Re: arsclist Transfer of multiple copies, was: Full 3-D mapping of groove?

[Don Cox <doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/12/02, Mwcpc6@xxxxxxx wrote:

> This discussion started with mention of the problems of accurately
> replacing the lost data during the removal of pops and clicks. It
> seems to me that the major advantage of synchronizing and
> mathematically analyzing the data from multiple copies would be the
> total removal of such defects without affecting the original music.
> 
> It is unlikely that a pop or click would occur at the same point on
> three or more copies. By completely rejecting data that deviates by a
> significant amount from the average, the defect would be removed and
> the "good" data from the other copies used.
> 
> This same technique might also remove distortion products due to
> record wear to a greater extent than simple averaging.
> 
> Beyond this, averaging of the random noise of the pressings would give
> the 3 dB benefit per data doubling as above, but being able to reach
> through the impulse noise and distortion should be a great value.
> CEDAR or other processing would then be applied to the noise
> components from the original master, common to all copies available.

That is exactly how I understand it.

Wow is the only thing that makes it difficult.

Regards
-- 
Don Cox
doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.