Re: [ARSCLIST] Can 78s sound better than LPs?

[Don Cox <doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 25/08/06, George Brock-Nannestad wrote:
> From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad
> 
> Marcos Sueiro Bal wrote:
> 
>> I have noticed that when recommending sound cards for podcasting 78s,
>> some on the list have not chosen top-of-the-line models with the
>> assumption that the sound quality of 78s is inherently inferior to
>> that, of, say, LPs. That seems generally to be the case, but I do
>> remember once hearing a pristine 78 RPM acetate of a live jazz
>> recording that blew me away --the sound was big and detailed, clean,
>> and also quite louder than the average LP.
>> 
>> My question is: is the 78 "system" inherently an inferior product? I
>> do not know enough about it, but it seems to me that it is moving
>> faster and the grooves are wider, so, potentially at least, it could
>> sound better than 33s (stereo notwithstanding). Or could it?
> 
> ----- I need to step in here and declare that the best quality sound
> card is definitely essential for 78s. The large linear speed of the
> surface below the cutterhead and the huge amplitudes available really
> do provide a very dynamic recording. But it will all be destroyed if
> there are limitations in the equipment used to extract the sound.
> 
> 1) Marcos' experience is typical of the result you get from 78 rpm
> recordings when they are represented as 1) acetates, 2) galvanotypic
> mothers (i.e. a positive metal derived from the original negative
> metal), and 3) vinyl pressings from 78rpm masters. All provided you
> have a linear pickup (Ortofon A or C - mono) and a preamp with a large
> headroom. This is the raw material you want for any further
> processing. I should say that the ELP LT will give the same from a
> vinyl pressing of a 78.

You also need a turntable that is well protected from any acoustic
feedback or bass resonance. I use two stages of rubber in the
suspension.
 
> 2) when this good signal is degraded by the grit in the surface of the
> shellac material, the requirement for good pulse response of the whole
> chain becomes even more necessary, because you need to represent noise
> well in order to be able to remove it with minimum generation of
> artefacts. Here the ELP LT may in many instances provide the simplest
> input, because there are no mechanical compromises to be made between
> compliance, linearity, trackability, etc. But it all comes to nothing,
> if the headroom and distortion of the pre-amp are not up to par.
> 
> 3) the result after podcast treatment will be worse if these
> conditions are not fulfilled.
> 
> 4) however, I must be true to my dictum "low quality sound is worse
> than no sound at all", so if you want to provide low-quality podcast,
> and nobody produces any better, you are still the best in the field.

Regards
-- 
Don Cox
doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx