A user-settable track marking threshold would be massively cool.
I find it interesting that you call the high end audio fringe the "far
right." (you mentioned this on another recent post). From where, or
by what line of reasoning, do you derive this characterization? ; )
I LOVE having my old albums on MD. I record at 0 db and do my
tracking manually, too. Once an LP is on MD, being able to flip from
track to track, or listening to a track once or twice more in a row,
or deleting a track that always used to make me cringe, or listening
in the car, or listening on a portable is just wonderful. Also, I can
BLAST it without worrying about feedback from the tone-arm to the
speakers.
Enjoy.
Regards to the list, Steve Higgs
On Thu, 14 Oct 1999 16:54:49 -0400, in you wrote:
>Eric Woudenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I'm finally digitizing some vinyl favorites of mine (i.e. recording
>> LPs to MD) and I'm puzzling over the recording levels. If I set them
>> high enough to peak just under 0dB, the LP surface noise (which seems
>> to be about 50dB down) keeps the LEVEL SYNC function from marking
>> tracks. I can fix this by just setting the recording level lower, but
>> that left me wondering if this might effect recording quality. My
>> sense is that it won't, since I'm not giving up any dynamic range,
>> just placing the LP's range near the bottom of the MD's, rather than
>> near it's top. (Playback volume is not at issue.) Comments?
>
>After listening to records again, and all the clicks, pops, and
>surface noise, I really can't understand what the far right
>audiophiles are talking about. How do they ignore all of vinyl's
>obvious flaws while simultaneously convincing themselves of its
>superiority!?
>A user settable track marking threshold is the right solution to this
>problem.
>
>Rick
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
