Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

AJH

andrew wrote:

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck
only has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by
depth of the needle?

No, the groove wiggles from side to side and needs a much larger needle than
the stylus used for 33 and 45's. You could even hear the sound from a 78 by
sticking your thumbnail in the groove as the record was going round.

--
Mike Clarke

On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:30:55 +0100, andrew
wrote:

Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

AJH


The stylus tip radius needs to be larger for 78rpm records. I think
the only early recordings used "hill and dale" depth recording.

In message , andrew
writes
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?


You could always buy one of these

http://www.firebox.com/product/1401/USB-Turntable

prolly cheaper elsewhere and you can get 78 needles for them


--
geoff

andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

AJH
You could record them at 45RPM then use software to speed up the playback.

A

"andrew" wrote in message
...
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

AJH


If you use 'audacity' (free and legal) to record the music from your record
deck (or you might consider buying one of those cheap ion 'usb' decks, if
you have trouble interfacing with your PC), you will find that you can
record at a slow speed and correct to 78rpm speed. Works well - I have done
it with a few 78s which my mother bought during the war.
You can also use audacity to clean up some of the scratches.(This takes
quite a bit of skill and practice). Definitely worth the time to preserve
the history.

http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

--

John

On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:41:43 +0100, Jim Lacey wrote:

On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:30:55 +0100, andrew
wrote:

Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor
nick, possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal
Recorder" and probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record
deck only has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation
by depth of the needle?

AJH


The stylus tip radius needs to be larger for 78rpm records. I think the
only early recordings used "hill and dale" depth recording.

If you don't have the right size and shape stylus, you tend to be playing
the muck at the bottom of the groove instead of the sound on the sides.

As others have said, play it at 45 and audio-process it up to the right
speed (somewhere around 78 - it varied *a lot*. Also make good use of
noise fingerprinting, scratch and pop removal etc. Audacity is a good
place to start.

Alternatively there are experts out there with the correct equipment and
experience to do it for you. For a fee, obviously.

In article , Bioboffin
writes

If you use 'audacity' (free and legal) to record the music from your record
deck (or you might consider buying one of those cheap ion 'usb' decks, if
you have trouble interfacing with your PC), you will find that you can
record at a slow speed and correct to 78rpm speed. Works well - I have done
it with a few 78s which my mother bought during the war.
You can also use audacity to clean up some of the scratches.(This takes
quite a bit of skill and practice). Definitely worth the time to preserve
the history.

http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

Audacity will be fine taking the input from the sound card too so the
o/p's existing deck through his amp to line out should be a no-cost
solution. The 45rpm playback with the existing small needle sounds ok
and can be speeded up. I had a 33/45/78 deck with just a single needle
yonks ago and made some recordings from 78s which sounded ok.

I was given a usb deck a while back and prefer to use it from the audio
outputs in the back, more flexible on lead length than the usb.
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs

Also, the equalisation of 78rpm records is different to that of 45 and
33rpm.

Equalisation is the filtering of the signal according to frequency.
When recording, low frequencies are reduced in amplitude and high
frequencies boosted. On playback, the opposite occurs.

For 33/45rpm records the formula used for this is the RIAA standard.
Prior to this, there were any number of different equalisations
standard. You should be able to get an approximation to the one used
for recording by applying a filter to the save file (ie. you apply a
further equalisation *on top of* the RIAA equalisation that your
turntable/preamplifier will have applied, in order to achieve the
desired actual equalisation).

I can probably find a reference to sample 78rpm equalisations used, if
that's of interest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equalisation#Uses

is also of interest.

HTH
Jon N

andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

Think its lateral.

And a fairly big needle

You CAN get compatible needles to plug into standard cartridiges, and
there are still decks around that do 78.

AJH

geoff wrote:
In message , andrew
writes
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come
across some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her
brother who was training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor
nick, possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal
Recorder" and probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I
attempt that what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that
my record deck only has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an
amplitude modulation by depth of the needle?


You could always buy one of these

http://www.firebox.com/product/1401/USB-Turntable

prolly cheaper elsewhere and you can get 78 needles for them

Brilliant, thanks for that link. I've loads of LPs that I wish to put on the
PC and couldn't be bothered playing with converting. This appears to be just
the ticket.

On Sun, 7 Jun 2009 19:42:26 +0100, Clot wrote:

geoff wrote:
In message , andrew
writes
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come
across some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her
brother who was training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor
nick, possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal
Recorder" and probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I
attempt that what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that
my record deck only has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an
amplitude modulation by depth of the needle?


You could always buy one of these

http://www.firebox.com/product/1401/USB-Turntable

prolly cheaper elsewhere and you can get 78 needles for them

Brilliant, thanks for that link. I've loads of LPs that I wish to put on the
PC and couldn't be bothered playing with converting. This appears to be just
the ticket.

£59.99 at Maplins

SteveW

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck
only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

Think its lateral.

And a fairly big needle

You CAN get compatible needles to plug into standard cartridiges, and
there are still decks around that do 78.

Worth mentioning that you may still get better results from micing up a
real 78 record player. The difference in the weight of the tone arm can
make recordings from modern decks sound very light and scratchy.

There is also commercial softwa

http://www.dartpro.com/

that makes quite a good job of automatic scratch removal.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

AJH

Try posting the same question in rec.audio.pro

You have two issues:

1. Getting the cleanest possible signal (audio) from the 78s

2. Post processing the signal.

The post processing is relatively easy (hm), well you can take as many
goes at is without damaging anything.

Getting the originals into digital format is the challenge, but I see
you've already spotted that.

I did a similar project recently, and bought a 78 player to make sure I
got proper results. What route you go down depends ultimately on the
value you place on the recordings.

In message , John
Rumm writes
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I
attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record
deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

Think its lateral.
And a fairly big needle
You CAN get compatible needles to plug into standard cartridiges,
and there are still decks around that do 78.

Worth mentioning that you may still get better results from micing up a
real 78 record player. The difference in the weight of the tone arm can
make recordings from modern decks sound very light and scratchy.

There is also commercial softwa

http://www.dartpro.com/

that makes quite a good job of automatic scratch removal.


There are any number of winamp anti scratch plugins too

--
geoff

On 7 June, 21:13, John Rumm wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck
only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

Think its lateral.

And a fairly big needle

You CAN get compatible needles to plug into standard cartridiges, and
there are still decks around that do 78.

Worth mentioning that you may still get better results from micing up a
real 78 record player. The difference in the weight of the tone arm can
make recordings from modern decks sound very light and scratchy.

There is also commercial softwa

http://www.dartpro.com/

that makes quite a good job of automatic scratch removal.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| * * * * *Internode Ltd - *http://www.internode.co.uk* * * * * *|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| * * * *John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk * * * * * * *|
\================================================= ================/

If you want to get really serious Computer Enhanced Digital Audio
Restoration, CEDAR

http://www.cedar-audio.com

Adam

In message
,
Adam Aglionby writes
On 7 June, 21:13, John Rumm wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck
only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

Think its lateral.

And a fairly big needle

You CAN get compatible needles to plug into standard cartridiges, and
there are still decks around that do 78.

Worth mentioning that you may still get better results from micing up a
real 78 record player. The difference in the weight of the tone arm can
make recordings from modern decks sound very light and scratchy.

There is also commercial softwa

http://www.dartpro.com/

that makes quite a good job of automatic scratch removal.

--
Cheers,

John.
If you want to get really serious Computer Enhanced Digital Audio
Restoration, CEDAR

http://www.cedar-audio.com

Err, lets think about this - he has a few old recordings from a relative
which he wants to restore in a sort of hobby fashion

Ask yourself if this really might be the best engineering solution, i.e.
cost effective ?

I rather think not, don't you ?




--
geoff

On 7 June, 23:37, geoff wrote:
In message
,
Adam Aglionby writes

On 7 June, 21:13, John Rumm wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck
only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

Think its lateral.

And a fairly big needle

You CAN get compatible needles to plug into standard cartridiges, and
there are still decks around that do 78.

Worth mentioning that you may still get better results from micing up a
real 78 record player. The difference in the weight of the tone arm can
make recordings from modern decks sound very light and scratchy.

There is also commercial softwa

http://www.dartpro.com/

that makes quite a good job of automatic scratch removal.

--
Cheers,

John.
If you want to get really serious Computer Enhanced Digital Audio
Restoration, CEDAR

http://www.cedar-audio.com

Err, lets think about this - he has a few old recordings from a relative
which he wants to restore in a sort of hobby fashion

Ask yourself if this really might be the best engineering solution, i.e.
cost effective ?

I rather think not, don't you ?

--
geoff

whoosh....

On 7 June, 23:37, geoff wrote:
In message
,
Adam Aglionby writes

On 7 June, 21:13, John Rumm wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
andrew wrote:
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck
only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

Think its lateral.

And a fairly big needle

You CAN get compatible needles to plug into standard cartridiges, and
there are still decks around that do 78.

Worth mentioning that you may still get better results from micing up a
real 78 record player. The difference in the weight of the tone arm can
make recordings from modern decks sound very light and scratchy.

There is also commercial softwa

http://www.dartpro.com/

that makes quite a good job of automatic scratch removal.

--
Cheers,

John.
If you want to get really serious Computer Enhanced Digital Audio
Restoration, CEDAR

http://www.cedar-audio.com

Err, lets think about this - he has a few old recordings from a relative
which he wants to restore in a sort of hobby fashion

Ask yourself if this really might be the best engineering solution, i.e.
cost effective ?

I rather think not, don't you ?

--
geoff

Sorry thought heard a sound rush past.

To get the best source possibly non contact, laser reading might be
best before feeding to the CEDAR rack server:

http://www.elpj.com

About 14K USD apparently think CEDAR modules start at around 8K UKP ,
" best engineering solution" is undoubtedly CEDAR , its what others
seek to emulate.

At the less expensive end of things garbage in garbage out, getting
the best transcription of source means less cleaning up afterwards.

Convenience with a sub £60 tutntable, with built in sound card and EQ
as well, depends what your wanting to transcribe TBH...

Lot of good quality turntables go for little money nowadays and with a
decent cartridge will certainly make a lot better result.

Adam

andrew wrote:

Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

AJH


IIRC a wiki article on this was written, you might look at the
audacity wiki to see if its there.

Needle: 78s used a bigger needle, but can still be played with a
modern stereo needle. The profile will be wrong, but OTOH you'll not
be playing the badly worn parts of the groove. This is why studio
transcription is done with a fair range of needle sizes, picking
whichever one gives the best result for each record. You can get 78
styli for some modernish cartridges.

Equalisation: Audacity has several built in 78 eq curves. But...
1. if you change speed, your eq will be all wrong and none of the
curves apply, just have to do it by ear.
2. a novelty booth in 1940s is unlikely to have made any attempt to
conform to any of the eq schemes in popular use at the time.

Cleaning: old records can be cleaned, but NEVER use alcohol on 78s.
Since its not a moulded disc it wont be shellac anyway, but something
rather softer, so be even more wary about cleaning it.

Speed: Some pre-war discs were 80rpm, but I think by the 40s they'd be
78. OTOH a booth recording could easily have been a few rpm off and
have varied with cutter position. so there's lttle point getting fussy
about speed.

Audacity has pretty much everything you need to do the job.


NT

On 8 Jun 2009 08:18:55 GMT, Huge wrote:

It's still a slow, tedious and painful process.

I've been lazy. Most of the records I want to digitise are available
on the net in mp3 already..
Probably worth checking before you do your own.
If they're not of good enough quality THEN try it yourself.

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:58:10 +0100, wrote:

On 8 Jun 2009 08:18:55 GMT, Huge wrote:

It's still a slow, tedious and painful process.

I've been lazy. Most of the records I want to digitise are available
on the net in mp3 already..
Probably worth checking before you do your own.
If they're not of good enough quality THEN try it yourself.

Ignore me
Finding your recordings might be a bit tricky!

On 2009-06-07, Clot wrote:
geoff wrote:
In message , andrew
writes

Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come
across some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her
brother who was training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor
nick, possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal
Recorder" and probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I
attempt that what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that
my record deck only has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an
amplitude modulation by depth of the needle?


You could always buy one of these

http://www.firebox.com/product/1401/USB-Turntable

prolly cheaper elsewhere and you can get 78 needles for them

Brilliant, thanks for that link. I've loads of LPs that I wish to put on the
PC and couldn't be bothered playing with converting. This appears to be just
the ticket.

snip

its ok for a 78 or two, they dont take long, but for bulk digitising
of vinyl media collections you're looking at maybe 4 hours per album
to do a decent job of it... not very practical.


NT

Adam Aglionby wrote:
On 7 June, 23:37, geoff wrote:
In message
,
Adam Aglionby writes

On 7 June, 21:13, John Rumm wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
andrew wrote:

Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt
that

huge snip

To get the best source possibly non contact, laser reading might be
best before feeding to the CEDAR rack server:

physical needles push a fair amount of dust & dirt out of the way. A
laser interprets it all as sound instead.


NT

Steve Walker wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 2009 19:42:26 +0100, Clot wrote:

geoff wrote:
In message , andrew
writes
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come
across some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her
brother who was training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor
nick, possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal
Recorder" and probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I
attempt that what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that
my record deck only has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an
amplitude modulation by depth of the needle?

You could always buy one of these

http://www.firebox.com/product/1401/USB-Turntable

prolly cheaper elsewhere and you can get 78 needles for them
Brilliant, thanks for that link. I've loads of LPs that I wish to put on the
PC and couldn't be bothered playing with converting. This appears to be just
the ticket.

£59.99 at Maplins

SteveW

£49.99 At Aldi on Sunday!

Reports to work with 78's too

http://www.aldi.co.uk/uk/html/offers/2827_10015.htm

Toby...

On Jun 8, 11:49*am, wrote:
On 2009-06-07, Clot wrote:
geoff wrote:
In message , andrew
writes
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come
across some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her
brother who was training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor
nick, possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal
Recorder" and probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I
attempt that what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that
my record deck only has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an
amplitude modulation by depth of the needle?

You could always buy one of these

http://www.firebox.com/product/1401/USB-Turntable

prolly cheaper elsewhere and you can get 78 needles for them

Brilliant, thanks for that link. I've loads of LPs that I wish to put on the
PC and couldn't be bothered playing with converting. This appears to be just
the ticket.

snip

its ok for a 78 or two, they dont take long,


But you might have to splice them together. I remember an old 78
recording* where you could hear that the orchestra stopped dead at the
end of each side - the echo died away afterwards. You'd need to join
them up with an overlap.

Robert
* Beethoven's Eroica in fact

andrew wrote:

Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come across
some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her brother who was
training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

I think they are directly scribed into the plastic which is in poor nick,
possibly some mould growth. The discs are "Zenith Universal Recorder" and
probably done in some sort of booth.

I shall try and record them directly to wav files but before I attempt that
what precautions need I take? I have a problem in that my record deck only
has 33 and 45 rpm. Was mono 78 simply an amplitude modulation by depth of
the needle?

These are fragile disks, playing them can cause damage so you need to be
fairly sure that you have things set up properly before you start. As
others have said, the stylus needs to be specifically designed for 78s.
Don't try using the 33/45 rpm stylus because it will go to the bottom of
the groove and cause damage or scrape up the muck.

Those Ion turntables are absolute rubbish, a waste of money in almost
very respect. If you could get hold of a 78 turntable + cartridge and
stylus with a pre-amp and feed that into the line input on your Mac you
would do much better. OTOH if you were familiar with audio equipment I
guess you would have worked this out for yourself.

A new 78rpm cartridge and stylus will cost about £150. A decent
turntable could be as low as £40 with tonearm, if you're lucky you might
get a cartridge with it.

RobertL wrote:
On Jun 8, 11:49*am, wrote:
On 2009-06-07, Clot wrote:
geoff wrote:
In message , andrew
writes
Whilst clearing out the loft at my mother's old house I have come
across some records. These were made in America in 1942 by her
brother who was training as RAF bomber crew. He died shortly after.

If you play them back at 45 and use software to speed the recordings
up to normal, you will lose the top frequencies. in accordance with
the ratio 45:78
I'd definitely obtain a 78rpm player.

Tony

tonyjeffs wrote:
If you play them back at 45 and use software to speed the recordings
up to normal, you will lose the top frequencies. in accordance with
the ratio 45:78
I'd definitely obtain a 78rpm player.

Tony

that would be true for vinyl, but not 78s. Their recorded bandwidth is
a long way shy of 20kHz.


NT

On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 19:47:29 -0700 (PDT), tonyjeffs wrote:

If you play them back at 45 and use software to speed the recordings
up to normal, you will lose the top frequencies.

Explain?

Original recorded 78 sound = 5kHz
Played at 78, frequency reproduced = 5kHz

Played at 45, frequency reproduced = 2.88kHz
Digitally speed up by 1.73, frequency = 4.98kHz

Close enough for Jazz...

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article
,
tonyjeffs wrote:
If you play them back at 45 and use software to speed the recordings
up to normal, you will lose the top frequencies. in accordance with
the ratio 45:78

Think that's apex over posterior. You might lose the extreme bottom end
through this - not the top. But it's very unlikely there is much of either
in this case.

--
*Go the extra mile. It makes your boss look like an incompetent slacker *

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

tonyjeffs wrote:
If you play them back at 45 and use software to speed the recordings
up to normal, you will lose the top frequencies. in accordance with
the ratio 45:78
I'd definitely obtain a 78rpm player.

Tony
What top frequencies would those be then, on a 78rpm? typically 200-3khz
if that.


Actually you get *better* top frequencies that way...;-)

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

What top frequencies would those be then, on a 78rpm? typically 200-3khz
if that.

Depends. 78s were actually produced much later than many think. Pye even
making them out of vinyl. 10kHz plus isn't unknown. But something out of a
booth could be no better than telephone quality.

--
*Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

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

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

What top frequencies would those be then, on a 78rpm? typically 200-3khz
if that.

Depends. 78s were actually produced much later than many think. Pye even
making them out of vinyl. 10kHz plus isn't unknown. But something out of a
booth could be no better than telephone quality.

I once took some stuff off an old wire recorder for a friend..some
speeches of his fathers.. and put them on cassette. I ran the whole
think straight of the replay head, as the electronics had died, and used
a graphic equaliser to try and get some sort of reasonable balance. ISTR
I built a basic equaliser as well..to cope with the innate equalisation.

To be honest it didn't replace what wasn't there in the first place, but
a reasonably hiss free and un-tinny tape resulted.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

What top frequencies would those be then, on a 78rpm? typically
200-3khz if that.

Depends. 78s were actually produced much later than many think. Pye
even making them out of vinyl. 10kHz plus isn't unknown. But something
out of a booth could be no better than telephone quality.

I once took some stuff off an old wire recorder for a friend..some
speeches of his fathers.. and put them on cassette. I ran the whole
think straight of the replay head, as the electronics had died, and used
a graphic equaliser to try and get some sort of reasonable balance.
ISTR I built a basic equaliser as well..to cope with the innate
equalisation.

Good grief. I've only ever seen one in a museum. ;-)

To be honest it didn't replace what wasn't there in the first place, but
a reasonably hiss free and un-tinny tape resulted.

They must have been reasonable for speech at least since the BBC used them
for some time. Although they had disc recording too.

--
*We are born naked, wet, and hungry. Then things get worse.

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