vinyl archiving...

by **jkhuri44** » Tue May 18, 2010 4:08 pm

G'day guys,

i know there's been a thread about this before, not however asking the same questions i'm about to.

I am going to start archiving some electronic music from Vinyl....however, am unsure what the best sort of set up os for this.

I've got my turntables, and Convertor isnt a prob (the idea is use the most transparent possible).

what i was wondering about was the kind of needles people use for best possible recording/archiving, and also what the ideal Preamp is for this purpose? I imagine, something transparent again, the real question is which pre would have the right load for a turntable....?

by **Chris H** » Tue May 18, 2010 4:23 pm

You need to use a phono preamp. What i have done is use the phono stage of my sansui AU555 hi fi amp that was a pretty good amp in it's day.
If you want to go audiophile quality thenn there are plenty for sale on eBay. There is a Duntech one for sale at the moment for $300+. the sale has ended, but it didnt sell so contact the seller if interested.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll ... K:MEWAX:IT

I use an Audio Technica needle?Cartridge and it's great ....cost about $300 but the whole turntable and arm is as important so hunt down a good one.

by **jkhuri44** » Tue May 18, 2010 4:26 pm

Chris H wrote:You need to use a phono preamp. What i have done is use the phono stage of my sansui AU555 hi fi amp that was a pretty good amp in it's day.
If you want to go audiophile quality thenn there are plenty for sale on eBay. There is a Duntech one for sale at the moment for $300+. the sale has ended, but it didnt sell so contact the seller if interested.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll ... K:MEWAX:IT

so, a preamp of that quality would be as good as using a studio stereo preamp with variable impedance?

by **lonearranger** » Tue May 18, 2010 4:33 pm

Records use a special eq curve (RIAA) - see http://www.graniteaudio.com/phono/page5.html

You need to use a preamp that can handle this eq curve or it will be all over the shop - thus your humble HIFI amp phono-in to tape out or the higher end purpose builts that chris mentioned are essential.

There may be some post processing plugins that would attempt to do the same thing - personally would trust analog more in this case.

Cheers

by **Kurt** » Tue May 18, 2010 4:46 pm

Even the cheapest nastiest usb box with phono inputs will have better frequency response than records, including the Chinese made Teutonic name one.

Pretty sure there a several different companies making riaa compensated preamp - usb boxes.
I saw an expensive plug-in to do the same thing (part of a commercial package, with a "transparent interface" that looked remarkably like a very cheap rca/usb box), or I guess you could create the required eq curve in your favourite eq plug-in. I'm sure they'd be more accurate to the specs than all but the best phono pres.

by **jkhuri44** » Tue May 18, 2010 4:53 pm

i would, as lonearanger suggested, just use a box that does this, the least processing possible would be great, as i will have quite a few to do...and would want the process to be as easy as possibly...

emphasis is on good sounding, transparent stuff here, rather than cheap "get the job done" boxes.

by **Kurt** » Tue May 18, 2010 5:21 pm

That was kind of my point... With the noise inherent in records even the cheapest box you can find will not introduce any audible noise/artefacts over and above what is already there.

If a box (regardless of price) sticks to the RIAA specification then it's accurate (or "transparent"). If it imparts a special sound, even if that sound is desirable, then it isn't accurate.

Lots of things sound good because of their inaccuracies, but they aren't transparent.

jkhuri44 wrote:i would, as lonearanger suggested, just use a box that does this, the least processing possible would be great, as i will have quite a few to do...and would want the process to be as easy as possibly...

emphasis is on good sounding, transparent stuff here, rather than cheap "get the job done" boxes.

by **jkhuri44** » Tue May 18, 2010 5:26 pm

oh i see, sorry i didnt quite understand that part....i should read that RIAA spec stuff first!

by **Chris H** » Tue May 18, 2010 5:33 pm

Kurt wrote:That was kind of my point... With the noise inherent in records even the cheapest box you can find will not introduce any audible noise/artefacts over and above what is already there.

If a box (regardless of price) sticks to the RIAA specification then it's accurate (or "transparent"). If it imparts a special sound, even if that sound is desirable, then it isn't accurate.

Lots of things sound good because of their inaccuracies, but they aren't transparent.

jkhuri44 wrote:i would, as lonearanger suggested, just use a box that does this, the least processing possible would be great, as i will have quite a few to do...and would want the process to be as easy as possibly...

emphasis is on good sounding, transparent stuff here, rather than cheap "get the job done" boxes.

Hey Kurt, you're not making a lot of sense here....or i'm not understanding what you're trying to say. The noise of a record you are referring to, i'm guessing is the noise floor, made up of any turntable rumble or clicks and pops from scratches? On a good system with good records this should be negligible. Despite this, as in any bit of audio kit, the quality of the build, design layout and components will have a direct affect on the quality of the reproduction of audio so it pays to get good gear to get good sound and, assuming your records are in fair to great condition then it's worth getting good gear to archive your vinyl collection.

by **Kurt** » Tue May 18, 2010 5:59 pm

Being a child of the 70's I am supposed to have fond memories of the scratch/scratch/rumble/click/scratch/pop of records, but I don't! (When I was a kid my favourite use of Dad's records was to put the needle in the run-off groove and crank the bass to simulate explosions. Don't tell him.) I agree with you though, a good record on a good turntable will sound good.

Records by their very nature have timing and frequency variations and a high noise floor, these inherent inaccuracies will be vastly higher than any introduced by virtually any digital interface designed for the purpose. This is where I'm coming from when I suggest Jamil use whatever he can get hold of to do the job.

Any phono preamp will present a 47k load (thanks google!) and apply the appropriate de-emphasis. But ones that sound great are probably doing more than that and that's why I say that good sounding isn't transparent.

Chris H wrote:
Kurt wrote:That was kind of my point... With the noise inherent in records even the cheapest box you can find will not introduce any audible noise/artefacts over and above what is already there.

If a box (regardless of price) sticks to the RIAA specification then it's accurate (or "transparent"). If it imparts a special sound, even if that sound is desirable, then it isn't accurate.

Lots of things sound good because of their inaccuracies, but they aren't transparent.

jkhuri44 wrote:i would, as lonearanger suggested, just use a box that does this, the least processing possible would be great, as i will have quite a few to do...and would want the process to be as easy as possibly...

emphasis is on good sounding, transparent stuff here, rather than cheap "get the job done" boxes.

Hey Kurt, you're not making a lot of sense here....or i'm not understanding what you're trying to say. The noise of a record you are referring to, i'm guessing is the noise floor, made up of any turntable rumble or clicks and pops from scratches? On a good system with good records this should be negligible. Despite this, as in any bit of audio kit, the quality of the build, design layout and components will have a direct affect on the quality of the reproduction of audio so it pays to get good gear to get good sound and, assuming your records are in fair to great condition then it's worth getting good gear to archive your vinyl collection.

by **Chris H** » Tue May 18, 2010 6:34 pm

Kurt wrote:Being a child of the 70's I am supposed to have fond memories of the scratch/scratch/rumble/click/scratch/pop of records, but I don't! (When I was a kid my favourite use of Dad's records was to put the needle in the run-off groove and crank the bass to simulate explosions. Don't tell him.) I agree with you though, a good record on a good turntable will sound good.

Records by their very nature have timing and frequency variations and a high noise floor, these inherent inaccuracies will be vastly higher than any introduced by virtually any digital interface designed for the purpose. This is where I'm coming from when I suggest Jamil use whatever he can get hold of to do the job.

Any phono preamp will present a 47k load (thanks google!) and apply the appropriate de-emphasis. But ones that sound great are probably doing more than that and that's why I say that good sounding isn't transparent.

Chris H wrote:
Kurt wrote:That was kind of my point... With the noise inherent in records even the cheapest box you can find will not introduce any audible noise/artefacts over and above what is already there.

If a box (regardless of price) sticks to the RIAA specification then it's accurate (or "transparent"). If it imparts a special sound, even if that sound is desirable, then it isn't accurate.

Lots of things sound good because of their inaccuracies, but they aren't transparent.

jkhuri44 wrote:i would, as lonearanger suggested, just use a box that does this, the least processing possible would be great, as i will have quite a few to do...and would want the process to be as easy as possibly...

emphasis is on good sounding, transparent stuff here, rather than cheap "get the job done" boxes.

Hey Kurt, you're not making a lot of sense here....or i'm not understanding what you're trying to say. The noise of a record you are referring to, i'm guessing is the noise floor, made up of any turntable rumble or clicks and pops from scratches? On a good system with good records this should be negligible. Despite this, as in any bit of audio kit, the quality of the build, design layout and components will have a direct affect on the quality of the reproduction of audio so it pays to get good gear to get good sound and, assuming your records are in fair to great condition then it's worth getting good gear to archive your vinyl collection.

Ok. definitely not wanting to be argumentative but we are audio engineers or recording enthusiasts here and if the "audio standards bar" gets lowered on forums like this, what hope is there???..... so i'm clarifying what's important to me...... Good gear may not be transparent, but cheap gear will not be transparent either. The best word, or words to use would be accurate reproduction of the audio signal.The cheap USB phono stage will have an analogue stage and if the reproduction and conversion is as accurate as high end A to D and the analogue stage is as good as eg the duntech or Manley stage then we have a high standard achieved, if not we are missing something in the capture and repro of the original record . I'm assuming, jkhuri44 has a good a to d already,..... and i'm guessing a fair quality hi fi amp will have a better analogue phono preamp than the cheap USB one. My advice is to go with the best you can afford and with a bit of creative thinking this doesn't have to be prohibitively expensive.
Now to be explicit and call you out, this is not good advice you give here and is in a nut shell where you are going wrong:.....

[Quote]Records by their very nature have timing and frequency variations and a high noise floor, these inherent inaccuracies will be vastly higher than any introduced by virtually any digital interface designed for the purpose. This is where I'm coming from when I suggest Jamil use whatever he can get hold of to do the job.[end Quote]

by **rick** » Tue May 18, 2010 7:08 pm

i have just about everything to add here but i dont think i will - it would take me all night

jamil you simply need to get a stand alone riaa phono preamp of some quality , you can spend $49 or $69,000 so pick somewhere in there and buy one - plug that into the line in of your daw converters and your a winner

the question of cartridge and needles is an ambush waiting to happen , but get a cartridge that can play back @ + 4dbm without distorting and you will cover most situations , you best bet for as a simple starting point is a higher model shure setup
ie whatever the modern equivilant of a v15 mk 4 is
get a new needle that fits , clean your records and go for it

oh yeah adjust your arm for stylus and tracking weight etc etc and then figure out if you want to clean the audio up

but the bottom line is its pretty hard for a usb converter to have enough volts to run the audio part of the circuit very well unless its well designed and the designer gave a shit , so best just get a stand alone job 2nd hand from the zillions that were made over the years

by **Kurt** » Tue May 18, 2010 7:23 pm

I missed the bleeding obvious solution....

Don't you have a good quality DJ mixer you can use as a pre?

Chris, sorry I guess I was just being argumentative. True the budget solution is rarely the best, on the other hand the most expensive is rarely necessary.

by **Mickstape** » Tue May 18, 2010 7:38 pm

I've been using a technics 1200 with an ortofon cartridge and needle, you can get the both in a kit for round $4-500 for a semi decent one, I think the pro spec one is around 2.5k. There is another cool invention that cleans vinyl, it was mentioned in AT or one of the audio mags a few weeks back.

As for the pre well I reckon what Chris advised would be enough mate,and usually what rick offers is from experience so yeah do that too.

http://www.castlehillhifi.com.au/?main= ... 7B/Ortofon

just offhand Rick, could you offer informed advice regarding the difference between the hill and dale and side by side(45/45) process, is one better than the other in terms of "accurate reproduction"?

by **jkhuri44** » Tue May 18, 2010 8:05 pm

the use of this is to digitise alot of classic electronic and new electronic stuff coming out....it wont have rumble, crackle or hiss...(at least the relatively new stuff).

i agree with chris, would feel a bit scared recording this nicely produced music with a crude USB box...i want the tunes to sound the same as they do on the vinyl (to a degree)..

thats why i was asking for some recommendations for some good archiving styli and good preamps for this application.

i do have a preamp in my mixer, but i dont want to use it...its just a club mixer...not nice enough for reocrding the audio for listening.

by **Ausrock** » Tue May 18, 2010 9:04 pm

I don't know your setup but a few years ago I needed to play/record vinyl so I purchased a basic/budget phono preamp (yes it did the job just fine), ran it into my S/craft and made sure to connect the Earth connection to the console and...............voila, it worked.

by **rick** » Tue May 18, 2010 10:12 pm

Mickstape wrote:I

just offhand Rick, could you offer informed advice regarding the difference between the hill and dale and side by side(45/45) process, is one better than the other in terms of "accurate reproduction"?

off hand i have nothing informed to say about the hill and dale process

except to say i have lived in winston hills and annandale for extended periods of my life , i didnt have an hill and dale turntable in either suburbs , nor have i ever heard one in action...

in fact i think they went out well before my dad got into long pants
so i guess i have nothing informed to add :)

what ever your thinking about a hill and dale player mick ... forget it and pick up a guitar me thinks

by **jkhuri44** » Tue May 18, 2010 10:13 pm

Ausrock wrote:I don't know your setup but a few years ago I needed to play/record vinyl so I purchased a basic/budget phono preamp (yes it did the job just fine), ran it into my S/craft and made sure to connect the Earth connection to the console and...............voila, it worked.

yeah i kinda want something a bit nicer than that...

this is for making great digital recordings of my vinyls...not just ok ones.

by **musikwerks** » Tue May 18, 2010 10:37 pm

Vinyl is soooo 1970. Get with the times Jamil. MP3 is so much better AND you can keep your whole collection on a USB stick. What more could you want?

by **jkhuri44** » Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 pm

musikwerks wrote:Vinyl is soooo 1970. Get with the times Jamil. MP3 is so much better AND you can keep your whole collection on a USB stick. What more could you want?

my music is so cool i have to buy it from a record store.

by **Kurt** » Wed May 19, 2010 12:25 am

Go and buy the most expensive pre you can find, make sure it has wooden knobs....

How do you know how nice his recording turned out, in order that you know it isn't good enough?

jkhuri44 wrote:
Ausrock wrote:I don't know your setup but a few years ago I needed to play/record vinyl so I purchased a basic/budget phono preamp (yes it did the job just fine), ran it into my S/craft and made sure to connect the Earth connection to the console and...............voila, it worked.

yeah i kinda want something a bit nicer than that...

this is for making great digital recordings of my vinyls...not just ok ones.

by **jkhuri44** » Wed May 19, 2010 9:42 am

well, jeez, i wasnt wanting to buy the most unaffordable thing out there....just something good enough to allow me not to want to re record my vinyl again! :P

something in the middle of the most expensive, and cheapest option...

by **Mickstape** » Wed May 19, 2010 9:55 am

Hey Jamil I have an old technics Modular Hifi from the early 80s you are quite welcome to have, it's in working order. I'm in homebush for a gig tomorrow, you are at carlngford yeh? I can drop it in on the way through if you like then all ya gotta do is buy a nice cartridge n needle. Let me know.

by **jkhuri44** » Wed May 19, 2010 10:18 am

Mickstape wrote:Hey Jamil I have an old technics Modular Hifi from the early 80s you are quite welcome to have, it's in working order. I'm in homebush for a gig tomorrow, you are at carlngford yeh? I can drop it in on the way through if you like then all ya gotta do is buy a nice cartridge n needle. Let me know.

lol, sure! that was easy :P

ill pm ya mate.

by **Chris H** » Wed May 19, 2010 10:49 am

jkhuri44 wrote:
Mickstape wrote:Hey Jamil I have an old technics Modular Hifi from the early 80s you are quite welcome to have, it's in working order. I'm in homebush for a gig tomorrow, you are at carlngford yeh? I can drop it in on the way through if you like then all ya gotta do is buy a nice cartridge n needle. Let me know.

lol, sure! that was easy :P

ill pm ya mate.

Cool......that's how the forum works :)

by **Mickstape** » Wed May 19, 2010 11:17 am

Yeah this forum is the bomb diggedy.

by **toddd** » Wed May 19, 2010 7:00 pm

this looks kinda handy....

http://www.altomusic.com/altoweb/getpro ... odid=11720

by **jkhuri44** » Thu May 20, 2010 9:49 am

yes, this is what i've been looking at too, funny you posted that...i just opened your link this morning...and was looking at this box last night :-)

by **jkhuri44** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:58 pm

ok, on further investigation...

apparently, direct drive turntables are bad for this as there is too much low end rumble....

i can second this....just by listening through my DJ mixer....it will be a problem when archiving, as electronic has a lot of sub bass information...

for this ....ppl recommend belt drive decks for transfers as they are "decoupled" or soemthing like that,

thoughts??
or bollocks??

by **Kurt** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:47 pm

Just for a change teh internets is full of conflicting information....
Would I be right in assuming you have a 1200 (or two) There are as many pages saying they're perfect for archiving as there are saying they're no good. There are also mods available that claim to improve them for the purpose..

I guess you'd have to borrow a good belt drive deck, copy the same record played on each deck (with the same pre etc) and compare the result.

BTW, I stumbled across a NAD USB pre on eBay a while ago, was going for $200 or thereabouts.. I know Rick suggested staying away from USB but if NAD had a go at one it would have to be worth a look.

jkhuri44 wrote:ok, on further investigation...

apparently, direct drive turntables are bad for this as there is too much low end rumble....

i can second this....just by listening through my DJ mixer....it will be a problem when archiving, as electronic has a lot of sub bass information...

for this ....ppl recommend belt drive decks for transfers as they are "decoupled" or soemthing like that,

thoughts??
or bollocks??

vinyl archiving...

vinyl archiving...

Who is online