Question about recording vinyl

JL wrote on 1/9/2004, 7:15 PM
I listen to a lot of vinyl. Some is 40 to 50 years old, and I'm extremely grateful to the talent of the early recording engineers who endeavored to produce the very best recordings they could. Back then, they were well aware that most folks didn't have "high fidelity" let alone "stereo" systems in their homes, yet they created stereo hi-fi records none-the-less. It probably wasn't until the early 1970's when Ivor Tiefenbrun and others began to make precision turntables available to consumers that savvy folks were able to unlock the full range of musical information contained on the early vinyl recordings. Sadly, most consumers' experience with vinyl has been tainted by mediocre sound equipment. I guess mine hasn't.

So here's my question. Can anyone tell me what the very best method is for recording from vinyl to a digital format? I am of the philosophy that if something is worth doing, it's worth doing well. Therefore I'd like to preserve as much sonic information true to the original recording as possible in the process. For example, I don't want to filter out surface noise during the recording process. I can deal with it afterwards if necessary. Besides, I feel that minimizing surface noise is the job of the turntable.

I have a good turntable with a high quality tone-arm, cartridge and phono preamp. My computer has on-board sound card, and my software is Vegas. I have a couple of DV cams with pass-through.

Since I've gotten conflicting information on a couple related things, I would appreciate if someone could also set me straight on the following:

Would recording analog sources benefit by upgrading to a 24/96 PCI sound card?
Would going through a mixer be necessary, or could it degrade the sound quality?

Thanks for any feedback.

JL


There's an old saying: "If you buy the 'best' (tool) to begin with, you'll only cry once."

Comments

farss wrote on 1/9/2004, 9:32 PM
If as you say you have a good quality turntable, arm, cartridge and the stylus is in good shape you also need to ensure the tone arm is setup correctly. I think you'd have thought of that as well as you sound pretty dedicated.
A good quality preamp is vital and you seem to have that as well.
The weakest link will probably be the soundcard in the PC, the one I have which is built into the mobo is totally pathetic so I've bought a M-Audio Firewire 410, probably more than what you'll need, I wanted something I could use with a laptop.

I don't think you really need 24/96, sure will not hurt though. Thing is getting decent codec and low noise usually means getting something capable of 24/96, you can always drop it back to say 24/48 or 16/48 but if you've got the capability then why not sample at the highest bitrate and depth.

One thing I'd try to do is see if the labels you're interested in have been rereleased on CD. If you're lucky they've come from the original tapes, if your unlucky they just done what your going to do.

BTW if you're trying to recover 78s you technically need a different stylus from memory.
Cold wrote on 1/9/2004, 11:38 PM
If you can afford it, apogee analog to digital converters.

It does make a difference, and make sure to keep the conversion outside of the computer.

Steve S.
Caruso wrote on 1/11/2004, 6:18 AM
I dunno, to me, it's not rocket science. I've transferred plenty of analog to digital from a variety of sources - just finished a project transferring r2r performances for two world famous classical artists - my approach is pretty simlple (and my equipment unsophistocated).

For vinyl, I use a Techniques SL-Q202 turntable. I like it because I know it will spin at a very precise speed - there are "better" tone arms around, but I doubt any TT is quieter or more speed accurate (which to my clients is most important).

I run the TT signal through an old Pioneer integrated amp (only because my better stuff is upstairs in the "sound system"). Output from the amp is routed to my SB card.

I use either Vegas or Wavelab to capture/edit the wav file, and employ plugins sparingly to eliminate pops/clicks and other vinyl-specific defects (scratches, etc).

I always normalize my files before burning them to disk.

So far, each of my clients has elected to give me repeat business and recommend me to their friends.

IMO, the signal coming from a turntable is pretty good, aside from noise (rumble and groove noise and, of course pops and clics), and you're already dealing with very well done mixes.

A better turntable with a low mass tone arm might help in tracking problem discs, but, other than that, I don't think really high end equipment will substantially improve an otherwise good signal to the point where the human ear will hear a difference in the sound of the CD that results.

Sounds to me as though the original poster is well on his/her way to success. If you have a decent PC, I'd go ahead and try that first - see if you like the sound of the CD's you produce.

I'm guessing you will.

Hope this helps.

C
tmrpro wrote on 1/11/2004, 8:00 AM
Here's my two cents....

Even at 24/96, you will never have as much information with digital audio as you do on vinyl.

Vinyl is linear and digital audio is incremental. Vinyl and analog tape machines (and other archaic recorded mediums) are like having a single stereo sample that renders over the length of the entire song. This would be a gigantic sample....lol...

I'm assuming that your preamp is very good. If not, you need to consider this. You can spend between $50 at Radio Shack and $30k for a Levinson. You'll find a really good preamp at parasound that covers every consumer level input need for about $250. I would suggest to go with high end A/D convertors (apogee or lucid), and 24/96 (at least). There are cards out there that support higher sample rates like the RME HDSP soundcards (up to 192k). These cards have exceptional conversion qualities and are widely used without external or additional convertors.

If you are very serious about these archivals, and you want to reproduce the linearity of your vinyl, then the higher rates will give you a substantial difference.

You should leave your files in the higher sample rate/bit-depth and either play them from your computer or you can use DVD-Audio to playback these files.

*NOTE: You will need an authoring software other than Vegas (at this time) to create your DVD-Audio disk.
Cold wrote on 1/11/2004, 11:58 AM
Keep your sygnal chain as short as possible. So do not use a mixing board.
turntable to preamp to analog to digital converter into the computer.
And follow tmrpro's advice about using high bit and sample rates.
Steve S.
farss wrote on 1/11/2004, 2:40 PM
tmpro,
I totally agree with what you're saying here. The only issue I have with it is how much vinyl is there left that hasn't been compromised by playing with substandard gear?

I know in some cases you can get around this with a very good stylus as a lot of the damage has only occurred at the top of the valley.

BTW I came accross an old jazz singer who'd only record onto a Revox deck and sing into a Neumann or Sennheiser mic, thank god I'd bought along a Senheiser or the show wouldn't have happened.
JL wrote on 1/12/2004, 12:57 PM
Thanks everyone for the input.
So if I were to summarize what I understand is being said:

Record at a higher bit depth and sample rate, say 24/96 (good) or 24/192 (better), to capture more detail in the digital format.

The better the A/D converter, the better the quality of sound.

External A/D (may) produce better results.

Keep signal chain short, e.g., do not route through a mixer.

Employ plug-ins sparingly, if at all.

For archiving, record and keep files at highest resolution possible.

High quality playback is possible using DVD-audio.

In response to some other comments, I agree that it is very important for the turntable to be properly set up. I might add that although not often adhered to, I feel that it is also important that the TT components (turntable, tonearm, cartridge, power supply and preamp) be carefully matched to each other. This will enable the TT to retrieve the best possible sound from the vinyl recordings. My experience is that much of the 'noise' associated with vinyl is actually generated by the TT, either from being low quality or improperly set up, or both. I concur that employing high resolution A/D doesn't make sense unless you are starting with a high quality analog signal.

As far as buying re-releases on CD as an alternative, I don't care to go that route. Right now, since I have a rather large collection of vinyl, I'd prefer to tap into that. Besides, my hope is to be able to achieve better than CD quality ;-)

Since I'm not in a big hurry, and generally tend to do a fair amount of research before parting with my $$, it may be a few months until I get everything set up, but will keep you posted on how things work out. If anyone has additional hardware recommendations I'd be glad to hear them. Thanks again everyone for the feedback.

JL

[A man walks into a clothing store and begins looking at sweaters. As he pulls one out from the pile and holds it up, the salesman comments, "That's 100 percent wool… you just can't do any better than 100 percent wool."
The man hesitates a moment and replies, "But the label says 100% cotton."
"Better still!" exclaims the salesman, not missing a beat.]
jester700 wrote on 1/17/2004, 6:08 AM
tmrpro,
Some advice is good, but your digital/analog spiel is dismal. Vinyl is not inherently superior to "digital"; it's all about the resolution of the digital format. 8 bit, 11k digital sucks. 24/96 is very good indeed, and well able to capture EVERYTHING vinyl has to offer. The one thing you don't get is, digital is *also* linear. Yes, it is quantized for storage, but when reconstructed & filtered, there is an analog waveform EVERY BIT as pure as the one that went in (provided enough resolution).
wobblyboy wrote on 1/17/2004, 11:56 AM
Once you have done all this, consider using Sony Noise reduction to clear record noise and pops, that is unless you want those noises for effect.
tmrpro wrote on 1/18/2004, 5:50 PM
I'm well aware of how it is stored and rendered, Jester.....

It is stored and rendered incrementally, not linearly. It is NOT linear, it is made up of increments of audio samples ...snapshots that correspond with nothing in the waveform or the result of audio and it is made up of increments that are relative to nothing more than time.

Did I say that vinyl is "Superior to digital"? ....NO I DID NOT.... I actually referred to vinyl as archaic.
jester700 wrote on 1/19/2004, 7:38 AM
I didn't mean to put words in your mouth - I read "more information" as "superior". But you are still wrong. When properly recreated, a *properly filtered, recorded, & dithered* 24 bit digital signal has 2 important characteristics: 1) it has the same amount of information as an analog signal *of the same bandwidth*, and 2) it is linear. It is, after reconstruction, an analog waveform.

Further, you can't view samples by themselves; there's a time domain as well - this is where many people's "space between the samples" issues fall down.

Now, I'm no engineer. But I've been following these arguments a while (and there are smarter people than me on both sides of the issue) and after all the heavy math, it seems to come down to simple bits & sample rate. 24 bits is enough to store everything analog audio can produce.