Home  

Members  

Join  

Search  

Listings  

 
<<<<   5041   >>>>

Topic: Re: Help me out of a Jam anyone? Just a minute 259 Getting Wound up with the 4 boys NOT Andree Melly earlier version

Message 1 / 5
Espen KrømkeFeb 26, 2011
 

 
Den 26. feb. 2011 01:04, skrev nylon net:

Hi Espen. What sort of sound card would you consider adequate for capturing 
audio for archival recordings?

Cheers
Mark

You are looking for a card to record an analogue source (like a fm radio), right? So, one analogue stereo input.
No other needs, like more in/out channels or digital in/out?

Well, first off:
All those typical consumer products you get thrown after you everywhere, like Creative, TerraTec, SDM & co: They have released one million cards, but they are described with one single word: No.
All integrated audio in motherboards (typically lap-tops but also most stationary PCs): No.
Of course I am too categoric now. Of course there could be (and probably is) a very few exceptions found somewhere in this ocean of junk. But why waste time finding those?

Instead, trust those who specialize in audio hardware for the professional market.
The brand I have come to love over the years is M-audio. (http://www.m-audio.com)

My first M-audio was a Delta 1010LT and I've stuck to their Delta range ever since. *zero* noise and a sound so crisp they could splice eardrums.

However I do think a Delta is a tad overkill only for recording from a fm radio. I'm pretty confident that their cheapest alternative is more than good enough for your purpose: The M-Audio Audiophile 2496 , priced at $99.95.
Please note that I've not tried that particular card myself and it is obviously aimed at a different user segment than the Deltas, but I got faith in the brand. They would not put their name M-Audio on anything sub-par.

... Uhm... Wait a second. Did I say $99.95? Is there a number missing somewhere? Actually that was so dirt cheap that it should be googled.

And from my quick research I give you these quotes:

"For the price, I know of no comparable DAW system that combines such high sound quality with recording and editing software of such sophisticated elegance. "
- Pro Audio Review

“How does it sound? In a word, stunning. This has to be one of the best sounding cards we’ve had in for review…”
- Computer Music

"I cleaned my ears with alcohol-wet cotton wool and spent several hours to listen to the cards changing compositions and reswitching them immediately in my hardware audio mixer Behringer. The sound of both cards was impeccable!"
- ixbtLabs.com

"this is hands down the best soundcard with RCA jacks for the price. I feel like I just upgraded a stereo component. It makes my Nak sound like it's new again."
- User Review @ cnet.com

I was quite surprised and pleased with its sound quality. The system uses the same converters as the Delta 66 I have reviewed previously and sounds nearly as good. The card is quiet, sounds uniformly good throughout the audio range from very highs to very lows
- PCrecording.com


... Youp, it's a true M-audio. That's your card, bro'!

(I'll get one myself, even!)

 
<<<<   5046   >>>>

Topic: Re: Help me out of a Jam anyone? Just a minute 259 Getting Wound up with the 4 boys NOT Andree Melly earlier version

Message 2 / 5
Espen KrømkeFeb 27, 2011
 

 
I've done quite a lot of attempts of audio restoration but I'm not
particularly good at it. It's not easy.

When you work on audio files I believe it helps to keep a basic fact of
the trade in the back of your head: Tweaking audio is *always* a
question of *subtracting* from the source. You can never add anything
that's not already there. That is technically impossible.

To illustrate with a very basic example; If you got a recording that has
no bass, there will never be any bass on that recording. The bass is
gone. However you may create the illusion of a more balanced sound by
removing also some high frequencies. But it's a downward spiral. Always
subtracting.

Same goes with snap&crackle: You may zoom in on that particular moment
when the snap is and *remove* the frequency range of the crackle. That
will make the snap go away - but you will never get back the sound that
*would* have been there had there not been a snap there in the first
place. If you catch my drift?

My tool of choise used to be Sony SoundForge, nowadays it's Audacity. I
have never tried Adobe audition so I can not give any advice on that
particular program, however as long as it is a suitable tool for the job
(and I assume it is) it doesn't matter that much what tool you use - the
important thing is to know how to use it.
And learning the tools require an understanding of what sound is made
of, from a technical point of view.

But it's fun while you learn! And if you got the patience and time for
it, just go ahead and try&fail your way to get to know both the tool and
the theory.

Just remember to never, never ever overwrite a source. Always work on a
copy. :)

> And I don't suppose you or anyone else out there are skilled at restoring
> vintage audio recordings too? That's my next ambition - to learn to improve
> muddy, hissy and crackly old radio classics like JAM, ISIHAC, the Glums etc.
>
> I've dabbled with Adobe Audition, but the results have been mediocre at best.

 
<<<<   5048   >>>>

Topic: Re: Help me out of a Jam anyone? Just a minute 259 Getting Wound up with the 4 boys NOT Andree Melly earlier version

Message 3 / 5
Don JudgeFeb 28, 2011
 

 

 
<<<<   5049   >>>>

Topic: Re: Help me out of a Jam anyone? Just a minute 259 Getting Wound up with the 4 boys NOT Andree Melly earlier version

Message 4 / 5
drling0Feb 28, 2011
 

 
Do you mind me asking what tools / filters and settings you have used successfully with Audacity?

Love as always, David

--- In just-a-minute@..., Espen Krømke <espen.kromke@...> wrote:
>
> I've done quite a lot of attempts of audio restoration but I'm not
> particularly good at it. It's not easy.
>
> When you work on audio files I believe it helps to keep a basic fact of
> the trade in the back of your head: Tweaking audio is *always* a
> question of *subtracting* from the source. You can never add anything
> that's not already there. That is technically impossible.
>
> To illustrate with a very basic example; If you got a recording that has
> no bass, there will never be any bass on that recording. The bass is
> gone. However you may create the illusion of a more balanced sound by
> removing also some high frequencies. But it's a downward spiral. Always
> subtracting.
>
> Same goes with snap&crackle: You may zoom in on that particular moment
> when the snap is and *remove* the frequency range of the crackle. That
> will make the snap go away - but you will never get back the sound that
> *would* have been there had there not been a snap there in the first
> place. If you catch my drift?
>
> My tool of choise used to be Sony SoundForge, nowadays it's Audacity. I
> have never tried Adobe audition so I can not give any advice on that
> particular program, however as long as it is a suitable tool for the job
> (and I assume it is) it doesn't matter that much what tool you use - the
> important thing is to know how to use it.
> And learning the tools require an understanding of what sound is made
> of, from a technical point of view.
>
> But it's fun while you learn! And if you got the patience and time for
> it, just go ahead and try&fail your way to get to know both the tool and
> the theory.
>
> Just remember to never, never ever overwrite a source. Always work on a
> copy. :)
>
>
> > And I don't suppose you or anyone else out there are skilled at restoring
> > vintage audio recordings too? That's my next ambition - to learn to improve
> > muddy, hissy and crackly old radio classics like JAM, ISIHAC, the Glums etc.
> >
> > I've dabbled with Adobe Audition, but the results have been mediocre at best.
>

 
<<<<   5058   >>>>

Topic: Re: Help me out of a Jam anyone? Just a minute 259 Getting Wound up with the 4 boys NOT Andree Melly earlier version

Message 5 / 5
Espen KrømkeFeb 28, 2011
 

 
I am getting worried that I somehow has given the impression that I am a
"pro" when it comes to this, cause I'm not!

I'm pretty sure I just use what everyone else would think of as the
"obvious" filters related to restoration, and quite often I settle for
one of the presets, even.

There's one problem with naming them though: Since the default language
on my workstation is Norwegian, all the menus and names in Audacity are
in norwegian too. :D But I'll try to translate to what I suppose they
are called in english:

The three tools I'd say I *always* use are the compressor, normalizer
and equalizer. In my opinion you can get incredibly far by only using
the equalizer. Well, at least at my level of competence... :D

But then, all depending on the audio in question of course, I usually
fiddle around with the:
Click removal
Repair
Noise removal
Smoothen
Clip fix

Smoothen has taken some of the "edge" off the worst recordings, those
with a very aggressive, cutting sound. A nice tool. Noise removal too
has produced some pretty impressive work at times.

One thing I'd *really* love to figure out though, is how to do something
about the horrible noise that appears with audience applause if the
recording has been treated with heavy compression. Those "flick
flack"-sounding things... That's a noise that get on my nerves.




Den 28. feb. 2011 12:39, skrev drling0:

> Do you mind me asking what tools / filters and settings you have used successfully with Audacity?
>