[soundcrave]

Did anyone face the following problem.

Problem = md recording with lots of clcks and pops (turntable)
Playback on my system did not revealed that much of clicks n pops as compared to recorded sound.

This clicks n pops is evident eps when using Grado SR 80 headphones.

Details

Source:

Md recorder = Sony MZ - R50
Recording cable = Stock cable
Turntable = STD
Tone arm = SME 3s
Cartridge = Goldring Epic
Preamp = Hafler DH 110
Power amp = Hafler 120


Questions

1. Do I need a better recording cable?

2. Is Sony MZ- R50 a capable unit (recording/playback)? Any reviews or comments on this recorder
3. Any blanks(brand/type/model) that is good for recording (Sound).

Any input will bevaluable. Thank you.

 

[Mike Walker]

If you only hear the clicks and pops on recordings you make from lps, my guess is that they are on the original recording! Why are they more audible with your Grado headphones than through speakers? Because Grados have peaky response through the midrange and treble which makes the transient clicks and pops sound louder than they really are. It's the same thing that makes Grados sound more "detailed" or "in your face" when playing music...a basic coloration in their frequency response. My guess is, fm stations sound quite a bit more "hissy" through your Grados than through 'phones without this midrange/treble emphasis (such as the Sennheiser HD-580/HD-600, Koss Sporta Pro/KSC-35/KSC-50. And NO, I'm not saying these inexpensive Koss 'phones are better than the Grados...only that their midrange and treble response are less peaky, and thus don't emphasise noise as much! Ok now I WILL say it. They're better than Grados to MY ears)

Lps have noise. Either transfer the audio to your computer first, and use a program to eliminate clicks and pops (a potentially expensive, and extremely time consuming prospect), then make your mds from your "cleaned up" master, or simply live with the fact that LPS HAVE NOISE! There's a reason most of us switched to cd (md, dat and other digital formats)

 

[livingplasma]

I've actually read somewhere that the ATRAC encoding scheme can have problems properly encoding or playing back certain sounds, one of them being the French horn. The result is a clicking noise when such a sound is played back. I'm going to assume that you have checked recording levels, but maybe it's still distorting because the signal levels from the preamp are too high or "hot" for the recorder (for example, all the home cd players in my house will cause the Sony receiver to distort). For those situations, you may need to use an inline attenuator to lower the signal slightly.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

I've actually read somewhere that the ATRAC encoding scheme can have problems properly encoding or playing back certain sounds, one of them being the French horn.

This is actually not an across-the-board problem. It was exhibited by certain older versions of ATRAC from Sharp. From everything I've heard, the newer versions no longer have that problem.

 

[Mike Walker]

I "got into" md about 1996, about the time (Sony) ATRAC 3.5, and then 4 were the norm. The earliest md recorders (like MANY electronic products) were put on the market too early, and early adopters became the "beta testers" (and paid for the privilege!) There were OBVIOUS flaws with early version (1991-1995) recorders, and it wasn't too hard to "trip up" the early versions of ATRAC. Well, to paraphrase a famous cigarette ad campaign, md has "come a long way baby".

It is nearly impossible to find music which causes obvious artifacts with late generation ATRAC used in today's md recorders. In fact, when an audible (under double-blind conditions, using the SAME dac) difference between master and recording does become obvious, it's almost always as benign as a VERY slight softening of high frequency transients on the md copy (a trait which many prize analog tape for, in fact! Imagine that...md sounding more "analog"

Today's md is FAR better than "high end audiophiles" would ever admit! And I'd wager that, if record levels are set correctly, the clicks and pops you're hearing have NOTHING to do with ATRAC. Note: YOU'RE RECORDING FROM LP! "Clicks and pops" are not exactly unheard of! It's FAR more likely that they're being exaggerated by the Grado headphones!

 

[soundcrave]

Thanks for all the info.

Few questions though

1. Adjusting of recording level?
I thought just plug and record as it should be automatic as mentioned in the manual.(for analogue recording)

2. How can I adjust the recording level
and wat is the norm level?

3. Regarding recording level, it seems that my md recorder ican only be adjusted at standby mode and not during recording.
which might not be possible for a record playing.

4. By the way, my recording was done with the preamp volume set at 12' o clock'. Is it too high or low???

5. Why during recording when I listen to the source on speakers, my recorded music is so soft??

6. Do u guys clean your md lens regularly?? or prior to a recording??


Thanks

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

1. Adjusting of recording level? I thought just plug and record as it should be automatic as mentioned in the manual.(for analogue recording)

Nope; analog recording requires you to set the levels. "Automatic" is only for digital.

Quote:

2. How can I adjust the recording level and wat is the norm level?

The specific instructions are in the R50's manual, including what level you should aim for. I don't have my R50 manual in front of me, so I should direct you to yours.

3. Regarding recording level, it seems that my md recorder ican only be adjusted at standby mode and not during recording.
which might not be possible for a record playing.

All Sony's require you to pause/stop recording to set recording levels. The trick is to "pause recording" then play one of the records you want to record (making sure that you're playing part of the record with higher output levels) and set your recording level. Then start the record over, and start recording.


Quote:

4. By the way, my recording was done with the preamp volume set at 12' o clock'. Is it too high or low???

You should be recording from "line out" jacks on your pre-amp, not variable-output jacks. When you do this, the volume level doesn't matter.

Quote:

5. Why during recording when I listen to the source on speakers, my recorded music is so soft??

Not sure what you mean there.

Quote:

6. Do u guys clean your md lens regularly?? or prior to a recording??

Most people I talk to say to *never* use MD lens cleaners. Many newer MD recorders/players actually use plastic lenses, so there's a chance that using the lens cleaners (which actually come in contact with the lens) could scratch the lens, especially if used repeatedly. This is even true with glass lenses. A better approach is to a) keep dust out to begin with

; and b) use a compressed air duster (you can buy them at CompUSA) to blow dust off the lens.

The only exception would be if you're having skipping problems and nothing else seems to work -- I might use a lens cleaner as a last resort.

Hope this helps!

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

simply live with the fact that LPS HAVE NOISE! There's a reason most of us switched to cd (md, dat and other digital formats)

No, the reason most "of us" switched to digital formats was because they got sucked in by the hype and for 15 years thought they were listening to the ultimate only to be confronted with the gruesome fact that digital ruined the music, which they weren't listening to anyway, they were listening to the glorious silence and to the digital bits. What fun! Now we have even "more perfect" options, SACD and DVD-A!

If you enjoyed early digital and/or find LPs noisy, its because you had crap equipment to begin with and didn't take care of your records. In this case, anything would be an improvement, even horrible early digital. Go listen to any standard commercial CD issued between 1983 and 1992 and tell me how good they sound. I need a good laugh. Then listen to an LP on a good turntable setup and listen to what actual music sounds like.

Like anything, there are good sounding CDs (especially in the last 5 years) and bad sounding ones. But there are more bad sounding CDs than good sounding ones. If an LP sounds bad it is because it was not pressed properly or not recorded properly, assuming your equipment is up to the task.

 

[Mike Walker]

Sorry Beagle, but that's a load of snobby high-end crap. The first cds sounded bad because engineers were preparing them from masters used to make up for (known) losses in the lp medium...losses which just didn't happen with cd (high frequency rolloff in particular...unlike analog records or tapes, cds can record a 0dbfs tone all the way to 20khz. So if you boost highs excessively during the mastering stage, you will get some really SCREECHY sound coming out the other end. It is generally accepted among professional recordists that THIS is why early cds sounded bad. Learning this lesson is largely why today's cds, even to the ears of such "enlightened" purlications at "The Absolute Sound" are MUCH better).

And people who heard noise with lp playback had crappy equipment? Sorry, but people who DIDN'T hear noise with lp playback were f###in' deaf. Even the beloved "absolute sound" admits that GOOD lps, on the finest players are 20-30db more noisy than their cd counterparts. Duh! You're dragging a hunk of rock through a dust-infested (even in the best of conditions there's gunk in the air, which falls right back in after you "remove" it), squiggly groove. Not to mention inner-groove distortion, which EVERY lp has, because the linear velocity of an lp is DRASTICALLY lower toward the center of a disc than at the first. In other words, lps dynamic capability takes a nosedive at the end of a side...just where music traditionally climaxes!

Add to this the FACT that the BEST CASE distortion of lp is dozens, or even hundreds of times higher than cd!

Do you have a recorder (analog or digital...doesn't matter) that has vu meters with a REALLY broad dynamic range at your disposal, Beagle? Take your BEST lp, play it on your BEST turntable (with your BEST tonearm and cartridge), and with your recorder in record-pause mode LOOK at the noise between tracks, and during "silent" spaces in the music on the vu-meter. It will probably average around -60db (actually that would be extraordinarily quiet!) with ticks and pops to -20db or even much higher. That's (GENEROUSLY) a signal to noise ratio of -60db. Now take the WORST SOUNDING cd in your collection and run the same test. The noise level is too low to even see on the meter, huh? That's because even inexpensive cd players have a signal to noise ratio of -96db! That's THIRTY SIX DB LESS NOISE than the BEST lp sources!

So people who "hear noise" with lp aren't just using crappy equipment, Beagle. IT IS THERE, and can never be separated from the medium. In fact, since the noise IS there, and at a level that (conservatively) is 36db higher than cd (and at -60db that is one extraordinarily quiet lp! The vast majority sure aren't this quiet!), then I submit that if you DON'T hear it, your equipment isn't revealing what is actually "in the grooves". That's ok, though. "LP lovers" have proven (to my satisfaction) that actually retrieving ACCURATELY what's "in the grooves" is pretty far down their list of priorities!

Even the looniest of high end audio publications wouldn't claim that people hear noise from lp playback just because they have crappy equipment! I think it's pretty easy to prove that just the opposite is true! Yes lps DO have some nice sonic qualities. BUT FREEDOM FROM NOISE sure as hell ain't one of 'em!

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

..losses which just didn't happen with cd (high frequency rolloff in particular...unlike analog records or tapes, cds can record a 0dbfs tone all the way to 20khz

Analog LP's can reproduce up to 100khz. Tests have proven this.

Quote:

Add to this the FACT that the BEST CASE distortion of lp is dozens, or even hundreds of times higher than cd!

I agree that the signal to noise ratio of the Compact Disc is much, much higher than that of even the best pressed LP. But that is not what I was referring to. I was referring to the LP being bashed for it's clicks and pops which are usually caused by misuse. I have over 5000 LPs and most of them sound quiet because I have taken care of them. A lot of used LPs are noisier. Not much I can do about that.

What I can do is enjoy the actual music that is present on LPs and tune out any residual noise. What I cannot accept is the distortions present in the compact disc, which are "woven into the musical fabric" so you cannot possibly tune them out.

I like both CD and LP. I prefer the overall musical yield of the LP but good sounding CDs are right up there. I still find the LP more musically involving, that is I can listen to LPs for a much longer period of time than I can with CDs. A lot of people feel the same way, and it is not because they are hooked on distortion.

Quote:

Now take the WORST SOUNDING cd in your collection and run the same test. The noise level is too low to even see on the meter, huh? That's because even inexpensive cd players have a signal to noise ratio of -96db! That's THIRTY SIX DB LESS NOISE than the BEST lp sources!

So what? The CD still sounds crappy and unlistenable.


Quote:

That's ok, though. "LP lovers" have proven (to my satisfaction) that actually retrieving ACCURATELY what's "in the grooves" is pretty far down their list of priorities!

Talk about "a load of snobby high-end crap".

Yeah, that's why they spend mucho money on cartridges with a smaller stylus tip to retrieve more music and less noise.

Anyway, thanks, but I'd rather listen to and enjoy music than measure it.

 

[Mike Walker]

Yes LPs DO have ultrasonic capabilities beyond the cd. It doesn't need "proving" to me. The CD-4 discrete quadraphonic lps of the 70s used an fm carrier for each of the difference channels required to retrieve back left and right information...which involved encoding the equivalent of fm radio signals IN THE GROOVES, with frequencies up to 50khz. BUT, by "losses" I'm not referring to the ultimate high frequency limit. (reel to reel tape ALSO has a high frequency limit beyond cds). What I am referring to is the ability of cd to record high frequencies AT FULL VOLUME, right up to 0dbfs. NO analog system can do this! The 10-20khz octave on lp CANNOT be recorded at anywhere near the same level as the midrange! This is FACT! And the level at which high frequencies can be cut into a record groove decreases steadily as the stylus tracks toward the center of the disc.

If you think there's much beyond 15khz on your favorite lps on the last couple of cuts on a side, you're sadly mistaken. Part of what mastering engineers used to do with lps was gradually roll off the high frequencies, and limit dynamic range as the center of the disc was approached so that inner-groove distortion could be minimized. It can NEVER be eliminated, but it CAN be minimized. This is still STANDARD PRACTICE for the few mastering houses who still prepare lps for manufacture. In fact, I STRONGLY suspect that this deliberate dynamic range compression which is mandatory in lp production (in order for the discs to remain playable. YES, you can cut all the canon shots you want into discs like the old Telarc 1812, but what good is it if the vast majority of phono cartridges can't play it?). Audiophile snobs go on and on about the "improved ambient retrieval" of lps, where "ambient trails" don't get lost. DUH! You can hear "ambient trails" more clearly on lp because THE DYNAMIC RANGE has been compressed during mastering, which brings up low level information above the noise threshold of the phonograph record so that it will not "get lost". This is completely unnecessary with cd. "Ambient trails" are easier to hear on lp because they are LOUDER!

Yes, while you can record higher frequencies on an lp than a cd, you CANNOT record them at full level! And cutting heads DO roll off high frequencies, which must be compensated for with equalization. This is also part of what they do at the mastering lab when preparing lp masters. Early cds were made from these same, heavily equalized masters. Since they DID NOT roll-off high frequencies, they ended up sounding WAY too bright and "screechy". Note: saying that high frequencies are rolled off on lps is not the same as saying that the lp can't record higher frequencies than lp! Although response steadily declines with frequency on EVERY analog format, it is a gradual falloff which can be at least partially corrected with equalization. With digital, on the other hand, while it can accept signals at 0dbfs (the highest recorded level any digital format can record) right up to the high frequency cutoff imposed by the sample rate, it can record NOTHING above this cutoff. The high frequency cutoff is a BRICK WALL in digital recording beyond which you CANNOT pass (without using a higher sample rate). With lp and analog tape, the high frequency limit is as much a matter of opinion as anything. When is the "useful high frequency limit" reached? When response is rolled off by -3db (representing a reduction by half of acoustic energy)? By -6db? How about -10db, or -12db...since it is still possible with aggressive equalization to bring these levels back up to "where they belong".

Yes analog recorders and recordings DO have a gradual high frequency rollof. Digital recorders DO NOT! Stating that lps "can record to 100khz" doesn't explain this away! You can't record at 18khz with the same groove/stylus velocity that you can at 1khz, let alone 100khz!

Remember, the average adult hears little or nothing above 15khz. So I STRONGLY believe that response extension AT FULL LEVEL (0dbfs) to 20khz is far more important to what can actually be heard than extension to 50khz or beyond at -20db! (the highest level at which these EXTREME high frequencies are likely to be recorded). There's a reason why frequency response measurements on analog tape recorders are made at -20db. Without electronic trickery from such circuits as Dolby HX Pro, analog recorders can record little if anything above 10khz at 0db! Response curves made on analog recorders at 0db look very much like what you'd expect from am radio, NOT from a supposed high fidelity format. Fortunately, most music has a natural rolloff at high frequencies. Rare indeed is the musical performance which has energy above 10khz at anywhere near the level of frequency bands nearer 1khz. The vast majority of what we perceive as "high frequency content" is well below 10khz!

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

If you think there's much beyond 15khz on your favorite lps on the last couple of cuts on a side, you're sadly mistaken

This is true. And I know when I am beaten. Measurementwise, LPs suck and CD's are nearly perfect. Measurementwise, tubes suck and solid state is near perfection.

Which sounds better? For many people, it is LPs and tubes. That is the bottom line, for people who use their ears to decide what sounds right.

 

[Mike Walker]

Nobody was "beaten", Beagle. We simply disagree on which sounds better. I could say that I have an opportunity to compare recorded sound to a direct microphone feed every day, and that digital SOUNDS exactly like the direct mic feed. However I'll admit that, although a reel to reel analog recorder may not sound exactly like the microphone, there's something very attractive in the editorializing it does about what's fed to it. This is why for years as a production manager in radio, I would record music and sound effects into my "workstation" computer digitally, but for my voice, I'd always record it to analog tape first to pick up that "special warmth" that comes from the process. OF COURSE it's a form of distortion, but a very attractive one!

And while I also believe that the various resonances of stylus/cartridge/tonearm/plinth in turntable reproduction are responsible for most of the "analog warmth" of lp, I will also admit that for whatever reason lps have a certain "something" that I can understand people preferring, although I don't prefer it myself.

We each hear things through our own biases and preferences. For some the "warmth" "spaciousness" etc. of analog is more important than anything else. Not so for me! I have ALWAYS been bothered by things such as inner groove distortion, speed inaccuracy (I am blessec/cursed with perfect pitch!), wow, and flutter which can never be divorced completely from lp playback. These things bother me MUCH MORE than a lack of "warmth" and "spaciousness". I long ago lost the ability to "listen through" the faults of analog lp playback and "just enjoy the music". When I hear a high end lp system through state of the art electronics and speakers, I must confess that what is going through my mind is "yes, that sounds very nice, but there still is a slight amount of pitch instability, there still is surface noise, there still is inner groove distortion, and I still hear ticks and pops". In other words...it's still "merely" a phonograph record, which for all it's refinement, still is just a "rock being drug through a squiggly, dust-infested groove!" This technology is now 125 years old! Considering that, it's remarkable how good it can sound! It's a sad bit of irony that the finest turntables, tonearms, and cartridges in history were introduced after the majority of music listeners quit playing lps!

But there will ALWAYS, at least for our lifetime(s), be a need for extremely high quality lp playback equipment, because such a huge amount of recorded material exists, much of which (most of which, possibly) will never make it to cd, let alone dvd-a, sacd, or whatever comes next. I have never sold my lps! They're still on shelves in my living room, with the overflow in boxes in the closets. I still maintain a high quality turntable/tonearm/cartridge, although they are seldome used these days! I just can't bring myself to part with them. And they contain music which in large part I've never seen on cd! So people like me, and you too perhaps Beagle, who have been collecting music for decades truly must have both formats (lp, cd, and perhaps md, dat, open reel, and more) in service in our systems. I agree with you that the people who truly lose are those who concentrate on the technology so much they forget to LISTEN TO THE MUSIC!

A great performance of lovely music on am radio is INFINITELY more enjoyable to me than a pristine recording of mediocre music on the finest audiophile system!

 

[Beagle]

Very well summed up. If you have a direct mic feed to compare to, you would certainly be able to judge accuracy, one would assume.

Quote:

And while I also believe that the various resonances of stylus/cartridge/tonearm/plinth in turntable reproduction are responsible for most of the "analog warmth" of lp

I would say it is the lack of digital artifacts such as jitter. The HDCD Joni Mitchell remasters certainly sound warmer compared to the original CD releases. I just find, for the most part, that analog LPs sound more like a performance and less like a digitally reconstructed facsimilie. Again, if I had a live mic feed to compare to, I might not enjoy LPs that much anymore. Who knows.

I love my MD recorder but sometimes I find that in comparison to the musicality of an analog cassette
(noise notwithstanding) the MD sounds like the music was dismantled and put back together. But for longevity, absence of noise, and convienience, there is no comparison. The MD kills the cassette.

 

[soundcrave]

Just got a NEW copy of George Michael Faith album and recording with the MD recorder did not have that much clicks and pops.


Guess problem probably came from my records(ill treated).

Recording must be done from line out of preamp so I will have to plug the interconnect out that is connected to the power amp.

So any difference between recording from variable outout and line out?? Soundwise

How do u guys ensure clicks and pops free on records. By cleaning with

1. record vacumm cleaner
2. special formulation fluids
3. antistatic spray/ brush
4. etc.

Is it a worthwhile investment for a vacumm cleaner??
or is it clicks and pops free after vacummm cleaning.



Thanks