Jonathan Gazeley wrote: > Grammostola Rosea wrote: >> frank pirrone wrote: >>> Grammostola Rosea wrote: >>>> frank pirrone wrote: >>>>> Olivier Guilyardi wrote: >>>>>> garry.ogle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>>>>> frank pirrone wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'd also look into Gramofile: >>>>>>>> for pop/click filtering and automatic breaking of a continuous >>>>>>>> recording into "tracks" or songs. It can be used for >>>>>>>> post-processing the recordings you make. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd recommend gnome-wave-cleaner for post-processing: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://gwc.sourceforge.net/ >>>>>>> >>>>>> +1 for Gnome Wave Cleaner. I successfully digitalized 50+ years old >>>>>> persian >>>>>> music LP's using this app. >>>>>> >>>>> Yeah, me too. It's a fine program, but my reason for referring the >>>>> OP to Gramofile was primarily its functionality for breaking a >>>>> continuous recording into individual tracks or songs based upon the >>>>> silence between as delimiter. >>>>> Anyone have another program recommendation for that operation? Gnome Wave Cleaner --> Markers / Mark songs Not sure if you can save all detected songs into multiple files at once though. Another thing about Gnome Wave Cleaner that I liked, is how efficiently it handled large files. >>>>> Of course it's easy enough to manually split a waveform where one >>>>> tune ends and another begins, but if one were digitizing an entire >>>>> record collection that would be beyond onerous. Also DAO can >>>>> certainly handle impressing that continuous recording onto optical >>>>> media, but that's not the same as having individual files - for any >>>>> of a number of purposes. Splitting can't be fully automatic anyway, you need to review it and maybe adjust markers manually. >>>> Thanks all. Interesting suggesting Frank... >>>> >>>> Btw. Does it matter for quality what soundcard is used? >>>> >>> Not in my experience. It's not a demanding audio task. Others may >>> report differently. IMO, the problem is at the preamp level. If I had some more LP's to digitized today I'll certainly give a try using the amplified mics input of my Presonus Firebox firewire device. From the voice/singing recordings I made, I can say that the Firebox preamps sound excellent to me. >> Can someone confirm or reject this thesis? > Going back a few years I digitised a set of LPs using a SoundBlaster 16 > card with a consumer Technics turntable, amplified by an ancient Inkel > MX-1810 mixer, hooked up to the line-in socket of the SB16 with a 3.5mm > jack. IIRC I used a SB16 too :) > Sounded surprisingly good given the bodged setup! I had no amplifier/mixer, I think I plugged the turntable directly into the mic input of the SB16. The sound was ok, but using a mixer or some sort of quality preamps as you did is certainly much better. However, there seem to be some other subtleties, especially about equalization: http://www.tappin.me.uk/Linux/audio.html > Obviously you will get better sound quality with a decent sound card, > but depending on your source, you can get away with a cheap sound card. > I don't recommend motherboard onboard sound chips though. They usually > pick up a lot of digital noise from the computer. > > At the time I made those recordings, I was a Windows user and would > probably have used Steinberg Wavelab. I don't know what I'd use these > days under Linux though. -- Olivier _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
