Minnie Ripperton - Minnie [[1979)

[soulster]

This 1979 Capitol album does not exist on CD, except as a Japanese import that costs upwards of $50, so, since I found a clean used copy at a used record store several years back, I decided it would make a nice needle drop. My work came out very nice. I have listened to it several times in both the car and my home stereo system. I cleaned up the pops and surface noise with Click Repair and iZotope RX. The stereo was so narrow that the album was almost mono, so I widened the stereo a bit and that gave it more of a three-dimensional sound. Then, I EQ'ed the midrange a tad to add some body to her voice, as it sounds nasal. I also added a touch of an exciter in Ozone. In fact, it sounds so good that if the owners of EMI ever do come out with a digital version of it, I won't need to buy it.

One thing, though, I don't know who got the bright idea to put "Memory Lane" as the first song but it just doesn't work. "Lover And Friend" is a much, much better album opener and leads into "Memory lane" much better with a tiny gap. So, that's what I did with my transfer, I switch the two around. Now it flows much better as an album. I also wonder if it would have done better if it were released that way.

Anyway, what other albums do you think would have benefited more from a slight track sequence alteration?

[timmyfunk]

This 1979 Capitol album does not exist on CD, except as a Japanese import that costs upwards of $50, so, since I found a clean used copy at a used record store several years back, I decided it would make a nice needle drop. My work came out very nice. I have listened to it several times in both the car and my home stereo system. I cleaned up the pops and surface noise with Click Repair and iZotope RX. The stereo was so narrow that the album was almost mono, so I widened the stereo a bit and that gave it more of a three-dimensional sound. Then, I EQ'ed the midrange a tad to add some body to her voice, as it sounds nasal. I also added a touch of an exciter in Ozone. In fact, it sounds so good that if the owners of EMI ever do come out with a digital version of it, I won't need to buy it.

One thing, though, I don't know who got the bright idea to put "Memory Lane" as the first song but it just doesn't work. "Lover And Friend" is a much, much better album opener and leads into "Memory lane" much better with a tiny gap. So, that's what I did with my transfer, I switch the two around. Now it flows much better as an album. I also wonder if it would have done better if it were released that way.

Anyway, what other albums do you think would have benefited more from a slight track sequence alteration?

Actually, this CD has become quite affordable:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/MINNIE-RIPER...item416acad5a6

[soulster]

Actually, this CD has become quite affordable:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/MINNIE-RIPER...item416acad5a6

So it did make it to CD. Oh well, I still have a very nice mastering, and I had fun doing it myself.

[Jerry Oz]

I can't think of track switches that I would make, but I take a lot of satisfaction converting my albums to vinyl as well. I bought a lot of obscure cut-outs in the '80s and I can't find a lot of them anywhere [[Kiddo, Mark Anthony Thompson, Klick, etc.).

I have slight hearing loss in both ears and I miss a lot of high pitches, so I get rid of my pops and clicks in Cool Edit Pro [[still the best for doing it, in my opinion) individually because I don't trust the automatic settings to leave all of the sounds that should be in the song. I then switch over to Magix Audio Cleaning or Sony Sound Forge and adjust the EQ, usually raising the treble pitches to make the guitars and keys sound cleaner, tweaking the midrange just a bit so I can understand the vocals better, and adjusting the bass enough to make a nice round bottom. [[Yes, Beavis, I said "nice round bottom".) I then expand the stereo and tweak the master volume as, by now, it's considerably louder.

I have a cassette by View From the Hill that somehow had pops [[!!!) in it. It's probably as good as any soul album ever to me. I converted it last week and, because of choosing to eliminate the pops individually, it took me six hours to record and clean up eight tracks. I haven't even EQed them yet. For some silly reason, I listen to the songs that I digitized with more satisfaction than I do any CDs that I purchase. It's great to hear songs after 30 years again.

[timmyfunk]

I can't think of track switches that I would make, but I take a lot of satisfaction converting my albums to vinyl as well. I bought a lot of obscure cut-outs in the '80s and I can't find a lot of them anywhere [[Kiddo, Mark Anthony Thompson, Klick, etc.).

I have slight hearing loss in both ears and I miss a lot of high pitches, so I get rid of my pops and clicks in Cool Edit Pro [[still the best for doing it, in my opinion) individually because I don't trust the automatic settings to leave all of the sounds that should be in the song. I then switch over to Magix Audio Cleaning or Sony Sound Forge and adjust the EQ, usually raising the treble pitches to make the guitars and keys sound cleaner, tweaking the midrange just a bit so I can understand the vocals better, and adjusting the bass enough to make a nice round bottom. [[Yes, Beavis, I said "nice round bottom".) I then expand the stereo and tweak the master volume as, by now, it's considerably louder.

I have a cassette by View From the Hill that somehow had pops [[!!!) in it. It's probably as good as any soul album ever to me. I converted it last week and, because of choosing to eliminate the pops individually, it took me six hours to record and clean up eight tracks. I haven't even EQed them yet. For some silly reason, I listen to the songs that I digitized with more satisfaction than I do any CDs that I purchase. It's great to hear songs after 30 years again.

I do know that the first Kiddo album is available on CD in Japan. I found it recently on eBay.

[cozmic]

I do know that the first Kiddo album is available on CD in Japan. I found it recently on eBay.

What what what?!
Man, that's major! I immediately checked online but the only thing i could find is an expired ebay auction which is not visible anymore:

http://www.ebay.fr/sch/sis.html?_nkw...d=170635678239

^^ L'objet 170635678239 n'est plus disponible [[= The purpose 170635678239 is no longer available)

And japanese sites with official releases such as amazon.co.jp and cdjapan.co.jp + a japanese auction site such as auctions.yahoo.co.jp all gave zero results as well.

http://auctions.search.yahoo.co.jp/s...ab_ex=commerce

Except for 2 vinyl copies: http://auctions.search.yahoo.co.jp/s...merce&slider=0

Amazon.com only has the vinyl lp available:

http://www.amazon.com/Self-Titled-Lp...keywords=Kiddo

Did you buy that cd timmyfunk? Could you still locate the link of that ebay auction or post an image/scan, if possible? Was there also an official obi from the record company factory-wrapped around the cd?

Thanks in advance for your time & effort!

[soulster]

I have slight hearing loss in both ears and I miss a lot of high pitches, so I get rid of my pops and clicks in Cool Edit Pro [[still the best for doing it, in my opinion) individually because I don't trust the automatic settings to leave all of the sounds that should be in the song. I then switch over to Magix Audio Cleaning or Sony Sound Forge and adjust the EQ, usually raising the treble pitches to make the guitars and keys sound cleaner, tweaking the midrange just a bit so I can understand the vocals better, and adjusting the bass enough to make a nice round bottom. [[Yes, Beavis, I said "nice round bottom".) I then expand the stereo and tweak the master volume as, by now, it's considerably louder.

I have a cassette by View From the Hill that somehow had pops [[!!!) in it. It's probably as good as any soul album ever to me. I converted it last week and, because of choosing to eliminate the pops individually, it took me six hours to record and clean up eight tracks. I haven't even EQed them yet. For some silly reason, I listen to the songs that I digitized with more satisfaction than I do any CDs that I purchase. It's great to hear songs after 30 years again.

I start with good playback and capture from the start. I won't get into the gear I use unless you ask.

But, anyway, once I record the album at 32-bit, Iin Audition, then declick with ClickRepair, and, trust me, it is the most popular and effective declicker out there unless you want to spend over a grand. It will NOT remove musical content is you use conservative settings. Declicker quality has jumped leaps and bounds since you bought the software you use.

Next, I carefully remove surface noise and other little noises in iZotope RX. Again, the NR of today is a quantum leap from what was available even five years ago.

Then, I import back to Audition for any further tweaking, if necessary.

Next I boost the gain and apply any hard limiting just to bring up the level relative to early 90s mastering practices.

I then chop up the big wave file into tracks.

Next, I batch convert the files to 24-bit FLAC in Sound Forge 10 using iZotope dither/noise shaping, and tag them with Media Monkey, complete with artwork. I make a copy of that and archive the resulting FLACs to my hi-rez archive drive.

I take the copy and convert those to redbook FLAC. I make a copy of that folder and convert the copy to 320kbps mp3. I archive both versions to various backup drives and the server.

Next project.


I rarely EQ anything unless it really, really needs it. The cart, turntable, and soundcard I use should do the job of bringing out the best of the vinyl already. If the pressing is a bit wonky, like the Minnie album, i'll tweak it a bit.

[Jerry Oz]

I only EQ the tracks because I have the opportunity. As I'm looking into ClickRepair and iZotope RX, I have to ask why you don't use iZotope for all of your sound restoration?

[timmyfunk]

What what what?!
Man, that's major! I immediately checked online but the only thing i could find is an expired ebay auction which is not visible anymore:

http://www.ebay.fr/sch/sis.html?_nkw...d=170635678239

^^ L'objet 170635678239 n'est plus disponible [[= The purpose 170635678239 is no longer available)

And japanese sites with official releases such as amazon.co.jp and cdjapan.co.jp + a japanese auction site such as auctions.yahoo.co.jp all gave zero results as well.

http://auctions.search.yahoo.co.jp/s...ab_ex=commerce

Except for 2 vinyl copies: http://auctions.search.yahoo.co.jp/s...merce&slider=0

Amazon.com only has the vinyl lp available:

http://www.amazon.com/Self-Titled-Lp...keywords=Kiddo

Did you buy that cd timmyfunk? Could you still locate the link of that ebay auction or post an image/scan, if possible? Was there also an official obi from the record company factory-wrapped around the cd?

Thanks in advance for your time & effort!

You're kidding, right? Of course I bought it. LOL! It didn't have an obi, but from what I could tell, it was in near mint condition. I'm gonna hit you on the private mail in a minute.

[soulster]

I only EQ the tracks because I have the opportunity. As I'm looking into ClickRepair and iZotope RX, I have to ask why you don't use iZotope for all of your sound restoration?

The declicker in iZotope isn't as good as the $45 Click repair. Seriously! However, iZotope has specialized tools that help you get rid of sonic anomalies like nothing else in it's price range! I also use it to get rid of those strange pops that Click repair can't get.

Once in a while, I may use the auto-declicker in Audition.

The bottom line is to use the best tool for the task, and that's why I can use up to five programs for one restoration project. I get dead serious about restoring and preserving sound. But, like I said, I rarely EQ except in desparate cases. The playback should be enough, provided the LP was cut well. Each LP has a unique flavor and I aim to preserve it.

I many times prefer a needledrop to a manufactured CD because of the crimes the companies commit on screwing up the sound like using ridiculous amounts of EQ and compression where it isn't needed.

[Jerry Oz]

The biggest surprise I had when I started digitizing my records was how much fidelity there actually was. For some reason, I had myself convinced that everything would sound flat and lifeless compared to today's digital masterpieces, but I can hear incredible detail in spite of the vinyl format.

[soulster]

Jerry,

You might be interested in this post from the Steve Hoffman forum:

Steve Hoffman
Your host



Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 47,269

What sounds just like the master tape: CD, Vinyl, SACD or an Open Reel tape copy?
First, let me say that I love records, compact discs and SACDs; I have a bunch of all three formats. Nothing that I discovered below changed that one bit.

I did these comparisons a few years ago. Since I spilled the beans to an interviewer on mic last year I continually get quoted and misquoted about this subject. I'll try to set the "record" straight in this thread. Please note I'm typing on a whacked out computer not my own with a tiny monitor and no spell check.... There could be a [[gasp) typo or two...

A few years ago, mainly out of curiosity [[and nothing else) I got the chance at AcousTech Mastering to compare an actual master tape to the playback of a record lacquer and digital playback. Also did the same test using DSD [[SACD) playback as well later on in the day. The results were interesting. The below is just my opinion. Note that we cut the record at 45 because the lathe was set for that speed. A similar test we did using the 33 1/3 speed yielded the same result.

FIRST COMPARISON: MASTER TAPE with ACETATE LACQUER AT 45 RPM with DIGITAL PACIFIC MICROSONICS CAPTURE.

We had the master tape of the Riverside stereo LP Bill Evans Trio/WALTZ FOR DEBBY at AcousTech and decided to do this little comparison. Since the actual master needs a bunch of "mastering" to make it sound the best, I set the title track up as if it was going to be mastered [[which in a sense it was, being cut on to an acetate record).

We cut a lacquer ref of the tune with mastering moves while dumping to the digital computer at the same time with the same moves.

Then, after a break, we sync'd up all three, first matching levels. Simultaneous playback of all three commenced and as Kevin switched, I listened. [[We took turns switching and listening). First thing I noticed:

The MASTER TAPE and the RECORD sounded the practically the same. We honestly couldn't tell one from the other during playback. This was of course playing back the tape on the master recorder with the mastering "moves" turned on. The acetate record was played back flat on the AcousTech lathe with the SAE arm and Shure V15 through the Neumann playback preamp [[as seen in so many pictures posted here of AcousTech).

The flat digital playback of my mastering sounded different. NOT BAD, just different. The decay on the piano was different, the plucks of Scott's bass were different, the reverb trail was noticeably truncated due to a loss of resolution. Non unpleasant, just not like the actual master tape. This is slightly frustrating to me because it confirmed the fact that when mastering in digital one has to compensate for the change [[which I do with my usual "tricks"). The record however, gave back exactly what we put in to it. Exactly.

Please note that an actual record for sale would have gone through the manufacturing process and the lacquer would have been processed to a MASTER, MOTHER, STAMPER and VINYL with increased surface noise, etc. but the sound of the music remains intact for the most part. A remarkable thing since records have been basically made the same way for over 100 years.


SECOND COMPARISON: MASTER TAPE with ACETATE LACQUER AT 45 RPM with DSD MASTER [[SACD MASTER).

So, using the same master tape of WALTZ FOR DEBBY, we compared the before mentioned acetate that we cut on the AcousTech lathe [[manufactured in 1967 and modded by Kevin Gray) with a DSD playback of the same tape with the same mastering and levels.

Result? The DSD/SACD version sounded even MORE different than the compact disc digital playback compared to the analog master. More not-like the sound of the actual master tape. The resolution was fine and we could hear the notes decay, etc. just like analog but the TONALITY was a bit off. It was not telling the truth when compared to the master tape or the acetate record.

THIRD COMPARISON: MASTER TAPE with ACETATE RECORD with OPEN REEL TAPE COPY AT 15 ips:

We made a dub of the tune WALTZ FOR DEBBY to an Ampex ATR-100 at 15 ips non-Dolby, +3 level and played it back with the actual master tape and the acetate record. Both of us thought the open reel tape copy sounded inferior to the acetate record when compared to the master tape; weaker transients, a more "blurred" sound that would never be noticeable unless played back with the actual master tape to compare it to.


So, what does this mean to you? Probably nothing. What did it mean to me? I found it interesting. The CD playback had more accurate tonality than the DSD/SACD playback. The DSD playback had more front to back resolution than the CD playback. The tape copy sounded slightly lackluster. The acetate record playback beat them all in terms of resolution, tonal accuracy and everything else when compared directly with the analog master in playback. This is not wonderful news in a certain sense; vinyl playback is sometimes a pain in the butt and knowing that CD's are not capturing everything in perfect resolution drives me bonkers.

Regarding the lowly phonograph record:

Remember, a record groove is a true "analog" of a sound wave; not a SAMPLE but the real deal. Even the electrically recorded 78's I have from the 1920's have a wonderful sound with a lifelike convincing midband [[which is where the "heart" of the music lies). Read what Kevin Gray wrote in this essay:

http://www.recordtech.com/prodsounds.htm

http://www.recordtech.com/faq.htm

Of course records have their problems [[could be noisy, warped, bad cutting, etc.) as well but for the most part they will be a damn miraculous representation of the actual master recording for not much money.

Your comments are welcome.

Please remember, the above is just my OPINION but I found it interesting. I love my compact discs but I realize they are not the last word in resolution; they are damn fine though and when listening for pleasure I play CDs and records, with CDs getting the most play. My Sony and Living Stereo SACDs are never far away from me either. If you disagree with me, that's cool. It's all fun, or should be.

Sorry again for some awkward English in this; my proofing time was limited [[but not compressed).
Share this post:
Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on email Share on print Share on reddit More Sharing Services

Steve Hoffman is offline Report Post

[Jerry Oz]

Okay, so that proves that I'm not completely nuts.

Just kidding, that is remarkable. How many digital snobs out there turn their nose up at vinyl records being a prehistoric format? In my personal opinion, there's a romantic side to records that you don't have with CDs. It's sort of like how you feel being in a train station instead of an airport: something long gone, but still special.

Thanks for posting that, Soulster!

[soulster]

Of course, the trick to good vinyl playback is a good vinyl setup. And, it doesn't help digital when the record companies jack the sound of CDs.

The big thing about that little test Mr. Hoffman did is he had a cutting lathe in a world-class mastering studio. The consumer has a mass-produced vinyl record that went through a plating and stamper process, and, more often than not, was pressed on a cheap vinyl compound. The average person has a less-than optimal turntable and related gear, playing a somewhat worn record.

[Jerry Oz]

Not to mention the inevitably warped album. I've taken many back after ripping off the plastic and seeing a less-than-acceptable bowing.

[cozmic]

Thanks again timmyfunk!