Digitizing records

[Arneb]

So I want to digitize my old record collection. Oomph. I request a little help.

I have a decent record player (Technics), almost 20 years old, but, to my ear, functioning well (Let's see about a new needle). It plays via my stereo of the same age. The stereo has a so-called "receiver", that is, a radio-cum-amplifier combo which also takes care of the preamplification for the record player's signal. The receiver's sole outputs are via the speaker cable jacks (or is that "socket?") on the back and a headphone jack in the front side.

My computer has "line in" and "mic" jacks. I suppose the "line in" is for a preamplified signal while the microphone line is for an unamplified signal?

So where to connect? I imagine I could build a connection between the headphone jacket and the "line in", or between the record player and the "mic" jacket? Would that work, or something else? :?

And I have no "grabbing" software. Which can you recommend? (Freeware would be nice... :P ).

Any help is much appreciated.

[Мастер]

So I want to digitize my old record collection. Oomph. I request a little help.

I've had the same thought.

I have a decent record player (Technics), almost 20 years old, but, to my ear, functioning well (Let's see about a new needle).

Same here, except for the "almost" part. Well over 20 years here.

It plays via my stereo of the same age.

OK, now we start to differ.

The stereo has a so-called "receiver", that is, a radio-cum-amplifier combo which also takes care of the preamplification for the record player's signal. The receiver's sole outputs are via the speaker cable jacks (or is that "socket?") on the back and a headphone jack in the front side.

My computer has "line in" and "mic" jacks. I suppose the "line in" is for a preamplified signal while the microphone line is for an unamplified signal?

That's my understanding, although this is Enzo's and BM65's turf. However, the turntable output also is supposed to have different frequencies amplified differentially (part of some noise reduction technique), which may not be what the computer does to the mike input.

So where to connect? I imagine I could build a connection between the headphone jacket and the "line in", or between the record player and the "mic" jacket? Would that work, or something else? :?

And I have no "grabbing" software. Which can you recommend? (Freeware would be nice... :P ).

Any help is much appreciated.

Audacity is freeware, I have used it not for records, but for cassette tapes - I had some that were not commercially available, and processed them into CDs so I could play them on the computer or in the car.

However, for commercially available recordings, I think the best solution may be to get digitized copies here. At least, I think that's what I'm likely to do.

[Arneb]

Thanks, Mactep :D

However, for commercially available recordings, I think the best solution may be to get digitized copies here. At least, I think that's what I'm likely to do.

Do you mean I should get all the records I have as CD re-releases? I have over 150 records, so we would be talking about serious expense

[troubleagain]

If you will look, there are usb-attachable turntables you can buy, which presumably come with software, for not a whole lot of money. Also, my mom bought a turntable/cd-burner combo, which she has been using to digitize her albums.

[Blue Monster 65]

I do this all the time, though I'm sure I have much more gear than you do (erm ... not trying to be rude here, just mentioning that my set up is a bit more extensive).

So! To make it easier for you, hook your stuff up as such:

1. turntable to receiver

2. look for any line outs (cassette deck, for example) and use those for running into your computer (preferrably line in, but a mic input will work).

3. run Audacity (http://audacity.sourceforge.net/) and get to it.

It is VERY simple, once you get it up and running and try it out a bit. Do check out the noise reduction feature when recording either vinyl or tape - it's extremely useful!

Does that help at all?

If #2 is not feasible, I would run the headphone out, with the volume turned WAY down into either of the inputs. Monitor your signal in for distortion and turn the signal either down or up via the receiver's volume control.

Let us know how this works out!

Scott

[Мастер]

Thanks, Mactep :D

However, for commercially available recordings, I think the best solution may be to get digitized copies here. At least, I think that's what I'm likely to do.

Do you mean I should get all the records I have as CD re-releases? I have over 150 records, so we would be talking about serious expense

I believe you, but my experience is, unless you earn less per hour than subsistence farmers, it is cheaper than any digitizing process I've been able to figure out :)

The program BM65 mentions is the one I have used, Audacity. If you just record the whole record side as one continuous track, then it might not be too bad. If you need to slice it into individual tracks

[Blue Monster 65]

If you need to slice your record up (I always do!), just use the wave form editor to find the spaces inbetween the songs, then cut and save each song as an individual wav file. You'll still have the original, long wav saved (if you don't overwrite it), so you can go back and continue with your edits.

Really, Audacity is about the easiest audio-editing program out there. I use it for voice work all the time.

As Mactep has said, though, THIS IS A TIME-CONSUMING PROCESS! If you're expecting to just run it through and be done, you're better off spending the cash and getting the commercial CD release.

However, Arneb (and others), if you're anything like me, you'll have no luck in finding many of your favorite records released on CD. That's just the nature of the beast. Sigh ...

Scott

[Arneb]

Project status report 1:

Of course, I hadn't thought of the output via the tape recording channel. Thanks a lot, bm! Luckily, I found a cable in my big cable box that fits (cinch on the receiver end, small jack plug at the computer end). So I moved the receiver and plugged it into the computer (line in). I couldn't adjust the out signal gain, as bm65 recommended, because there is no such possibility. That control resides in the tape deck. So a very simple set-up.

I also plugged in my headphones to be used as positive control in case of hearing nothing/DC hum/crackling/whatever. I was totally flummoxed, then (hey sorry, I HAVE to use this word once in a while), when my computer speakers started to blather out the current radio program right away. I had braced myself for at least a few minutes of fiddling around with controls and/or Windows media player, instead it just worked. Good

What I did spend several minutes on was grounding. The computer seems to be very sensitive there. From the stereo, I am used to an innocuous soft hum when I don't ground probably, and a bit more from the record player, which has its own grounding cable. With the computer, it was quite pronounced. Whatever, I used speaker cables as grounding lines, so the noise did go away.

A totally funny, and to me, unexplained thing happened along the way: Our flat (what you call apartment) has cable TV and radio, so I figured it would be a good idea to connect the receiver to the cable socket and have a good-quality radio signal to listen to while fiddling with the software (instead of a record, which has to be turned/exchanged/restarted/dusted every 20 min). But when I plugged in the cable line, I got a very pronounced 50 Hz DC hum, which I couldn’t ground away no matter what I did. I never noticed this when the stereo was still sitting on its shelf a few meters away and connected to that same cable socket, and neither did I notice it with my TV or the other stereo, which are both connected to other cable outlets in the house. The hum also appears via the headphones. What is this? Could it have something to do with the fact that I disconnected the stereo's speakers?

So, on towards downloading, installing and using Audacity!
bm65, one more question: You say Audacity is is the easiest audie editing software. Is it also good? If you know a software which is substantially better re. noise reduction and scratch/crackle elimination, I'd be perfectly willing to spend a few bucks on it.

---

Mactep, bm - Re. your recommendation to take it easy with the digitisation:

I am fully aware that this will be slow, tedious and time consuming. I am also aware that probably some 30-50 % of my records at least will be available as CD re-releases, and if I base it on my salary per hour, just buying the CDs would probably be cheaper than sitting here digitising the entire collection.

But that is not the point.

First of all, I am not an audiophile. I was very happy with the quality records and cassette tapes provided back in the old days. I was content to transfer my records to cassette tape and listen to them in a whiny, noisy walkman (and not one from Sony). Since I bought my decent stereo combo (receiver, tape deck, record player, CD player, two tall speakers) for a total of around DM 3.000 in 1989 (around $ 2700 in today’s money), I have never looked for more sophisticated equipment. I am also quite ruthless with my digital recordings: I listen to them in the car, and via small active speakers in front of the computer, via a bad set of headphones. So mp3ing them for me is not a sin against the holy spirit of audio. It's a way to make them more accessible for me. The fact that any affordable CD will sound miles better than my digitised record is not all that important to me.

The second point is, I am very much the classical guy. The number of pop records to digitise will probably be around ten, and I already own the complete works of AC/DC on CD 8), so this quantity is negligible . It will save me some time, as I will have to edit not 12 songs with crazy names of 3:12 duration, but movements (Allegro, Andante, Scherzo, Allegro, period) 10 or 20 min long. And also, some high percentage of my old records will be available as re-releases, but not all of them will.

But there is an even more important point. With my classical records, I have a personal history. Most of them I bought or was given when I was between 12 and 18 years old, during the 80s. I built my music taste with them. I cried over them, I literally spent nights with them, and hours on the bus and U-Bahn with their cassette clones, under cheap blaring headphones. I love them, scratch, wobble, crackle and all. They are my friends, and the fact of the matter is that I am about to abandon those friendships - I haven't played these records in years. Yes, they're there sitting on the shelf, and so are the record player and the stereo. But they are in the living room, I am at my desk. I have very little time and a lot of bouncy energetic little son wanting to handle anything that I handle. I am sitting in front of a screen, reading, watching YouTube files, listening to mp3s and exchanging views with Illuminati around the world in the evening. Not in the living room with a book or the papers. So the records sit there, unused. Converting them to mp3s is my way of continuing a friendship.

[Мастер]

OK, it was just a suggestion, you don't need to defend your choice :)

I just want to make it clear, this is going to be work...

[Blue Monster 65]

Audacity is not only very easy to use, but also very powerful. It sounds as good as any other program I've used (and I've used a lot). I would not be able to use it if it didn't, as some clients are quite demanding (which always kills me when they then demand an MP3 of something).

Your hum is coming from a grounding loop. I would plug all the pieces into one power strip, then use adapters to lift the ground from all but one. That's always worked for me when I've had that problem. Enzo will be able to explain that in more detail, I'm sure.

I, also, have records that have been released on CD and have chosen to digitize my own instead. Why? Because after years of listening to them on vinyl, I have grown quite used to the way they sound, with all their pops 'n' hisses, etc. To me, some inherent noise is not bad at all! Also, I often find that when some albums are released on CD, the re-mastering and re-mixing that is done ruins the sound for me. Anyone else remember the first CDs? Their high end was brutal!

Plus, I like to dink around with that sort of thing, sooo ... :)

Arneb, please feel free to drop me a PM if you have other questions that pop up as you get started on this, OK?

Scott

[Arneb]

OK, it was just a suggestion, you don't need to defend your choice :)

I just want to make it clear, this is going to be work...

No worries, Mactep :D . I just wanted to wax poetic a little. And yes, I will probably save me some time in not digitising a work of music which I already have as a CD if it's not a very special one...

bm65, thanks so much for your help. I'll keep you posted, and if the others don't mind, I'll do it in the thread - maybe someone else will like to profit from the experiences I make...

Project status report 2:
Audacity found, downloaded, and installed as if it was nothing in a whiz. At first, it recorded only Mono, but I soon found the relevant control settings. Also installed the LAME mp3 export tool and a few bells & whistles. Looks great.

Actually, here are a few more question:
1. I can select "Stereo Mix" or "Line in" as sources. I haven't figured out what the diefference is (except, of course, they are steered by different knotrol knobs in the Windows Audio settings).

2. Modulation. Of course, one doesn't want to have the loudest parts cut off or everything overmodulated so that it's just an undifferentiated roar (Fun to play with the controls; the signal from the receiver seems to be quite strong, actually. You have to set the line-in and stereo mix volumes quite low in order not to have a normal record overmodulated when the Audacity recording volume is set as low as 0.2-0.3).

The question is: Where should the loudest places in music piece be? Should they 0 reach dB in the recording volume bar or should even those loudest parts (the climax in a Mahler symphony movement, for example) max out at, say, -3 dB or so? And which of the three relevant controls should be "loudest" (Line in volume, Stereo Mix record volume in Windows, or the recording volume in the software itself)?

[Blue Monster 65]

I'd play the loudest part of whatever piece you're recording and set your controls so that it's just below clipping (introducing distortion). Mind you, when you set this up, I'd put your signal as loud as you can, without going into clipping there, too. By the way, that's both funny and odd that you can set a level on your line out - very unusual for a hifi piece. Anyway, if you have your level out set too low, you'll leave hiss in the recording. Set that high enough to NOT have any hiss and yet not too loud to overload the input (resulting in the aforementioned clipping).

You can experiment with all this over and over again, 'til you find the levels you like, you know? At the end of the day, it has to sound good to you and you alone. You may find you like a little distortion in the upper end or you may want a little more noise - it's all down to your ears here.

Does that help?

Scott

[Enzo]

On an older "analog" system you could run into the red a little and everyone was happy. In digital recording you do not want to ever go into the red.

As TA mentioned above, they now have "USB Turntables" for about $100 over here. Turntable plugs right into the USB port and provides a digital signal for recording on the computer.

[Blue Monster 65]

On an older "analog" system you could run into the red a little and everyone was happy. In digital recording you do not want to ever go into the red.

True - however, on Audacity, sometimes it looks like you're distorting (the signal is high) when it, in fact, sounds fine.

Digital distortion: UGH!

I've looked at the USB turntables in passing, but never up close. I should check one out, but I don't want to spend the money, you know? How's that thing of your Mother's work, TA?

Scott

[Arneb]

Thanks a lot again, folks. This is extremely interesting and fun.

Project status report 3:
The hardware config is stable and sounding great (except I dont' have cable radio, but that is not the point anyway, and our terrestrial FM sounds good, too. I almost went exstatic when I listened to my old records under my headphones - not via the headphone socket on the receiver but via a headphone socket on the active spaekaers that are being fed by the computer. 8)

So I recorded three albums by Jean-Michel Jarre (yes, I liked that as 12-yo!). I managed to hit the target area between -3 and 0 dB for the loudest parts quite well, I think. But just to be sure I used one of Audacity's filters - Normalise - to get the peaks to -3. Not sure that is a good idea, because if I can manage it by hand, why let the software churn on it for 20 min?

One problem is with quality and resolution. I thought, I am only going to do this once, so there should be no reason not to do it at the highest possible quality, 32 bit float and 96000 Hz, SNORT. Result was that after click removal and noise reduction, the file had swollen to 10 GB for a 79 min double album.

I think I can safely go back to 16 bit 41000 Hz without giving up anything? I mean, CD have been doing this for 27 years and they're not exactly bad, are they?

Questions:
1. Do I lose anything meaningful by "just" doing 16 bit/44100 Hz?
2. I noticed that the scratch removal and noise reduction operations noticeably reduced sound quality. There is an interesting passage in one of the Jarre albums. The music fades out with a sample of a marching band fading into the distance. Then the sides are flipped and the noise of an airliner cabin with a cabin announcement fades in softly. That passage was totally distorted and destroyed by the NR. What can I do here, or is this just the compromise you have to make?

[Мастер]

The sampling theorem.

So if you sample at 44,100, it should reproduce faithfully all frequencies up to 22,050 Hz, which is beyond the limit of most human ears. Well, not exactly. The assumption here is that the analog signal has first been filtered of all frequencies above 22,050 Hz before sampling. Since you can't build a perfect filter, it won't be quite that accurate. But if the filtering is reasonably good, I think you should have pretty good frequency response there.

Whether the 16 bit vs. 32 bit makes a noticeable difference, I don't know.

[Blue Monster 65]

I doubt you're going to hear the difference, myself, but I don't know what the experts say. I would imagine if you're going to hear any difference, you've got a helluva lot better system than most!

I just leave it at 16/41, as that's what commercially produced CDs use, soooo ...

I would re-sample your noise reduction or turn it off for that point in the music, Arneb. I have always had a thing for Jarre's "ZooLook" album myself - at the time, it was a masterpiece.

Scott

[Arneb]

Well, maybe we are unfair to the NR system here. I mean, what do you hear in an airliner cabin? Noise, of course... So no wonder it's distorted. Probably it is the best to switch it off for those precious seconds.

I'll stick with the CD standard. And write 100 times on the blackboard, I am NOT an audiophile, I am NOT....

Just listening in on the records and their sampling, I am totally flattened how good they come out anyway. These are 25 year old records on a 20 year old record player with a 20 year old middle class amplifier chanelled through a consumer PC with an off the shelf soundcard. I mean, where do I want to get here? It's gorgeous, pure and simple.

I am just listening to a scene where he has a schoolclass reciting some Chinese poem in the midst of street traffic. It comes across crystal clear. Maybe I'll just reduce the sensitivity of the NR a bit, and everything will be fine.

Now I'll see about click removal :D

Does it make more sense to do NR reduction first and then click removal, or is it better the other way round?

[Blue Monster 65]

Hmmm ... I've run the click removal after the noise reduction, but I wonder how it would sound the other way 'round? I don't know, Arneb - here's your chance to do it first! :)

Scott

[Lance]

My collection of Jarre includes:

1977 - Oxygene
1978 - Equinoxe
1981 - Magnetic Fields
1982 - Concerts In China
1984 - Zoolook
1986 - Rendez-Vous
1987 - Cities In Concert - Houston & Lyon
1988 - Revolutions
1989 - Jarre Live
1990 - Waiting For Cousteau
1991 - Images - The Best of Jean Michel Jarre
1993 - Chronologie
1994 - Hong Kong (Live)
1997 - Oxygene 7-13

Good stuff.

[Arneb]

I have Magnetics Fields and the Concerts in China. I used to have Equinoxe and Oxygène as cassette tapes transferred from the vinyl records of a friend, but I chucked those during some relocation. Figured I would never listen to them at all anymore... :(

Funny how listening to Magnetic fields brings back memories of the boy reading his Tolkien and listening endlessly to these tapes... Some tracks of it seem to taste like The Silmarillion. The things you find opening the vaults of the past. Maybe that's what 40 year olds do.

Edit - Just bought a triple CD with Equinoxew, Oxygène and Chronologies. For € 14,14 shipping incl. HA!

[Blue Monster 65]

Funny - I never got into Tolkien. All his stuff was either about walking through the woods around my house or daydreaming about space. We used to bring a boom box out on the boat and cruise around either Lake Michigan or Lake Superior, blasting stuff like that out, too.

Vangelis, anyone?

Scott

[troubleagain]

Duh duhduhDUHduh, duh duhduhduhDUUUUHHH....

Only Vangelis I know...

[Blue Monster 65]

Oh! Umm ... there's SO much more!

Scott

[Arneb]

Thanks again, Mactep and bm65. I had some foggy idea of the sampling theorem, so I knew that 44100 should be enough for any human ear. On some website relating to Audacity it was said that the higher sampling frequency could later be useful for NR etc. and would help smooth out hard changes in volume. That's why I asked, but the question is moot now.

Project status report 4:
I have now digitised all of 9 records (yes 9. And I am not currently working, so...). I started with hard rock, electropop, some orchestral film music and a record of a German comedian ripped off the original recordings made in the 20s and 30s. That taught me a lot.
- Noise reduction is hard to do. For all but the most scratched records, doing the weakest (least aggressive) amount of filtering is enough. OTOH, the more scratched the record, the less amenable it is to NR. If you crank up the aggressiveness of the filter, you start to get severe distortion, especially of the softer passages. If you just do some light adjustments, noise is somewhat reduced, but also a lot more annoying - it acquires this unbearable high, squeaky, distorted, "digital" quality that can ruin your recording. I left the more worn records as they were. Do you remember the "E.T" soundtrack? That lonely, soft, incredibly fragile solo flute at the beginning? I played this record well over a few 100 times, 25 years ago, and it is really worn. Any fiddling with the NR destroyed the sound of the flute. And the rest. Same with the comedian record, which has two sources of strong noise: The original recording and the reckless handling by a brute child. Ozzy Osbourne is a lot easier. Would you have thought?
I think it all works out to the GIGO principle. You cannot really improve a bad record. You can polish it, but as with the Sistine Chapel, polish off too much soot, and the colour will come off, too. And when it's worn down, the dynamic range a pittance, scratch and pop coalescing into into continuous noise, well, it won't make for a pristine, perfect, nuanced, rich, huge-dynamic-range sound mp3 (of all things!) file afterwards.
- Scratch and pop reduction works excellently in Audacity. I was very reluctant to use it at first, but I became bolder. Astonishing, what you can do.
- Partitioning and flagging the recording, writing tags and exporting it as mp3 or wav files is EXACTLY the kind of work Mactep predicted. Silence finder never works, it even placed a wrong flag in a brute-force, always-loud album like Ozzy Osbourne's "Ultimate Sin". After NR and cleanup, that is . I mean, come on, it's the fucking PRINCE OF DARKNESS. It's shrieking ON or sweating OFF. You CANNOT misplace a silence flag with one. Yes, we can... I know, I know, you can adjust the silence level. After you've done this ten times, doing it by hand is in fact faster.

I'll keep you posted. bm/Enzo/Mactep, do you think I made severe mistakes in the conclusions I derived here? Is there anything I overlooked?