip amps, that's kind of fun.
So I have fairly resolving system. Not sure my 68 years old ears however are as high quality...
But I do want to get rid of the physical vinyl media, it's time.
Did you digitize to PCM? DSD?
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
The recorders wrote to a CDRW. I converted to FLAC when ripping to the hard drive.Yep I kept the media. And when I decide I no longer want the music, which happens on occasion over time, I remove the rip from my library when I get rid of the disk (usually on eBay).
Edits: 02/11/21
but ultimately, the sound quality will get compromised by the NJM4580 op amps - if transparency is important.
I would not recommend open reel tape. It's too heavy, requires too much storage space and it's too expensive. My experience with hi-rez digital copies of vinyl is that they are inexpensive, convenient and they sound identical to vinyl. I've copied about 387 vinyl albums. I have 275 LPs in 16/44 WAV, 41 albums in 24/96 AIFF and 71 albums in DSD128 using my TASCAM DA-3000 DSD recorder .
Making recordings of vinyl records is very tedious and time consuming. Therefore, I would recommend beginning by copying only your most favorite LPs. Once you finish those you might not want to go further due to the amount of work involved.
I've found DSD128 to be the best sounding digital format although 24/96 PCM is a close second. TASCAM produces free editing software for DSD but it's limited to cropping and splitting into individual tracks. PCM allows additional editing options.
If you'd like to discuss more about the technical aspects of digitizing vinyl, feel free to send me personal email.
Best regards,
John Elison
John, the Tascam will generate AIFFS? Somewhere I thought I had understood that it was restricted to WAVs.
Jeremy
No, the TASCAM DA-3000 generates WAV and DSD. I used my DA-3000 for DSD128 recordings only. My 16/44 WAV and 24/96 AIFF recordings were made with my Alesis Masterlink before I bought the TASCAM DA-3000.
Sorry for the confusion!
John Elison
John I totally blanked on your talking about your Tascam gear before and that actually worries me a bit ... hm ... I might need that Prevagen supplement but it's made from jellyfish right? I mean, how smart are THEY?
regards,
Yeah I have been procrastinating due to the amount of work.
In my case, complicated by the fact I am so close to Nellis AFB that we can hear their nightly base broadcast of taps when the wind is right.
So F-22, F-35s, F-16, A-10, regularly, and ocassionally even the big boy B1s, 52s, and Cargos pass almost directly overhead, shaking the walls a bit. Not exactly conducive to clean LP playback...
My first try will probably be using a KORG MR-1 combined with a Music Hall MMF 7.1 and Grado cart, comparing results of DSD64 with 24/192 PCM.
I would prefer to just buy a hi-res USB turntable to keep it simple, but all the hires models seem to be unavailable now, I suppose due to the AKM fire.
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
you'd better research and then think thoroughly about taking that vast amount of time and recording to tape. Look at TAS volume 10, Issue 40 with interviews of luminaries like Doug Sax and Keith Johnson.
I would suggest you transcribe to digital storage.
Ampex 456 is bad news in that it's very sticky now, look up sticky shed syndrome, it's a thing and Ampex was notorious about it. Now not sure when the transition to better stuff came out but it may well have begun just before Quantegy took over. You are better off with newer stuff. Don't use it.
It'll leave a mess all over your heads and it's a bitch to clean up, just FYI.
Also, it can literally stop down your deck due to this stickiness.
As to why you are digitizing your LP's, you don't say so am going to ask, why? If you are afraid of wearing them out, as long as you check your stylus (or have it checked) periodically and replace when it begins to wear down and keep your cart alingned and what not, you should not have to worry about playing your LP's. Also, if you have older LP's, have you looked to see if they are available in the here and now? Many are. The few obscured LP's may still be out of print.
Now to have easy access to better sounding copies in the analog domain to start with, and to play as part of a media server that's fine, but many times, it's also available through streaming services now. Before streaming you may only have the option of capturing and digitizing, but now, not so much as streaming will usually have what you have already, unless it's been deleted or never streamed as it's obscured.
.
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
[[Ampex 456 ]]
Actually my tape is Quantegy 456. Have about 30 boxes of NOS, purchased a decade ago with the intent of using for archiving the LPs. Did a few test recordings last year and no sticky issue found so far, thankfully.[[why]]
Tired or paying $200/month for storage unit. I am retired, will likely be traveling, want to divest of the hassle and expense of storing and maintaining the physical media.
If art interprets our dreams, the computer executes them in the guise of programs!
Edits: 02/11/21
OK, Good that you have Quantegy instead as the formula was changed just prior to the name change. You should be OK.
That makes sense, retired and traveling.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: