Static Impulse Problem

[Craig Maier]

DJ sent me a sample of the static infested file. The file was recorded at a 24 bit resolution and a 96 KHz sampling rate. I was unable to determine the precise cause of the noise, but I did note that the EZ Clean filter had no trouble removing the noises with the following settings:

Scratch: 0
Crackle: 40
Hiss: 0
Hum: Off

keyword: Electrostatic Discharge, ESD, Electrically Charged Vinyl

[Audyossey]

...Actually I was kind of cheating with the specs anyway.... I guess I should mention they were dbx encoded LP's.

I'll say you were cheating! When I saw your numbers, dbx came to mind. I presume you recorded them through a dbx decoder.

I don't remember the specs for dbx discs, but I remember that at the time I was collecting them?at about the time CDs were introduced, I noticed that the S/N ratios that they gave exceeded those for CDs. dbx was indeed mastering them from the original Dolby A masters and, where necessary, correcting any engineering tricks that had been used to prepare them for ordinary LPs.

HB

[DJBohn]

Craig,
I've been converting a bunch of music over to MP3's over the past week (more that 200 songs!), & thus have not had the chance to try the EZClean on those files yet, but will be getting back to them soon - I will let you know how they work out. I'm also going to start doing my recordings at 20bit / 48kHz instead of the 24bit / 96kHz in the hope my old PIII can handle the recordings better with less chance of digital problems - at least until I can afford a better computer. That should make for a usable compromise.

Audyossey,
You are correct. I was using a dbx 224X to decode the LP's prior to the sound card input. (I just had to see what the measured background noise was!) I have always wondered if dbx encoded LP's would have become the new standard for high quality sound, had CD's never come onto the consumer marketplace. We'll never know. Outside of the occasional noticable "pumping" of the music's volume level, these dbx encoded LP's really do sound quite good. But use of such a decoder in the audio chain will increase THD & other problems, so I guess in the long run CD's may have been the right direction to go - they just should have used higher bit & sample rates with them to begin with.

A note of interest: In 1910, Columbia records started making 78's that had a song on both sides of the record. RCA and others were also doing the same thing close to around that time. In 1958, stereo LP's were first introduced (RCA Living Stereo, etc.). In 1982, the first CD's were available to the consumer. Also note there is music only on one side of these CD's... (A step backward in time?) DVD's have more storage than CD's, but can loose data over time due to their design and/or sun exposure, poor handling, etc.. It would have been nice if CD's had been introduced as 2 sided discs. (It could be done) They could have also designed them to be in a slim like case that could have been inserted into a playback machine that could only be opened by the machine itself - keeping everyones hands off from the disc itself. No fingerprints, smudges or scratches would have ever been a problem. No sunlight would ever degrade the data on the disc. The artwork could have been on the case, while nothing would need to be printed on the disc at all, allowing information to recorded on both sides. Such an approach could have reduced our CD storage needs in half, not to mention the long life durability! (I hope the recording industry is reading this...) Anyway, it was just a passing thought...

[Geebster]

Yeah, I think you are spot on about CD's. Unfortunately, at the time they were introduced, Sony/Philips were so worried about the marketability of them that they had to make concessions to the retailers and the artists. The long boxes were the norm for awhile because the old LP bins could be easily retro-fitted to accomodate these new fangled CDs. And extra long playing times and double sided discs were nixed by the artists themselves. A lot of bands can/could hardly come up with 40 minutes of new material, let alone what a double length CD would hold!!!

Sony kinda had the right idea with the mini disc, but because of it's reduced size it can only hold a CD's worth of material by using compression. Don't get me wrong, I love MD's, but for only casual listening.

Now if they wouild come up with double sided CD housed in a MD-like enclosure and add a couple of other tweaks, the CD could be a viable main stay of recorded music for a long time.

GB

[Dan McDonald]

But if you look at compact flash or SD cards that now are holding 4 GB or better, you could make the case for the CD being on the way out. I've already seen car stereos with inputs for flash cards.

Of course, they are a little too small, so that gives CDs an edge. I think there's a convenience factor where people don't want things that are too small because they're too easy to lose. SD and other flash cards are ok because they fit into other devices - recorders, cameras, etc., and the files get transferred to bigger equipment - computers mainly, so the consumer doesn't have to really deal with the small size that much. But storing music on them and moving the card itself around is probably too much hassle for most people.

Dan

[Geebster]

Yes... Smaller isn't necessarily better, especially when you have big hands like I do.

I'm kind of in the market for my first MP3 player, just for those instances where I am waiting for someone or riding in the car as a passenger for long periods of time....Anyway, when I went to my local mega mart, I was so surprised at how tiny most of them were; Too tiny for me actually. So, I'll probably opt for one that has mass storage, not because I need all of that data space, but because it makes the player a bit bigger and easier to deal with.

And even the already tiny SD cards have gotten smaller with the MicroSD's!!!

Maybe that's why the manufacturers are making everything so tiny; they hope that we will misplace these devices and have to buy replacements.

GB

[DougMac]

Dinosaurs

I'm kind of in the market for my first MP3 player, just for those instances where I am waiting for someone or riding in the car as a passenger for long periods of time....

I finally broke down and asked Santa for an MP3 player for Christmas. He brought me a Creative Labs Zen 60gig model. My wife has an ipod 30 gig, which I like, but I didn't want to be locked into itunes and the AAC format.

So far I love it. I find 128 is fine for most music, but I have the option to use higher rates for more critical (classical) recordings. I'll be able to fit my entire CD collection comfortably on the device. No more taking CDs to work or in the car. We also have an iRiver transmitter for the cars. Of course it's not equal to a hard wire, but it sounds fine. I like the iRiver because it has three frequencies, all of which can be tuned to any FM setting. Interference has not been a problem.

The title refers to me feeling behind the times. My wife is an instructor at a university nursing school and her ipod (along with 11 others and a MacBook Pro) came from a grant proposal she wrote. She and her students are producing both video and audio podcasts. I've helped as the recording engineer, using DC6 to record to the computer and sweeten the vocal tracks.

Both my sons subscribe to Rhapsody and now that I have a player, I'm about to join. I think this will be the main way music is distrubuted in the future. I plan to use it as a way to explore new and old music and buying CDs of the stuff I really like. There's no FM station anywhere near here that plays anything I'd care to buy. There's a wealth of really great music out there, it's just so hard to find it.

Doug

[Geebster]

Hey, thanks for telling about your experiences with your new toy. I've finally decided to take the plunge too because more and more, there are special releases where these new services are the the ONLY way to get them.

I'm sure I'll love it and when you are on the go, it sure beats having to deal with CD's or the like.

If you or somebody else doesn't mind.... Can you tell me a little more about Rhapsody? Rhapsody's entry page is pretty vague at best; they want you to try it for 14 days, but don't say too much about their service. Thanks.


GB

[DougMac]

If you or somebody else doesn't mind.... Can you tell me a little more about Rhapsody? Rhapsody's entry page is pretty vague at best; they want you to try it for 14 days, but don't say too much about their service. Thanks.


GB

They are pretty vague.

Here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhapsod..._music_service)
As you can see, the streaming only service is $9.95/mo and the "To go" service, which allows you to download to your player is $14.99/mo. As I recall, you can set your bit rate, with 128 as possibly the highest rate. Some music is not available for download and has to be purchased, although you can preview it first. I'm not sure, but I think it's only a small percentage that's not available.

If you download, you can listen for 30 days, then it drops off your player. You can download again for another 30 days or purchase the music. If you purchase the music, you're limited to three or so devices, so you can have the file on your PC, a laptop and a player. You can't share, though (at least not legally).

It has a lot of other features. Doug had a Halloween party and we hooked up his laptop, which is on a wireless network to the stereo. Rhapsody streamed a Halloween playlist which had some great Halloween music. There were no hiccups and the quality was fine, certainly for a party setting.

Rhapsody also makes suggestions. If you listen to or download a particular artist, it will point you to similar artists. This is a great way to discover new music.

I'm going to sign up tonight. I'll let you know what I think.

Doug

[Geebster]

Thanks, Doug...

I really appreciate your information. Let me know how you make out with it...

GB

[DJBohn]

Hey DougMac,
I just purchased a Creative Zen Touch 20 Gig on a close-out at the local WalMart on a good deal. I had been using a Philips Expanium CD/MP3 player in the past with most of my Top40 collection on MP3 CD's, but felt the Zen would be much easier to carry around than a case full of CD's. I went with this model for one important reason - it's compatible with Windows98 which is what I'm stuck with untill I upgrade my computer. The new IPods, Reo's, Zens, etc. are not downward compatible, so it was either I get that now or be stuck with using CD's. I only wish there were more optional accessories for the Zen like there are for the IPod.

As for using a service like Rhapsody, the new Napster and others, I'm wondering if it's really that great of a deal. 15 clams a month is pretty spendy for low bit MP3's, especially if they "self destruct" in just 30 days! If a sample listen is all you want, that could be got for free at most of the Internet CD sales outlets, such as CD Universe. But what would you think about 40 different channels of CD quality digital sound for only about $10 (or $20?) a month that not only has good RCA analog outputs to feed your stereo, but also has an S/PDIF coax output that could be fed right into your computer sound card, so you can make your own high quality MP3's??? (No, not XM or Sirius) This is a service that has been around for almost 15 years! It is available from your local Charter Communications cable service called DMX Music Express. Granted, you can't pick on the spot what you want to hear, but if you have a large hard drive, you could set it to record for several hours & then just select what you want to keep when it's convenient. And what a variety of music formats! And I say again, 16bit/44.1kHz CD quality! It just seems like a better deal for the money...

[Geebster]

Hey DJ...

I've been using DMX (and a comparible company whose name I have forgotten) for years, and it is a VERY good deal. It is absolutely free for me with the cable system that I have. What I do is to record 6 hours worth onto Stereo HiFi VCR, then pick and choose which ones that I would like to keep. I have a Stereo HiFi VCR connected to my computer where I do all of my sound restorations. It is a tad cumbersome, but especially on the remix channel I get, there are few other ways I could get some of these club remixes other than this service.

I'm still of the old school kind of guy that wants a hard copy of all the music I purchase, but for those instances where it is impossible to get the music any other way, DMX (or similar) is indeed a very good option.

GB

Mmmmm.... Which brings up a question... Us old schoolers have our cylinders, tapes, and vinyl. What is the younger generation going to have in 20 or 30 years to physically have as a music collection? I'm sure by then the MP3 players of today will be in dust.

[Dan McDonald]

Mmmmm.... Which brings up a question... Us old schoolers have our cylinders, tapes, and vinyl. What is the younger generation going to have in 20 or 30 years to physically have as a music collection? I'm sure by then the MP3 players of today will be in dust.

Most of them keep backups on hard drives. My son has CDs and a 250 GB hard drive where he keeps his mp3s and videos. After he gets out of college, I imagine he'll move up to terrabytes and whatever comes after.

That does bring up a related question. If this generation is starting with lossy formats, what will they have later on, when their hearing starts to fade? I assume they'll need audio restoration/regeneration to put the highs and lows in so that they can hear something that sounds like music.

Maybe a new filter for DCArt - where the presets are set for your hearing loss?

Dan

[Geebster]

Most of them keep backups on hard drives.

If this generation is starting with lossy formats, what will they have later on, when their hearing starts to fade? I assume they'll need audio restoration/regeneration to put the highs and lows in so that they can hear something that sounds like music.

At least with the people I associate with, this isn't the case. They buy, use, record music on either on their computer or their portable music device like it will live forever, and not worrying about backups at all.

If you go out an purchase a CD, that is fine; you have the original. What I am seeing though is lots of people not bothering to purchase any hard copy of their music at all, just depending on downloads onto their computers or digital music devices. Ah well.. that is their problem, not mine.

Also, I have seen in recent years that people (again with the people that I associate with) aren't nearly as concerned about sound quality as they used to. People with a lot younger ears than mine, seem to accept MP3 quality audio as the norm and aren't that much concerned about "true" High Fidelity.

It seems that they are more concerned about how many things that their latest electronic gadget can do, not how many it can do WELL.

GB

[DJBohn]

What I do is to record 6 hours worth onto Stereo HiFi VCR, then pick and choose which ones that I would like to keep. I have a Stereo HiFi VCR connected to my computer where I do all of my sound restorations.

Geebster, you surprise me! With all of the hard drive space you have available to you, I'm amazed you're actually using a lossy like Frequency Modulated video tapes! Although Hi-Fi VCR's sound very good (much better than MP3's), it is still a lossy format none the less.

Years ago, when Sony came out with the first Hi-Fi VCR's (in the Beta format), VHS soon followed. (VHS always lagged behind Beta with tech improvments) Shortly after, Stereo Review magazine did some double blind listening tests with a Sony Beta Hi-Fi, a high quality VHS Hi-Fi and Compact Discs. The listening panel was astounded when they found out (after the listening test) they had been listening to video tape audio recordings. But the test did reveal there were differences in sound between them. If you wish, I could dig out this mag & send you a PDF scan of the article. Could make for a good read if nothing else.