In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
The declicking method to which Dave refers was frowned upon,
(but nonetheless widely done!) and referred to as "destructive editing"
as one not only removed the click but the music underneath it.

Very true Iain. Now inform us just how you removed such clicks in the
analogue days long before you had a computer to do the work for you?

No self-respecting editor would want to do such work, so it was usually
given to trainees, who were instructed to "keep all the bits" (which
they did, numbered with white chinagraph pencil, and stuck to the front
of the tape machine with editing tape in the right order, until their
engineer or producer approved the job)

Ah. Forgot you never worked in the real world of broadcast. ;-)

--
*I got a job at a bakery because I kneaded dough.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 05/01/2017 12:27, Graeme wrote:
In message , Jim Lesurf
writes

Sadly, the shop only had volumes 1-4 so I didn't get
volume 5. But not bad for 3 quid a pop. :-)

Six copies of Volume 5 currently available via eBay :-)

Two copies should be sufficient.
As the clicks will be in different places, you should be able to choose
the best bits of each. :-)

--
Eiron.

In article ,
Eiron wrote:
On 05/01/2017 12:27, Graeme wrote:
In message , Jim Lesurf
writes

Sadly, the shop only had volumes 1-4 so I didn't get
volume 5. But not bad for 3 quid a pop. :-)

Six copies of Volume 5 currently available via eBay :-)

Two copies should be sufficient.
As the clicks will be in different places, you should be able to choose
the best bits of each. :-)

Quite. The one and only time I've cut clicks out of an LP was on one even
the various broadcast libraries couldn't find another of. It was for an
ITV schools' broadcast with no budget to have it specially recorded. Won
an international Emmy too - but not for the music. ;-)

--
*If at first you don't succeed, redefine success.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
The one and only time I've cut clicks out of an LP was on one even the
various broadcast libraries couldn't find another of. It was for an ITV
schools' broadcast with no budget to have it specially recorded. Won an
international Emmy too - but not for the music. ;-)

I make digital transcriptions for various reasons.

1) To remove clicks from old LPs.

2) To avoid the need to have to play the same LP again, risking added wear
to my ancient Shure styli, etc.

3) Convenience of being able to play the results in rooms where I don't
have the record deck.

Some of the second-hand LPs I bought are worn and so still sound lousy. But
others - after a careful declicking - sound very good. And I find it easier
to relax and enjoy the music when I'm not anticipating rifle shot
accompaniment.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

"Eiron" wrote in message
...
Six copies of Volume 5 currently available via eBay :-)

Two copies should be sufficient.
As the clicks will be in different places, you should be able to choose
the best bits of each. :-)


A cigar for that man:-)

Multiple copies of the original form the basis of
every good audio restoration project.


Iain

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
Yes, I am familiar with this technique. It was known as dissolving.

Thanks. Previously, I'd taken for granted that in the era of tape people
would always use tape splicing. But maybe some people found 'dissolving'
easier. When listening at first it sounded like odd dropouts due to
something like dirt on the tape. But when I looked at the waveforms the
thought came to me that it was a deliberate erasure.

In broadcast is was known as spot erasing. Some pro machines had this
facility - although more commonly used on one track of a multitrack. With
caution. ;-)


Spot erasing was a totally different thing, and used to
remove wrong notes or wrong beats (snare, BD, hi-hat, etc)
from one specific track on a multitrack machine. It left a
"hole" in the audio, which, in listening, was covered by
materal from other tracks. Spot erasure on a mono
or stereo tape, was, for obvious reasons, not an option.

Dissolving, a totally different technique, produced a cross fade
and was used exclusively on mono or stereo quarter in tapes, which
is what we are talking about here.

Iain

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
The declicking method to which Dave refers was frowned upon,
(but nonetheless widely done!) and referred to as "destructive editing"
as one not only removed the click but the music underneath it.

Very true Iain. Now inform us just how you removed such clicks in the
analogue days long before you had a computer to do the work for you?

No self-respecting editor would want to do such work, so it was usually
given to trainees, who were instructed to "keep all the bits" (which
they did, numbered with white chinagraph pencil, and stuck to the front
of the tape machine with editing tape in the right order, until their
engineer or producer approved the job)

Ah. Forgot you never worked in the real world of broadcast. ;-)

No. Thought I have recorded countless project
that have been broadcast. But not quite the same
thing:-)

When I was thinking about a career, I found that,
using three criteria, training, salary levels and
prospects, broadcast came right at the bottom
of the league table.

Besides, I wanted to work in a company
were things were done properly.
In the "real world of broadcast", your plexi
screens around drummers, and lapel mics stuck
to the bridges of violins with BluTack, were
clearly not optimum solutions:-)

Iain

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

The one and only time I've cut clicks out of an LP was on one even
the various broadcast libraries couldn't find another of. It was for an
ITV schools' broadcast with no budget to have it specially recorded.

Why did you not simply ask the record company for a 15ips Dolby A
tape copy from the master? These were always supplied very quickly
at no cost to broadcast. We used to send tapes to BH almost daily,
and even paid the courier:-)

This would have saved the cost of your LP transcription, declicking,
leadering etc.

It's a pity you didn't do it properly.

Iain

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:06:12 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:

[24 lines snipped]

Firstly, the original 78rpm shellac recorded
from the HMV gramophone with a
thorn needle, and a Neumann U47.

http://www.kolumbus.fi/Iain.Churches/Music/Chloe01.mp3

Then my digitally "restored" version using CEDAR

http://www.kolumbus.fi/Iain.Churches/Music/Chloe02.mp3

Wow.

My "party piece" is to cue up a track on CD of the same mono
title, a few bars in. Then I take a 78rpm original recording,
and place that on the gramophone. I start the gramophone,
and at a predetermined point, and cue the CD player.

The room is filled with "ambiosonics". The two systems keep
quite well in sync. The trick is to know when, and just how much
to wind the gramophone to retain reasonable synchronisation
through a 3 minute title:-)

Iain

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

These show an interesting psychological effect. There is almost no top
in the original music, but add a bit of hiss and crackle, and our
brains shape it into the missing sibilants (or whatever), despite the
fact that it is there continuously.

How true. Some people comment on the apparent loss of hf on the
restored version. In actual fact the frequency response of the recording
systems in those days was approx 100Hz to 5kHz (five and a half octaves)
so there never was any real hf to speak of.

It is interesting too how the internal balance of the recording seems to
improve when the noise artifacts are removed. In this case the rhythm
guitar.

Iain