scratchy 78 RPM

In article <[email protected]>,
Ty Ford <[email protected]> wrote:
>Try as I will, the recording of Adoremus Te on 78 does not want to get much
>better. If you have the slightest inclination to throw your shoulder into
>this one, it a 24-bit file loading up now to my on line archive.
>
>here: http://idisk.mac.com/tyreeford-Public?view=web

Some kind of noise reduction has already been applied to this, but this
seems to be an acetate cut with a non-feedback cutter and a very large
groove. You can hear mistracking on the higher frequencies.

Try using a slightly larger stylus and playing it wet. Your issue is
not clicking or surface noise so much as the rough edge of the groove
because the cutting head was cold and tearing the surface rather than
gliding through it. Wet playback _will_ cause microcracking on the
surface, but that's the least of your worries.

Oh yes, and use a brickwall rumble filter, cranked up as high as you can
take it. The original won't have much low end anyway.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Ty Ford <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Try as I will, the recording of Adoremus Te on 78 does not want to get much
> >better. If you have the slightest inclination to throw your shoulder into
> >this one, it a 24-bit file loading up now to my on line archive.
> >
> >here: http://idisk.mac.com/tyreeford-Public?view=web

>
> Some kind of noise reduction has already been applied to this, but this
> seems to be an acetate cut with a non-feedback cutter and a very large
> groove. You can hear mistracking on the higher frequencies.

Has the nitrate shrunk and then split at the bottom of the groove,
making it wider than it was originally cut?

>
> Try using a slightly larger stylus and playing it wet. Your issue is
> not clicking or surface noise so much as the rough edge of the groove
> because the cutting head was cold and tearing the surface rather than
> gliding through it.

Do you mean the rough top edge, the 'horns'? If you do, a larger stylus
riding higher will make it worse.

> Wet playback _will_ cause microcracking on the
> surface, but that's the least of your worries.

Wetting followed by drying makes it worse, but keeping it wet and
playing it straight away nearly always improves the S/N ratio. Once it
has been wet and dried out again, nothing will ever make it as good as
the first time it was played wet..


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

Adrian Tuddenham <[email protected]> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Ty Ford <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >Try as I will, the recording of Adoremus Te on 78 does not want to get much
>> >better. If you have the slightest inclination to throw your shoulder into
>> >this one, it a 24-bit file loading up now to my on line archive.
>> >
>> >here: http://idisk.mac.com/tyreeford-Public?view=web
>
>>
>> Some kind of noise reduction has already been applied to this, but this
>> seems to be an acetate cut with a non-feedback cutter and a very large
>> groove. You can hear mistracking on the higher frequencies.
>
>Has the nitrate shrunk and then split at the bottom of the groove,
>making it wider than it was originally cut?

Maybe. That happens sometimes. It could have been cut too deep, or with
a worn cutter, too. Without a microscope you don't know, but the solution
for all of these would be to try a slightly larger stylus. I normally start
with a 2.0 mil on broadcast discs and go up from there until the esses
sound right.

>> Try using a slightly larger stylus and playing it wet. Your issue is
>> not clicking or surface noise so much as the rough edge of the groove
>> because the cutting head was cold and tearing the surface rather than
>> gliding through it.
>
>Do you mean the rough top edge, the 'horns'? If you do, a larger stylus
>riding higher will make it worse.

No, the sides of the groove get rough too if you cut with a cold stylus.
The advent of hot stylus cutting in the forties was a huge advance in
bringing the noise floor down. Transcription discs cut with a cold stylus
have groove walls that just look dull under a microscope instead of nice
and shiny. This means more noise.

>> Wet playback _will_ cause microcracking on the
>> surface, but that's the least of your worries.
>
>Wetting followed by drying makes it worse, but keeping it wet and
>playing it straight away nearly always improves the S/N ratio. Once it
>has been wet and dried out again, nothing will ever make it as good as
>the first time it was played wet..

Precisely. This makes me always really reluctant to do it wet, but it
sure makes a big improvement on stuff like this.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:

> Adrian Tuddenham <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Scott Dorsey <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> Ty Ford <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>Try as I will, the recording of Adoremus Te on 78 does not want to get much
> >>better. If you have the slightest inclination to throw your shoulder into
> >>this one, it a 24-bit file loading up now to my on line archive.
> >>
> >>here: http://idisk.mac.com/tyreeford-Public?view=web
> >
> >>
[...]
> >> Try using a slightly larger stylus and playing it wet. Your issue is
> >> not clicking or surface noise so much as the rough edge of the groove
> >> because the cutting head was cold and tearing the surface rather than
> >> gliding through it.
> >
> >Do you mean the rough top edge, the 'horns'? If you do, a larger stylus
> >riding higher will make it worse.
>
> No, the sides of the groove get rough too if you cut with a cold stylus.
> The advent of hot stylus cutting in the forties was a huge advance in
> bringing the noise floor down. Transcription discs cut with a cold stylus
> have groove walls that just look dull under a microscope instead of nice
> and shiny. This means more noise.

It was the reference to the 'rough edge' of the groove that confused me.
It sounds as if you meant a rough groove wall, in which case a number of
different styli could be tried until the quietest depth is found. If
this is being played wet, the styli all need to be lined-up beside the
turntable, ready to be changed quickly so as to minimise the length of
time the disc needs to be kept wet.

Another possibility is that the disc isn't actually made of nitrate. It
could be one of the thermosetting materials like 'Pyral' or it could be
gelatine (in which case, don't wet it!). I can't hear the file because
it won't download on my browser, does it sound to you like poor nitrate
or could it be the really noisy surface of some other material?

>
> >> Wet playback _will_ cause microcracking on the
> >> surface, but that's the least of your worries.
> >
> >Wetting followed by drying makes it worse, but keeping it wet and
> >playing it straight away nearly always improves the S/N ratio. Once it
> >has been wet and dried out again, nothing will ever make it as good as
> >the first time it was played wet..
>
> Precisely. This makes me always really reluctant to do it wet, but it
> sure makes a big improvement on stuff like this.

The theory is that water replaces some of the missing plasticiser and
returns the material to somewhere near its original shape - but when the
water evaporates, it take some of the remaining plasticiser with it and
leaves the disc worse than before.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

Ty Ford wrote:
> Try as I will, the recording of Adoremus Te on 78 does not want to get much
> better. If you have the slightest inclination to throw your shoulder into
> this one, it a 24-bit file loading up now to my on line archive.
>
> here: http://idisk.mac.com/tyreeford-Public?view=web
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
> --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
> Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
> Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU
>

Beyond help, I think. It is not just noise, which can be removed quite
nicely most of the time, but heavy distortion which has caused the noise
to modulate the music making them inextricably linked. There is also a
very heavy flutter.

d