Recording your vinyl [Archive] - The Art of Sound Forum

RochaCullen

10-04-2012, 15:34

Hi All,

I was wondering what methods others out there used to record their vinyl. Is there any software that can help dice up the recording into separate tracks, etc.

What ADCs do people use, and how relevant is this to the quality of the recorded track.

A friend of mine has a motherload of vinyl that I might begin the process of recording if I can get my setup right.

Any tips would be appreciated.

I am currently flogging my Denon DL 304 on ebay and have purchased an Audio Technica AT440 MLA MM Phono Cartridge, as the Denon sounded a little too subtle when paired with my new Audio Note kit. I am also considering swapping out my CA 640p as it gets a bit of a hard time on this forum. But I think I will try the CA with the AT440 for a little while first.

I've been considering the following:

http://www.thomann.de/ie/behringer_ultramatch_pro_src_2496.htm?sid=0dbaf3fd 0a542d62f33649e10b1007c7

Is there anything that would work better? What other kit do I need?

Nathan :cool:

PaulStewart

10-04-2012, 16:37

A friend of mine has a motherload of vinyl that I might begin the process of recording if I can get my setup right.

Sorry but record your own vinyl so you can stream it at home, put it on an iPod for out of the house, even burn CDs for the car, fine. Do it with yor mate's records and that't copyright theft and is illegal. I don't know what you do for a living but, I'm sure you want to get paid for it. People think that interlectual property theft is OK if it's for personal use well it's not. Next time your in a Tesco when you get to the checkout, tell them you don't have to pay for the food because it's for personal use and see how far you get.

Copyright theft is theft. Don't do it

northwest

10-04-2012, 18:11

Sorry but record your own vinyl so you can stream it at home, put it on an iPod for out of the house, even burn CDs for the car, fine. Do it with yor mate's records and that't copyright theft and is illegal. I don't know what you do for a living but, I'm sure you want to get paid for it. People think that interlectual property theft is OK if it's for personal use well it's not. Next time your in a Tesco when you get to the checkout, tell them you don't have to pay for the food because it's for personal use and see how far you get.

Copyright theft is theft. Don't do it

I am always faintly amused by people with this stance. Some of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time started by stealing. Take the late, great Steve Jobs for instance. He started off by stealing telephone service alongside Captain Crunch, phone phreaking. Most Mac owners - in my experience - are the most anal about Copyright Theft. It always makes me chuckle.
Copyright died with the birth of the Internet, it just didn't lie down and give it's last gasp yet. The people who pontificate: "oh yes, you know. these illegal downloaders, you know. They have cost the music industry billions!!"
What a load of cobblers. By and large they didn't cost the industry anything at all. In fact I would argue quite the opposite. By making music more available, by spreading it out to a wider audience there has been an opportunity to present to a wider audience. An opportunity widely ignored by the music industry in their fervour to retain control of sand running through their fingers.
Do you really think the spotty yoof downloading a zillion MP3's would stop and instead actually pay for those tracks? Not a bloody chance. He/She only has them because he CAN download them (and if you are thinking of stopping that, go sit in front of the sea and stop the tide coming in first for practice) He/She never intended to buy those tracks - EVER! Therefore there quite simply CANNOT be a "loss". It is the most ludicrous self serving statement I have ever herad.
Lets look at this from another angle shall we?
Quite recently I went to a charity shop and bought a vinyl record. Cost me fifty pence. I am sure there are plenty on here have done the same.
Where is the "royalty" element in that? Who is going to recieve their "cut"?
No, it's all bollocks. Music, as with all art, needs to be shared. Let's take the example of a painting. Painting is art, right? But insted of listening to it you look at it. What happens when I show a friend a picture of the Mona Lisa? Feck me, no royalties to the Louvre? Is this a requirement? Shall my friend now "unsee" the picture?
No, I would argue that this gives a broader awareness of art and in turn motivates people to consider Art generally.
People really need to get over themselves with this and stop toeing the party line. A greater exposure to music results - directly in my experience - in more music being produced and ergo, more sales.
Nobody is losing anything and quite the opposite it does result in more music sales.
If you really are concerned about the artist losing money. Stop buying the downloadable offerings from iTunes and others and buy the CD. Apple - and many other such services - treat the artists like shit.

Thing Fish

10-04-2012, 18:20

Zoidburg

10-04-2012, 18:29

I am always faintly amused by people with this stance. Some of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time started by stealing. Take the late, great Steve Jobs for instance. He started off by stealing telephone service alongside Captain Crunch, phone phreaking. Most Mac owners - in my experience - are the most anal about Copyright Theft. It always makes me chuckle.
Copyright died with the birth of the Internet, it just didn't lie down and give it's last gasp yet. The people who pontificate: "oh yes, you know. these illegal downloaders, you know. They have cost the music industry billions!!"
What a load of cobblers. By and large they didn't cost the industry anything at all. In fact I would argue quite the opposite. By making music more available, by spreading it out to a wider audience there has been an opportunity to present to a wider audience. An opportunity widely ignored by the music industry in their fervour to retain control of sand running through their fingers.
Do you really think the spotty yoof downloading a zillion MP3's would stop and instead actually pay for those tracks? Not a bloody chance. He/She only has them because he CAN download them (and if you are thinking of stopping that, go sit in front of the sea and stop the tide coming in first for practice) He/She never intended to buy those tracks - EVER! Therefore there quite simply CANNOT be a "loss". It is the most ludicrous self serving statement I have ever herad.
Lets look at this from another angle shall we?
Quite recently I went to a charity shop and bought a vinyl record. Cost me fifty pence. I am sure there are plenty on here have done the same.
Where is the "royalty" element in that? Who is going to recieve their "cut"?
No, it's all bollocks. Music, as with all art, needs to be shared. Let's take the example of a painting. Painting is art, right? But insted of listening to it you look at it. What happens when I show a friend a picture of the Mona Lisa? Feck me, no royalties to the Louvre? Is this a requirement? Shall my friend now "unsee" the picture?
No, I would argue that this gives a broader awareness of art and in turn motivates people to consider Art generally.
People really need to get over themselves with this and stop toeing the party line. A greater exposure to music results - directly in my experience - in more music being produced and ergo, more sales.
Nobody is losing anything and quite the opposite it does result in more music sales.
If you really are concerned about the artist losing money. Stop buying the downloadable offerings from iTunes and others and buy the CD. Apple - and many other such services - treat the artists like shit.

Well put dude, totally agree with you.

PaulStewart

10-04-2012, 18:49

So you never taped songs as a kid...!

Yes I did tape songs as a kid and unlike thieves I bought an MCPS licence to do so. Cost about a fiver a year and gave be peace of mind and the moral high ground.:) Don't steal it's wrong. As for the spurious argument that if you buy a record second hand their is no royalty element, That is legal you can buy and sell the physical carrier all you want as the royalty has been paid on it. What you may not do is extract the intellectual property from that carrier and sell or distribute that, it's stealing pure and simple

PaulStewart

10-04-2012, 18:55

snapper

10-04-2012, 18:58

Copyright theft is theft. Don't do it

I wholeheartedly agree.

I am always faintly amused by people with this stance.

Copyright died with the birth of the Internet

:mental:

Well put dude, totally agree with you.

:rolleyes:

Maybe when you're the victim of copyright theft, you'll think differently.

Snapper (who is a victim and lost in excess of £150,000)

:steam:

Reid Malenfant

10-04-2012, 19:04

Ok, let me ask a question :) I know quite a few semi professional DJs that do sets of music at gigs, be it drum 'n' bass, jungle, techno or whatever.

I'm not at all sure that these DJs have any kind of a license allowing them to spin these records as I'm sure that the person that wrote the record itself only get royalties from the original sale. What it does promote is people into dance music going out & buying records or recordings of the sets themselves by their favourite DJs.

Now as I have set up the sound for a few gigs locally, I took the opportunity of recording these sets onto a hifi VHS video recorder - which is the very same thing as what used to happen at The Eclipse in Coventry & so many other places except onto cassettes ;)

You'd regard this as theft?

Go take a look at the Soundcloud website. There is literally thousands of sets of music made by different DJs etc which you can download for absolutely nothing. A lot of the records spun on these sets are nothing to do with the DJ apart from it was spun by him..

RichB

10-04-2012, 19:05

How do we record vinyl? Heres how i do it and it suffices for my purposes, Technics SL1800 (acquired for a reasonable sum from a member of this forum) fitted with Ortofon OM5E (which i bought) going straight into my Pioneer A400 (crap phono stage I know) with Monster cables I had lying around, then running a tape out from source direct into my PC's internal soundcard... I do all my rips in Audacity and apply the programs click removal effect. They sound pretty darn good considering the rubbish state of some of the old vinyl. In terms of labelling and stuff i do it the hard way, find the gaps in the recording and export the relevant selection to FLAC.

On the issue of copyright I think any albums purchased by me or my mates are fair game and will rip whatever comes my way. I dont go in for downloading (legally or illegally) as there seems to be so much music around that can be acquired so cheaply. I often browse ebay for CDs and have been known to have up to a hundred bids in where people are selling off their cd collections, I tend to 'win' 10-15% of everything i bid on so regularly have new discs dropping through my letterbox, these get ripped to FLAC and the CDs put in the cupboard, same for vinyl...Also a sucker for the odd chariity shop purchase, in all I've probably acquired around 30 albums in the last 6 weeks or so. all legititmately and for an outlay of approx a pound each... At that price its hardly worth the bother of stealing and I get to discover artists and tunes i wouldnt have found otherwise. Right now I'm ripping loads of old drum and bass stuff on vinyl that hadnt seen the light of day in 15 year or so, the ability to create a high quality digital copy has brought some of this music back into the world from relative obscurity (some might sat it should stay there). It will be streamed on my main system and played back to people who probably never even heard it first time around. Surely thats a good thing for the artists and labels who cared enough to make it in the first place!

northwest

10-04-2012, 19:06

As for the even more spurious comment about the Mona Lisa, well in case you had not noticed the copyright in that painting belonged to Leonardo DaVinci, not the Louvre and as the tem of copyright is the artist's life plus 70 years......... I think that it's not a problem:lol:

Paul, please do me the courtesy of not obfusciating the actual subject at hand here.
If you have NEVER done anything wrong in your entire life, either illegal OR immoral I salute you sir. But you are the only person in the British Isles who hasn't. I do however have a deal of sympathy for your position and I respect it. You need two extremes of an argument, two zealots, in order to reach some middle ground - a compromise. You have one end of the argument but I have mellowed with age so I will hand the other extreme to someone who is equally passionate about the other end of the spectrum.
Personally, I will sleep peacefully knowing that I have contributed directly to those artists whose music I love. Despite the several gigabytes of MP3's I don't listen to.

PaulStewart

10-04-2012, 19:09

Now as I have set up the sound for a few gigs locally, I took the opportunity of recording these sets onto a hifi VHS video recorder - which is the very same thing as what used to happen at The Eclipse in Coventry & so many other places except onto cassettes ;)

You'd regard this as theft?

No if it's for personal use and a record of something you have set up, that is OK, if you sell copies that's bootlegging. Most venues, pubs etc. do have Public Perfomance Licences that cover DJs:)

Cheers

Reid Malenfant

10-04-2012, 19:12

Cheers Paul, that does make sense :) I should have thought about that one :eyebrows:

WOStantonCS100

10-04-2012, 19:14

Copyright theft is theft. Don't do it

You can't steal a copyright. :rolleyes: Even if someone broke into my home and stole my copyright certificate, they still wouldn't own it.

PaulStewart

10-04-2012, 19:18

Cheers Paul, that does make sense :) I should have thought about that one :eyebrows:

If I recall the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988 correctly, then recording the set when you are involved in producing it, would come under the "Fair Dealing" clause.

As for comments about iTunes and other online streaming like Spotify, I got £38.00 royalties for online last quarter, paid for a curry out for me and the Mrs, I got bugger all for illegal downloads:steam:

TTFN

WOStantonCS100

10-04-2012, 19:30

northwest

10-04-2012, 19:30

PPL should be held by any venue where music is performed/aired for Public enjoyment. So let's take for instance the issue of maybe a festival. The PRS (performing rights) set the rate or value of that event on the projected sales. So for instance let's take a ticket sales value of 2.5 million pounds? The PRS will set the value of the PPL (the Licence) on those sales, let's say £100,000, £45,000 whatever. This figure is arrived at from the face value of the ticket sales. So what about the manager/promoter, in this instance Harvey Goldsmith, who overprinted by 3000 the tickets for the Michael Jackson concerts at the Royal Albert hall back in the late eighties? Standing tickets you see, not like a seat.
So the revenues from the sales are not entered into the calculation so the Band's manager (assuming original material) are actually ripping off their own clients!

No, this is a can of worms and the sooner the lid is torn right off it the sooner we can all get on with a workable model that distributes the revenue FAIRLY and not just to a few at the top.

On the subject of bootlegging. Although I do not condone this AT ALL I am really saddened that some of the best concerts in the world are no longer available to us because the bootlegs were destroyed. This is vandalism. The bootlegs should have been released after seizure and the artist could have further profited.

northwest

10-04-2012, 19:43

As for comments about iTunes and other online streaming like Spotify, I got £38.00 royalties for online last quarter, paid for a curry out for me and the Mrs, I got bugger all for illegal downloads:steam:

TTFN

Paul, this is MY POINT EXACTLY. Nothing to write home about from the "online services" and you were never going to get anything from the illegal downloads.

So, as the artist you recieved three parts of FA from the Spottify service. Yet it is "legal" for me to listen to this service and you - advocate for the prosecution - cannot tell me this is "illegal".

So let me get this straight. I can listen to a free service, perfectly legitimately without fear of any accusations, which pays the artist - in this case you - not so much as the cost of a meal for one in a year. Yet if I listen to music that I have saved for later consumption - because I do not have an infinite amount of time to listen to music - I am an arch criminal who should be ostracised by society.

I think not. This needs urgent revision and people such as yourself need to get yourselves organised and petition for change. And do not rely on the Managers either because a bigger bunch of self interested morally derelict individuals as contained within the music managers forum will NEVER help their artists. There are of coyurse excepions, I just haven't met one yet.
But screaming "criminal", especially on a forum such as this where by and large the populace are passionate about music, will do you no favours.

PaulStewart

10-04-2012, 22:22

Graham, I'm both a PRS member and I sit on the board of the British Photographic Council. In a "Past Life" I was a council member of the British Guild of record producers, so as you can see I have experience of intellectual property maters that goes back about 4o years. I agree that the pay rates for Spotify, iTunes etc are too low, but getting something rather than nothing, is better than a smack in the face with a wet kipper. If you download legally, the record companies accepted some years ago that it's OK to transfer recordings to other media for personal use.

Once we have established that the correct mode for obtaining any IP products, is buying or renting and not stealing then we can see about upping the rate. I do know that the amount record companies have to lay out on new bands has shrunk by 75% in the last 10 years, and this is bad for new music development. In real terms the cost of music is way lower than it used to be, so we need to make sure every thing that is taken is paid for. If we don't we will have no more creative industries.

mike1210

10-04-2012, 23:43

My setup is

out of my 1210 into a Trichord Dino Phono Stage (Plus power supply and modded diodes)
Dino into a Focusrite Saffire (Mark Grant cable)
Saffire into PC using Soundforge to capture audio
This can edit the files also.

Beobloke

11-04-2012, 07:23

Hi All,

I was wondering what methods others out there used to record their vinyl.

(1) Clean record and load it up onto turntable

(2) Unwrap nice new TDK SA90 and pop into cassette deck. Switch Dolby B on

(3) Play loudest passage of music that can be seen on the record, put cassete deck into record pause mode and set levels.

(4) Return stylus to start of record, set recorder playing. Record LP

Easy. :)

RochaCullen

11-04-2012, 08:27

worrasf

11-04-2012, 11:12

do all my rips in Audacity and apply the programs click removal effect.

+1 for Audacity and Click Repair - I also use DeNoise on v poor recordings (Click Repair and DeNoise are from Kagi Software).

I take a lineout from my SOHA II headphone amp which is fed from the Tape Replay socket of my Quad 33 either direct into my iMac or via Griffin iMic if going into my MacBook.

Experience suggests that setting input volume so that the displayed waveform is between -0.5 and +0.5 gives best results.

I save the Audacity project file as a master copy then export as an AIFF - use Audacity silence finder to help locate each individual track - export as a multiple file and title each track as per album sleeve. Import each AIFF file into iTunes library then convert to Apple lossless format and delete the AIFF files but remembering to keep the Audacity project file for later use/editing if required. Sounds a bit long-winded but once you get the knack it's fairly slick. I've not compared the SQ to other folk's needle drops but my Apple Lossless version of Led Zepp BBC sessions (4 disc set) is IMHO pretty darn good and certainly good enough for when I dont have access to teh original vinyl.

Steve

RochaCullen

11-04-2012, 11:25

+1 for Audacity and Click Repair - I also use DeNoise on v poor recordings (Click Repair and DeNoise are from Kagi Software).

I take a lineout from my SOHA II headphone amp which is fed from the Tape Replay socket of my Quad 33 either direct into my iMac or via Griffin iMic if going into my MacBook.

Experience suggests that setting input volume so that the displayed waveform is between -0.5 and +0.5 gives best results.

I save the Audacity project file as a master copy then export as an AIFF - use Audacity silence finder to help locate each individual track - export as a multiple file and title each track as per album sleeve. Import each AIFF file into iTunes library then convert to Apple lossless format and delete the AIFF files but remembering to keep the Audacity project file for later use/editing if required. Sounds a bit long-winded but once you get the knack it's fairly slick. I've not compared the SQ to other folk's needle drops but my Apple Lossless version of Led Zepp BBC sessions (4 disc set) is IMHO pretty darn good and certainly good enough for when I dont have access to teh original vinyl.

Steve

Fantastic,

This is what I am talking about!

Thanks,

Nathan

WOStantonCS100

11-04-2012, 21:35

If I was going to go digital:

LP -> Sony PCM-M10 portable 24/96 recorder -> dump to computer and then...

LP -> M-Audio Audiophile 192 (in computer) @ 24/192 and then...

LP -> Denon DN-F650R @ 24/96 (since it records internally OR to USB devices, I could just keep it on those)

LP -> Tascam DV-RA1000HD @ 24/192 or DSD 2.6MHz -> edit internally and dump from internal hard drive to DVD-R OR from internal hard drive to computer and then...

LP -> Korg MR-2000S -> dump to computer and then...

and then... = use whatever choice DAW/editing software to create files or burn discs. In the past, I have used Sonar, CD Wave, Gold Wave, Audacity, Sound Forge, etc. etc. etc.

Beechwoods

11-04-2012, 21:38

jazzpiano

11-04-2012, 21:55

I can't really refute anything Paul says. And as far as Snapper goes - $150K(!), that's a LOT of money - I'd be pissed as hell and on a mission. That being said though, in generalI just don't care. I look at these things in relation to the environment, people and the news. So... I've got my local Harley execs making millions in bonuses while workers are laid-off and I see foreclosure notices all around. Corruption abounds, especially at the highest levels. I knew a teacher who would spend much of his own precious off-time and what few expendable bucks he had on blank tapes to make mix tapes to hand out to kids when they were leaving his class for the last time. They loved it. How many of us have fond memories of sitting on the floor, LPs spread all around, head phones on, carefully dialing in that meter level...
Have fun. But if you're in it for big business I hope you get nailed! In general though, it just doesn't stack up.

Best,
Barry

WOStantonCS100

11-04-2012, 22:24

I use a Tascam HD-P2 compact flash recorder for personal archiving of tape / vinyl to digital. I love this machine. It's not the cheapest, but it is a perfect balance between portable and fullsize, does 24/96 and has excellent an excellent A>D. Takes balanced and unabalanced inputs, line and mic, yada yada yada :)

Hmmmm... I didn't realize the HD-P2 had 192 capability... and price-wise it's right on par with the DN-F650R.

Nick, How satisfied are you with 24/96??

I've tried to like 16/44.1, even upsampled, and I just can't do. As a result, I'm left with no portable audio options since I'm loathe to take my LP's and tapes out of the house.

Beechwoods

12-04-2012, 06:47

Biff, the HD-P2 doesn't have 192 capability 24/96 is as high as it goes. For me, 24/96 is more than adequate and the quality of the rest of the electronics means it retains the analogue quality of the original, none of that thinness and hardness sometimes found with cheaper recorders, or DATs that I've heard.

drrd

12-04-2012, 09:42

Highly recommend DSD and the Tascam DV1000 though it's not amazing for A-D, I use it because I can connect my dCS 904 with sdif. I haven't tried them but I hear good things about the Korg DSD recorders. I would actually avoid any automated click removal software, it's just not clever enough. You need a good front end and a good recorder and that's it really. If you must then a click/error removal tool like in Wavelab is quite useful, sort of semi-automated and you can visually check what's to be corrected and make sure it's not just hacking off leading edges of transients. Tbh though with DSD it sounds so much like analogue that I don't bother editing at all, in the same way a crackle or pop doesnt bother me when I listen to a record directly. DSD has actually speeded up the whole process because I just play a record with the recorder running, top and tail it and it's done, next record. Very enjoyable process all round.

AlexM

12-04-2012, 15:07

Hi,

I use the Phono stage from my C-J PV-15 into an Emu 04/04 USB for a/d and Wave Corrector (http://www.wavecor.co.uk/) for track-splitting/fades/click-removal/FLAC encoding on the PC. This is a beautiful and powerful tool for those with borderline OCD such as myself, and the results can be fantastic.

I usually record at 24/96 for processing, and then re-sample to 24/48 or 16/48 for playback. I find you loose almost nothing at 16/48 in comparison to 24/96 if you use a good sample rate converter (DbPowerAmp SRC with triangular dither in my case!).

BTW, buy a good record cleaning machine before you rip - you'll save hours and hours in post-processing and get much better sound to boot.

Regards,
Alex

WOStantonCS100

17-04-2012, 23:37

I just ordered a Tascam DV-RA1000HD. I guess I'm about to answer the which is truer to vinyl, DSD or PCM question for myself.

...................I must be :mental:

Stratmangler

17-04-2012, 23:50

I just ordered a Tascam DV-RA1000HD. I guess I'm about to answer the which is truer to vinyl, DSD or PCM question for myself.

...................I must be :mental:

That's one serious machine you've got coming your way.
You must be :mental: 'cos they cost a fortune :eek:

WOStantonCS100

20-04-2012, 03:07

That's one serious machine you've got coming your way.
You must be :mental: 'cos they cost a fortune :eek:

Tomorrow, the Tascam should arrive. In preparation, I have spent the last two nights and this evening in intense listening sessions.

The first night I listened to LP transfers I made to 16/44.1 played back upsampled to 176.4 Though noticeably smoother (in a good way), they still didn't sound "right". Not bad. But, not "right". Last night I listened to LP transfers I made to cassette, reel and vhs hi-fi. All I can say is that the Tascam has A LOT to live up to going against tape. If it doesn't deliver, back it goes. I'm putting analog upgrades on hold to do this. Shoot, I could've bought almost two Fender Deluxe Player Stratocasters for that much cash. ;) :hairmetal:

StanleyB

20-04-2012, 07:05

WOStantonCS100

20-04-2012, 08:48

Can I ask why you upsampled to 176.4KHz? Engineers normally record at a higher sample rate and then down sample, not the other way round.
It's like taking a picture at 1 megapixels and then enlarging it, instead of taking the picture at a higher resolution.

The 16/44.1 LP transfers were done using a standalone CD recorder and/or a PC based DAW with the intention of producing a disc compatible with Red Book CD/players; so, of course, no option for higher resolution with this format.

Smoker

27-04-2012, 01:29

WOStantonCS100

27-04-2012, 05:45

I would like to make recordings of some of my vinyl but would like to return to reel to reel. so far ive looked into the revox b77 and the pioneer 909, but would like opinions on these models or any that would be as good.

thank you :)

Once the other tapers see this, you're likely to get a long list.

With the exception of a brand new Otari, any deck you go with, will most likely need maintenance and/or parts. The ability to service these decks or get parts is crucial to their performance and should be factored into the purchase price. I got most of my decks for a song; but, have put a fair amount of dosh into them to bring them about. Of the ones I own, my fully refurbed Revox PR99MkI has no peers (in my house) when it comes to recording. Even my recently acquired Tascam DV-RA1000HD running at 24/192 can't beat it (though it's the best digital I've had in the house thus far).

AlfaGTV

27-04-2012, 06:31

On-Topic:
I am using different turntables/arms/carts fed into my Lehmann Audio Black Cube and from there to my PC where an Asus Xonar Essence STX does the AD conversion.
The files are recorded in 24/96 rez using Audacity, saved as WAV files.
Only uses Normalize for setting reasonable levels.

The resulting files does NOT perform on the same level as the vinyl so i really should look into some other AD solution. (seems the Asus cannot handle the true dynamics of a proper vinyl rig)

But, for comparing different setups, turntables and carts its really useful! ;)

Off-Topic:
The law is one thing, constructed by lobbyists representing different commercial interests. Moral interpretation is another.
IMO: It's OK to share recordings from hand to hand, as long as no one is making money, or loosing money in the process. It's not OK to spread to the public though, such as via Internet.
Personally i tend to buy the CD or Vinyl if i borrow something, or hear something on Spotify, that i like. I like to have the physical media in my posession.

Br Mike

Smoker

27-04-2012, 07:49

Thanks for the info regarding the pr99! im on the hunt now see if i can track one down. once I can do analogue back ups I'll then decide on an external soundcard for pc backups to wav.

dave2010

27-04-2012, 15:56

Can I ask why you upsampled to 176.4KHz? Engineers normally record at a higher sample rate and then down sample, not the other way round.
It's like taking a picture at 1 megapixels and then enlarging it, instead of taking the picture at a higher resolution.That's an interesting comment Stan. Simple upsampling from 44.1 to 176.4 just generates 4 identical samples from each 44.1 sample, but if filtering is then applied in the upsampled data it's just plausible that there could be a perceived improvement. Not very, but slightly. Try upsampling an image and then applying gaussian filtering. There will be a loss in sharpness (which arguably isn't there anyway) but the image might look slightly better. Of course to really do better things with images you need to do something like this - http://chiranjivi.tripod.com/EDITut.html look at the images from Li and Orchard - or see this article - http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=951537

Also, returning to audio again, it could be that whatever is playing the 176.4kHz data is doing some filtering on playback, which could also affect the sound.

I don't know what most engineers do for recording. If they record using PCM at high sampling rates, then they'll simply capture a whole lot of inaudible "energy", which should then be filtered out in order to get the data onto a 44.1k CD. This is probably better than using an analogue or digital brick wall filter to remove the HF components before digitising.

Some recording techniques might use other methods for the A-D in which case upsampling can be a way to move noise out of band. Are there any direct to DSD recorders? [Obviously yes - there are recorders by Korg and others, but note my use of the word "direct".] If so, and if they don't go via a PCM step, then this could well be what they do.

If noise shaping techniques are used, there can be rather large amounts of noise at high frequencies - in theory inaudible, but could have effects on equipment, and also on perception if any subsequent process maps it back into the audible range.

WOStantonCS100

27-04-2012, 17:59

Thanks for the info regarding the pr99! im on the hunt now see if i can track one down. once I can do analogue back ups I'll then decide on an external soundcard for pc backups to wav.

Honestly, I'm guessing a B77 of same spec (ie. check speeds & track configuration) would be just as good as a PR99.

The PR99 is a "professional/broadcast" deck. For me, that meant I had the I/O's converted to consumer, instead of pro, levels. I didn't want to use inline attenuators. Also, the PR99 is 1/4" 1/2 track. Essentially, I wind up using more tape because the tape can't be "flipped" to the other side, as you can do with many consumer 1/4" machines that use a 1/4 track. The trade off is the sound quality.

Smoker

28-04-2012, 16:53

Honestly, I'm guessing a B77 of same spec (ie. check speeds & track configuration) would be just as good as a PR99.

The PR99 is a "professional/broadcast" deck. For me, that meant I had the I/O's converted to consumer, instead of pro, levels. I didn't want to use inline attenuators. Also, the PR99 is 1/4" 1/2 track. Essentially, I wind up using more tape because the tape can't be "flipped" to the other side, as you can do with many consumer 1/4" machines that use a 1/4 track. The trade off is the sound quality.

ahh i understand, thanks for that. ive a friend with a b77 squeals some, must need some extra bearing oil/grease? if available Id rather get this as it was owned from new by only 1 owner. im watching both a pr99 and a b77 on ebay. i'll go with your recommendation and aim for a b77. Ive been reading about what i can do in terms of basic maintenence and what needs to be done by a pro interms with servicing.

probably sound crazy to some but id take a reel to reel over an ipad3/mac book anyday lol