Butch,
Look at http://www.usbturntables.net/USB turntables[/link]. I am sure you'll find one that has 78rpm capability, likely through s/w, to do what you need.
Tom

You can find 78 RPM turntables here:
http://www.garage-a-records.com
http://www.needledoctor.com/Online-Store/78-Speed-Tables
http://www.proaudiosuperstore.com

I am sure there are other Internet sites.

Check your town, or nearby larger, for shops that specialize in repairing older equipment.

Check flea markets.

Larry

The bad condition of this disc puts me more in fear if damaging an expensive needle. This is an old "direct to disc" recording of someone's grandparents singing. Any recovery is going to be appreciated.

I did the math and it worked out to an increase of 173.4%.

Thanks

You won't damage the needle unless there is sand in the record grooves
;?)

Tom,

I've looked at the USB turntables...but you know I'm going to take the cheapest way out!

Hope you had a good holiday!

Butch

Hi,

You definitively need a needle indented for 78 rpm.

Two reasons:

1. You pick up lots of noise with an 33/45 rpm needle, since it is able to tough the groove bottom and does nod "ride" between the two groove walls.

2. You WILL probably damage both the needle and the 78 rpm disk, due to the same reason, because of high friction and high temperatures at the tip - of the wrong tip...

1. You pick up lots of noise with an 33/45 rpm needle, since it is able to tough the groove bottom and does nod "ride" between the two groove walls.

Having had some experience doing this, I can definitely say this is true. My first try was with a turntable that was able to speed up to 78 RPM, but the needle was for normal records and the result was a horrible recording with groove noise as loud as the music itself. I don't know if the disc itself was damaged because the material in those old records is so strong, but the needle probably was. I eventually had another turntable that had 78 RPM capability from 1968 sent to a technician to modify it and make a line output from it, from an speaker only output that came with the unit.

If it's just a record that you need to transfer, a specialized place might be the best solution.

If this is a one-of-a-kind original record, don't take the cheap way out. Those old records were actually played with a metal needle - very different from the needles for 45s and 78s.

Check out the sources listed above - you may be able to find a modern needle for 78RPM to fit the cartridge you already have. You can then do the math and slow down the track. Do be aware though that stretching an audio file beyond a certain point is going to yield less than satisfactory results.

Ralph,
I don't think he would be stretching the file here, but squeezing (time compressing) -- or am I thinking backwards?

Ortorfon make 78 needles for their cartridges.
Others make a selection of different diameter 78 needles. The aim here is to find a section of the groove that's less worn or noisy

WARNING. If this is a direct to disk recording it's not going to be bakelite like most 78rpm disks. It could have been likely cut into vinyl using a heated needle. Alternatively it could be an acetate disk. Sizes went up to 14" and they were cut from the centre out. Those disks have an aluminium base and used a very wide groove. Even a 78RPM needle will likey ride on the base metal rather than track the groove.
Groove size maybe quite different as well. I'd suggest playing it first with a modern stylus at very low tracking weight.

Bob.

I'm going to be able to pull this off with my regular turntable and Vegas. Farss, I adjusted for light tracking. The audio is incredibly scratchy, but the disk is a mess (even after careful cleaning). A few passes of restoration plugins should improve that issue.

If I had more than one disk to transfer and thought it would help, I'd go a more sophisticated route.

Thanks to all for the great advice!

I have actually done a lot of this, and researched it extensively. There are several things you must know about this, most of which have not been mentioned.

Needle.

You cannot use a needle intended for LP records (33 1/3 and 45 rpm). They are much smaller and will not "fit" the 78 rpm groove. You will get sound, but even if you decide to playback at 33 1/3 rpm and then adjust the speed, the small needle will rattle around in the grooves. More important, it will not "sit" at the correct height within the groove. Older phonographs used to have a two-sided cartridge, which you could flip one way for the "modern" LP records and then flip the other way for 78 rpm.

The usual thing to do is to get a separate cartridge/needle assembly for the 78 rpm. It is much less of a delicate operation to change the whole cartridge than it is to remove the stylus from the cartridge.

When you purchase the cartridge/stylus for 78 rpm, take a look and see if they have "truncated" styli available. These are designed to sit higher in the groove and can sometimes avoid all the crud that falls to the bottom of the groove and adds to that 78 rpm hiss and chatter.

Getting the correct needle and cartridge is the most important step in transferring 78 rpm. People who do a LOT of this actually have as many as a dozen different styli, using different widths and truncations depending on the record's manfufacturer, its age, and the state of wear.

Speed

Not all 78 rpm records were actually recorded at 78. Some were recorded faster and some slower. If you can get a turntable which has variable speed, that would help.

Tracking Force

Modern records can be played using a very slight tracking force of only about one gram. 78 rpm records require a much higher force, usually in the range of 3-5 grams. Many turntables have a guage that gives you this number directly (you set it to zero and set the counterbalance so the tonearm "floats" horizontally, and then dial in the tracking force you want). If you are only going to play the record once, I'd recommend erring on the slightly heavy side (5 grams). Too light, and you'll end up with "chatter."

Amplifier

As you probably know, phonograph cartridges put out a VERY tiny signal, much like a microphone. You cannot just plug this into the "line input" of a modern amplifier. You MUST have an amplifier which has a "phono" input.

Equalization

This brings me to the next issue, namely that 78 rpm records were equalized differently than 33 1/3. Equalization in records refers to the practice of reducing the bass frequencies prior to cutting the groves in the record and increasing the high frequencies. This solves two separate problems. The first problem is that, in order to create a really loud low frequency note, like from a bass fiddle, the needle would have to swing so far that it would actually cut into the next groove. To avoid this, and also to avoid making the grooves wider, which would decrease the length of what would fit on one side of the record, the bass notes are decreased in volume. Since high frequencies are typically not that loud, and also because the velocity of the needle at higher frequencies makes it easier to get loud high frequencies without the needle having to move as far, those frequencies can actually be boosted. The reason for doing this is that during playback, when the bass notes are boosted, the high frequencies can be diminished. This acts to reduce the background hiss to a much lower level.

The problem is that this equalization is not done the same way on each record. By contrast, all modern (post 1955) LP records are recorded with a standard RIAA equalization curve.

So to properly playback a 78 rpm record and recover the exact fidelity from the original, you need to apply the proper equalization. The best way to do this is to purchase an amplifier which has these settings built in. Here's a picture of my old Scott preamp, showing the two knobs that are used for this purpose. They are usually called "Turnover" and "Rolloff."

As you can see, if you want to playback a Columbia 78 rpm, you would set the Turnover to 300 Hz and the Rolloff to 15.



Since you may not want to purchase this equipment, you can still use a modern amplifier that has a phono input. Your 78 rpm recording will be equalized with the standard RIAA rolloff and turnover. What you can then do is create a table which shows the correct settings for your particular record (each recording label used different values, as you can see in the photo above). You then develop a spreadsheet which "unequalizes" the RIAA and then applies the correct values, in essence giving you a "delta" to get from RIAA to the correct equalization for that particular record. You apply these values in Sound Forge or any other program that has a multi-band equalizer.

I developed this spreadsheet and would be glad to share it with anyone who needs it. I think you will find that it works well, and pretty much eliminates the need for a specialized amplifier for all but the most critical 78 rpm work.

Restoration

After you capture your recording using a truncated stylus, using a RIAA phono amplifier, and have applied the proper equalization, you will probably want to remove some of the 78 rpm artifacts. The pops are easy and you can use the NR module in Sound Forge or iZotope. The hiss is much more difficult. When I first started doing this, I got carried away with the noise reduction module in Sound Forge and took out way too much hiss. The two reasons why this was a mistake is that 78 rpm records, surprisingly, have quite a bit of real program material in the high frequency range, sometimes as high as 10 kHz! I thought they were more like AM radio or the telephone (both severely band-limited) but they are not. In fact, if you do this work correctly, a 78 rpm recording can sound pretty darned good.

The other problem is that you can very easily start introducing all sorts of flanging artifacts and, believe me, these sound far worse than any residual hiss.

Hope that helps!

musicvid,

It's so embarassing to be wrong - GUILTY on my part!!! He would have to compress the file timewise.

Butch,

I've transferred a ton of vinyl in the past 6 years. Mostly 45s and LPs to digital for radio automation. Sound Forge has been a blessing for me.

If you want to use a standard turntable you can, and then work the math to come up to the appropriate speed. Use 45 for the initial transfer.

After the transfer, set a linear EQ from 800 Hz (0 dB) to 20,000 HZ (+4). Then normalize.

Run Sony vinyl restoration for 78 to remove noise.

Then set a linear EQ from 800 Hz (0 dB) to 20,000 HZ (-4) and normalize again. This should scrub the audio of most noise.

If you have the Sony NR plugin, that helps as well.

For cleaning records, I have modified a small kids plastic drink cup, and cut out the bottom of the cup with a hole of about 1.5". I then applied felt to the bottom and about 1/2" up the side. The cup's open part, (where you drink from) will then go over a shop vac or home sweeper with hose attachment. When you're "vac'ing" the record, go with the grooves. It may be a little tough due to the suction, but you can raise an edge or put some holes in the cup. The idea is to draw as much crud out of the grooves before transfer.

Wow! I'm overwhelmed with the information I've recieved! Having been in broadcasting and have "spun" quite a few records in my time, I'm aware of most of the info provided.

Honestly, this is a one time job for a customer who simply wants to hear Grandpa and Grandma sing. Unfortunately...it's not that good. Given the condition of the record and the cost, both the customer and I are satisfied with the transfer.

But what we have accomplished is creating a great data base of advice for future reference. Vegas is about a LOT more than editing video. That's why I use it!

John, you took a great deal of time with your help. It's appreciated!

Thanks to all!

Butch

You're welcome.

When you say they just wanted to hear grandma and grandpa sing, was this a Wilcox-Gay Recordio disc? A friend of my parents, who was about 85 at the time, had one of these with a recording of his mother singing. For those not familiar, these were discs that were cut as you spoke or sang into a microphone. The machines were often placed in public places (I did one disc that was recorded during the war on top of the Empire State Building). The resulting disc could be played on a regular 78 rpm record player. The audio quality was horrific, however. I did about fifteen of these for another person, and it took every trick I could think of to make them "listenable."

By contrast, regular 78s can be stunningly good. There is a guy who restores 78s as a hobby and every few months sends out an email invitation to download and listen to his latest restorations. I just received an email from him a few hours ago, and downloaded and listened to his latest marvelous restorations. Listen to this one, and while you'll not confuse it with a modern recording, it sure sounds much better than what you normally associate with 78 rpm recordings:

Johnny Johnson and His Orchestra - Why Do I Lie to Myself About You?

I have a small number of 78rpm "Microgroove" records. These appear to be bakelite but much thicker than the normal 78s. The tracks are indeed as advertised, much smaller than a conventional 78.
So far I can barely get a sound off them. They could simply be worn out, they were rescued from a pile of discarded junk. Then again it's unusual to come accross a set of records with both side of all the records worn out, there's usually a couple of sides the owner didn't like and therefore rarely played.
I'm still curious about these, I can't seem to find anything much at all about them on the web. Some information I do have suggests that some recordings made way back used vertical displacement instead of lateral and therefore a conventional pickup will not work. Other information suggests a conventional stereo pickup head will work by extracting the difference between the two channels. Tried that with no luck, neither channel has much of anything in it to derive a difference from.

Bob.

I have a small number of 78rpm "Microgroove" records.I'm not sure what to tell you about these. The term "microgroove" seems to always refer to 331/3 LP records. I've not seen it used in relation to 78 rpm records. I don't know if the physics of the high speeds involved in 78 records would have permitted narrow grooves, but I am just guessing.

As to the thickness, I was just doing research yesterday to help finish off my equalization spreadsheet and found several references to unusually thick records. Here's a description of one such disc, the Edison Diamond Disc:

Edison Diamond Disc

Here's the first sentence from the link above:
Non-collectors who come across Edison Diamond Discs characterize these records by their thickness, often times I hear "I saw some old records that are a quarter inch thick"This sounds almost exactly like your post above.

The other information given at this link also seems to indicate that you may not be able to get much sound from these discs using standard equipment.

Finally, here's another illuminating statement from this link:

The discs are ten inches (diameter) but could hold more music than twelve inch discs made by other companies, ...

This would seem to imply grooves which are closer together.

Hopefully this will get you started in the right direction.

Thanks John.
That's them. Explains everything. The sleeve states these are "EDISON DIAMOND DISC RE-CREATION". No paper label on the disk, the label is molded / pressed into the disc and then a serial number pressed into it. Looks like they sold for $2.75, quite expensive.

Now I know why the density feels all wrong, probably wood core. Some do have fungus growing on the edge.

Bob.

edit: I do like the warning that says this disc must be played at 80rpm, time player regularly.

Here's a link to one of the most-visited 78 rpm sites. This page provides a link to an old DOS program that lets you create strobe discs for just about any turntable speed you can think of (just in case you really want to "time" your player for 80 rpm).

I think the program allows for 50 Hz as well as 60 Hz (because the "strobe" is actually nothing more than a light, like a fluorescent, which can "blink" at the speed of the mains).

Vintage Nauck's Records

Johnmeyer, you impress me each time you post an answer.
So glad to have you as a part of our forum with all of your great knowledge and ability to share.

Thanks,

Ted.