In article <008b01bfec0a$ccd80340$3f58b5cf@q4e1g3>,
Timothy Jaques <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it possible to simply record the LP as individual sound files, track by
> track, so as to avoid the nuisance of having to use software to make tracks
> on a CD?
Of course. If you don't mind not being able to jump to the start of a
piece then you don't need to do the track-splitting thing. Also, I
think that some CD-burning programs will essentially let you mark
interesting points in the file by hand.
> How does the software distinguish between the crackle
> and hiss heard between LP tracks, and, say, drumsticks being clicked
> together or someone knocking on the edge of a bodhran?
Usually it does that just fine :^) In the program I'm using, there are
several parameter that you can tweak if it doesn't detect the correct
tracks -- but I've never needed to do so. In any case it is always
possible to use a vanilla WAV file editor to split a track if necessary;
the specialized software is more convenient when dealing with a recording
that may consist of half a dozen tracks or more.
> Why does the software remove the cracks and hisses after it has been
> converted to a digital sound file? Would it not be more efficient if these
> were removed a step earlier in the transfer process? (Most of my LPs are in
> pretty good shape anyway -- some are still in the cellophane.)
Sure, but the computer only sees the sound when it is already digital.
One can do amazing things with a parametric equalizer before the sound
is digitized but that puts you back into the realm of wizardry.
Also, some of the procedures that are being used only work well when
the sound in question is digitized (for example, they may be too slow
to handle the analog sound in �real time�). If your LPs are in mint
condition, then chances are you won't have to do much about cracks and
hisses, anyway.
> Can the cable from the amp to the soundcard be shielded in some low tech
> method to avoid interferance -- wrap it with thin lead or run it through a
> lead pipe, for instance? I can easily obtain either at the local shop that
> sells recycled plumbing equipment.
Of course you can fancier cables which are shielded. Generally I'd go
for a cable that is as short as possible; one could probably shield it
using food-type aluminium foil which is grounded (run a wire e.g. to
your nearest water pipe or radiator)
> I wonder why someone has not come out with a sound card that works
> with RCA jacks, rather than needing a cable with a converter on it.
There are some (the Soundblaster AWE64 Gold, I think). The problem is
that this makes the card a bit more expensive and also takes up more
room on the back plane of the computer, so you're more likely to find
this with the more up-market type of card. There are cards like the
(very expensive) Terratec EWS64XL which come with a huge arrangement
of jacks of all kinds that you can install in a 5�" floppy drive
bay. The downside of this is that this requires you to run the signal
cables all the way through the inside of your computer, which in many
cases can deteriorate the signal more than a simple adapter cable on
the outside. The inside of a computer is teeming with all sorts of
electromagnetic �noise� from components such as the CPU, video card
etc., which is why there are strict rules about constructing computer
cases such that your friendly PC doesn't disturb your neighbors' TV
set. -- There are a few things you can do on the inside of your
computer to improve the chances of a good sound recording. Placing the
sound card as far away from the video card as possible is one simple
precaution.
> I am assuming that there are no "generational" issues in CD to CD copying
> since it is simply copying a digital file. In the old days when tapes were
> made of tapes of tapes of tapes etc. the sound quality got reduced the
> further you were down the line.
Copying CDs usually isn't much of a problem if the CD is clean and not
scratched, such that the computer can read them correctly. Audio buffs
will try to convince you that there is some deterioration even so, but
you don't have to buy that -- these are generally the same kind of
folks that will happily shell out $200 per foot of special voodoo
power cables, which for some reason that nobody can explain in
physical terms are supposed to do wonders to the audio reproduction
quality of the stereo setups they are used in ...
> Has anyone had experience with the CD deck burnables that plug right into
> one's amp? Are they worth the money and do they work well?
I've never used one of those, but I like my computer better because it
lets me �mix and match� different tracks conveniently, and as I said
it is possible to do things to the sound while it is inside the
computer. I don't think a stand-alone device will let you do
that. The other thing is that, at least here in Germany, the
stand-alone decks will only work with special CD-R media �for
professional audio use� which are at least twice as expensive as the
ones I use with my computer. The audio buffs mentioned above don't
really mind this because they have mostly been brain-washed into
believing that the special media really *is* better (it says
�professional� on the box, after all).
> What do these do to reduce hiss and pop? Just Dolby?
I don't think Dolby is used on CDs at all. After all, Dolby works by
emphasizing the higher frequencies during recording and toning them
down again (together with the noise) during play-back. You could have
this on the stand-alone CD recording decks but the CDs are supposed
to work on normal CD players as well.
Anselm
--
Anselm Lingnau ......................... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm not superstitious because it brings bad luck. -- Placido Domingo
Posted to Scots-L - The Traditional Scottish Music & Culture List - To
subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
