• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

High-Resolution Vinyl Disc Playback, How do you EQ older discs

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
Uh, no, you don't, unless the stylus was recently replaced. There's no cartridge ever made where that could be true except perhaps a Decca and that's on account of it having no cantilever. Of course this degradation occurs so slowly that you don't notice if over time. Its only when you get a new cartridge set up properly you realize how degraded the old one got. I've been able to revitalize older cantilevers (if they got stiff rather than collapsing) by using a tiny amount of brake fluid, but that stuff can take paint off so you have to be really careful and patient with it (the cartridge has to lay on its back for a few weeks) to make sure it can't migrate down the cantilever and contaminate the stylus!

IMO this is one of the weaknesses of vinyl; people don't seem to realize that the suspension is ephemeral. I've seen this problem a lot, having put myself through an engineering program by being a service technician- I've worked on literally hundreds of turntables and owned dozens of cartridges.
Oil of Wintergreen is a standard treatment for rejuvenating rubber... (Methyl salicylate)

However - the materials used for the cartridges suspension varied wildly - and so do their response to age

For really good styli, it can absolutely be worth while taking them to a retipper, simply to get the suspension replaced.

I admit, I have not tried to measure the actual compliance of the suspension, to compare to original spec.... something for a future rainy day.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
What about a traditional/vintage analogue graphic equalizer? Say a stereo 10 band per channel.

They are perfectly fine for tweaking vinyl playback, especially already technically compromised recordings. The residual noise will be way below the record noise and you'll have quick, easy adjustments you can can make on the fly for each record you play. Much easier than parametric EQ on a 'puter.

I'd grab one of the old Realistic 31-2000 units that must have been sold by the millions back in the day. They have large travel sliders and 'zero gain' controls with indicators to keep the overall level similar.

1669934355767.png
 

atmasphere

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
May 26, 2021
Messages
501
Likes
779
What about a traditional/vintage analogue graphic equalizer? Say a stereo 10 band per channel.

They are perfectly fine for tweaking vinyl playback, especially already technically compromised recordings. The residual noise will be way below the record noise and you'll have quick, easy adjustments you can can make on the fly for each record you play. Much easier than parametric EQ on a 'puter.

I'd grab one of the old Realistic 31-2000 units that must have been sold by the millions back in the day. They have large travel sliders and 'zero gain' controls with indicators to keep the overall level similar.
Based on what I've been reading here this isn't an equalization problem.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Based on what I've been reading here this isn't an equalization problem.

It's exactly what the OP asked "how do you EQ older discs". Each record will be different and need different adjustments- that's where a physical EQ is faster and more intuitive.

Graphic EQs are brilliant for dull/emphasised treble, squawky midrange, dull bass etc. You can take a great performance with ordinary recording and fix it to the point it is listenable.

Just because they are out of fashion with certain audiophiles, doesn't mean they aren't perfect for the job.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
In a perfect world, we would have data with regards to the EQ used by the particular recording studio/pressing-mastering house - and could then adjust our EQ to match.

With digital components like the Puffin Phono stage - this is relatively easy to do. Oryou can use your PC as your phono EQ, with a flat/no EQ phono preamp, and any one of hundreds of PC eq options...

But in an imperfect world, you are highly likely to have recordings with completely unknown EQ - especially if they are from before the 60's - when some degree of standardisation became the norm.

In that case, all you can do is EQ by ear... and for that purpose, a traditional Graphic equaliser is as good a tool as any - and often a heck of a lot easier to use, than many software packages / alternatives.

with most record EQ being bass boos treble depress - the old Quad Tilt control as found on Quad 34 or 44 preamps might work very effectively too... and is even easier to use (single knob!)
 

atmasphere

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
May 26, 2021
Messages
501
Likes
779
In a perfect world, we would have data with regards to the EQ used by the particular recording studio/pressing-mastering house - and could then adjust our EQ to match.

With digital components like the Puffin Phono stage - this is relatively easy to do. Oryou can use your PC as your phono EQ, with a flat/no EQ phono preamp, and any one of hundreds of PC eq options...

But in an imperfect world, you are highly likely to have recordings with completely unknown EQ - especially if they are from before the 60's - when some degree of standardisation became the norm.

In that case, all you can do is EQ by ear... and for that purpose, a traditional Graphic equaliser is as good a tool as any - and often a heck of a lot easier to use, than many software packages / alternatives.

with most record EQ being bass boos treble depress - the old Quad Tilt control as found on Quad 34 or 44 preamps might work very effectively too... and is even easier to use (single knob!)
What you are talking about here isn't the LP mastering itself rather the EQ the engineer used when sitting at the mix board.

LP mastering lathes have electronics that are matched to the cutter head. That and the RIAA pre-emphasis are not messed with by the label or anyone else unless the system needs service! So you can count on all stereo LPs being mastered to the RIAA characteristic curve.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
What you are talking about here isn't the LP mastering itself rather the EQ the engineer used when sitting at the mix board.

LP mastering lathes have electronics that are matched to the cutter head. That and the RIAA pre-emphasis are not messed with by the label or anyone else unless the system needs service! So you can count on all stereo LPs being mastered to the RIAA characteristic curve.
RIAA only started to be generally used circa 1960's - before that there were different competing EQ's used all the way from Shellac 78's onwards.

And there were a multitude of competing standards. RIAA was first intruduced in 1954 - and took a while to "take hold"

There was/is:
RIAA
RCA Victor Orthophonic
IEC
Teldec
EMI
HMV
Columbia
Decca FFRR
NAB
BBC Transcription
(and many more)

all of which have differing pre and post emphasis (ie: EQ)

There are phono stages (or - re-equalizers) that cater to some of these:

There are lots of vintage recordings that were made with a heap of differing standards.
 

atmasphere

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
May 26, 2021
Messages
501
Likes
779
RIAA only started to be generally used circa 1960's - before that there were different competing EQ's used all the way from Shellac 78's onwards.

And there were a multitude of competing standards. RIAA was first intruduced in 1954 - and took a while to "take hold"

There was/is:
RIAA
RCA Victor Orthophonic
IEC
Teldec
EMI
HMV
Columbia
Decca FFRR
NAB
BBC Transcription
(and many more)

all of which have differing pre and post emphasis (ie: EQ)

There are phono stages (or - re-equalizers) that cater to some of these:

There are lots of vintage recordings that were made with a heap of differing standards.
The RIAA characteristic is based on the RCA Orthophonic curve, and was adopted by the RIAA for all stereo recordings. So the RIAA curve goes back to 1958, when stereo LPs were first introduced. The Decca FFRR isn't an EQ curve- its a trademark, just like RCA's 'Living Stereo'. It means 'Full Frequency Range Recording'.

In fact in the list above you really mention only 5 EQ curves. Two are for tape (NAB and IEC), the other two I mentioned already, plus the Columbia curve, used only for 78s. The remainders on the list are names of companies and organizations. BTW 'HMV' was used by EMI and means 'His Master's Voice'.

Just to put the RIAA thing to bed, it is used for all stereo LP recordings. There are no variants. All mastering electronics are made with RIAA pre-emphasis only.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
The RIAA characteristic is based on the RCA Orthophonic curve, and was adopted by the RIAA for all stereo recordings. So the RIAA curve goes back to 1958, when stereo LPs were first introduced. The Decca FFRR isn't an EQ curve- its a trademark, just like RCA's 'Living Stereo'. It means 'Full Frequency Range Recording'.

In fact in the list above you really mention only 5 EQ curves. Two are for tape (NAB and IEC), the other two I mentioned already, plus the Columbia curve, used only for 78s. The remainders on the list are names of companies and organizations. BTW 'HMV' was used by EMI and means 'His Master's Voice'.

Just to put the RIAA thing to bed, it is used for all stereo LP recordings. There are no variants. All mastering electronics are made with RIAA pre-emphasis only.

"The Devil is in the detail that the record companies all chose different turnover frequencies. And all chose different pre-emphasis curves from 0dB at 10kHz, to +16dB at 10kHz; a staggering range. Tone controls on preamplifiers dates from this period; they were necessary not to offer tonal choice, but to make the majority of records listenable at all."
 

atmasphere

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
May 26, 2021
Messages
501
Likes
779
"The Devil is in the detail that the record companies all chose different turnover frequencies. And all chose different pre-emphasis curves from 0dB at 10kHz, to +16dB at 10kHz; a staggering range. Tone controls on preamplifiers dates from this period; they were necessary not to offer tonal choice, but to make the majority of records listenable at all."
:facepalm: This statement is false. Tone controls were not on preamps to correct LPs! There is a reason so many preamps made in the US today don't even bother, and yet those early stereo LPs sound just fine on them. There is good information in the article you linked and misinformation as well.

All stereo LP mastering systems employed RIAA pre-emphasis. I ran an LP mastering operation for about 12 years FWIW; I'm not making this up or blowing smoke. My lathe was a scully equipped with a Westerex 3D cutterhead- which is the cutterhead that ushered in the stereo LP era. Westerex did not offer variable pre-emphasis if you get my drift.

Record labels didn't/don't mess with the RIAA curve. They do add EQ, but not to mess with the curve so much as to satisfy a particular recording engineer or producer, both of whom are quite different from the mastering engineer that actually cuts the LP. There is a documented case where Everest, who had developed a tape machine that used a 35mm tape format, had an error in the EQ curve of the tape machine causing a rolloff of 6dB/octave starting at 100Hz going down, which is why Everests are always bass shy. They sold the machine to Mercury who discovered the problem and fixed it.
 

Philbo King

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
669
Likes
872
I have a ton of beloved music on 1950s thru 1980s vinyl. Most are original issues, not remastered. The collection includes what were then 'audiophile quality' classical, symphonic, opera, jazz, chamber, and vocal commercial vinyl records by well-known labels like Decca, RCA Victor, DG, Columbia, Capitol, etc.

Here's the trouble: I have heard many of you have the same situation as I; most of these sound pretty bad (in several different ways) when played on up-to-date playback equipment. I know the hardware is good because new vinyl sounds quite good -- about as good as I expect vinyl to ever get. [There's a list of the gear I presently use below for reference.]

The question to you is, if this is your situation, what do you do, commonly, to improve sometimes nasty recording character often found in old recordings? [If it isn't your situation, kindly sit quietly and listen or check a different topic. I don't need amateur therapy.]

In this, I include boosted high treble, distorted tape characteristics, and often unflat response of vintage microphones. (You know, the mics that bring huge prices today for reasons of 'nostalgia.') Do you use multi-filter digital EQ? Amplifier tone controls? I don't expect to get rid of the ticks and pops that a thorough cleaning can't remove -- they are simply a fact of life and past abuse. Mostly, I'm interested in getting rid of raspy strings without killing oboe solos, blatant brass horns, overly sharpened vocals and like that. (I have one Maria Callas solo record that takes her voice and shrills it terribly.)

I know there's no 'cookbook' solution; I wish there were. Tone controls take much of the bandwidth with them. I currently don't have digital EQ, but this could be a reason to hit the piggy bank. Maybe if I just cut everything above 9 kHz? If I had a solution, I wouldn't ask you all.

I promise to read all offerings. I'm happy to hear educated guesses. Kindly spare us troll offerings and vinyl sermons.

.......
Current playback gear for vinyl:
AT-120 TT, Denon high output m/c cartridge w/ elliptical diamond, Emotiva preamp with m/m and m/c inputs, Schiit Loki analog EQ, Emotiva 150/150-watt A/B amp., Elac DBR62 pair, two powered subwoofers.
I never EQ music on playback. I went to great lengths to get a flat playback setup and don't feel any need for continual tweaking.

However, there are quite a few music releases that verge on unlistenable. These range from "90s volume wars mastering" to old vinyl that has clicks hiss and scratches. I digitize these and do some simple remastering if the music itself makes it worth the effort.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
:facepalm: This statement is false. Tone controls were not on preamps to correct LPs! There is a reason so many preamps made in the US today don't even bother, and yet those early stereo LPs sound just fine on them. There is good information in the article you linked and misinformation as well.

All stereo LP mastering systems employed RIAA pre-emphasis. I ran an LP mastering operation for about 12 years FWIW; I'm not making this up or blowing smoke. My lathe was a scully equipped with a Westerex 3D cutterhead- which is the cutterhead that ushered in the stereo LP era. Westerex did not offer variable pre-emphasis if you get my drift.

Record labels didn't/don't mess with the RIAA curve. They do add EQ, but not to mess with the curve so much as to satisfy a particular recording engineer or producer, both of whom are quite different from the mastering engineer that actually cuts the LP. There is a documented case where Everest, who had developed a tape machine that used a 35mm tape format, had an error in the EQ curve of the tape machine causing a rolloff of 6dB/octave starting at 100Hz going down, which is why Everests are always bass shy. They sold the machine to Mercury who discovered the problem and fixed it.
Please read the article I posted the link to... the move to universal RIAA was driven primarily by the lathe manufacturers, who built the circuitry into their product.

RIAA became universal with stereo Lathes, which became pretty much universal by the mid 1960's, prior to that, in the world of mono lathes - there were a multitude of standards. - pretty much anything originally cut on mono lathes will be using one of the multitude of pre-RIAA EQ's. (some of which are very close to or the same as RIAA)

YES what you say is true, but only if you limit your perspective to the stereo / LP era.

For anyone with an interest in records issued before the 1960's - multiple EQ's are a necessity

I have some rarities recorded in the 30's and 40's - RIAA is completely irrelevant to these
 

atmasphere

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
May 26, 2021
Messages
501
Likes
779
For anyone with an interest in records issued before the 1960's - multiple EQ's are a necessity
Let's be clear here! Mono LPs produced after 1958 were all on the RIAA curve as well. Most mono LPs produced prior to 1958 were on the RCA Orthophonic curve as well. I of course I looked at the article you linked; like I said it has some good stuff but also has misinformation. I don't care who wrote it; they don't know what they are talking about. As best I can make out they took stuff from various sources and didn't fact check the resulting article.

The main reason for having multiple EQ curves is if you are invested in 78s. For those you also need a different stylus as LPs are microgroove and 78s are not.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
I have a bunch of French, North African and East European records 78, 33 and 45... none of which are RIAA... they were cut on pre-RIAA mono lathes 1930's through to late 1940's - actual EQ curves are anyone's guess...
 

Ron206

New Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2023
Messages
2
Likes
1
New (old) guy here, listening to some Simon and Garfunkel and being disappointed about the audio quality.

Not a high end system Denon, B&W, Sony Turntable. Just none of the sparkle, depth or clarity of a good CD. So I've ordered a new cartridge and some CD versions of the vinyl but ..... (I have no interest in starting that old vinyl - CD war) what can I do to get the best out of the vinyl that I have. This post has beat RIAA to death but what about compression, dynamic eq to prevent blowing out a groove due to high level bass, wear and tear on the vinyl of the record, rumble control and a dozen other audio - mechanical - audio conversion issues I failed to mention? Currently listening to Blows Against The Empire and if I were to guess at what a worn out groove would sound like, this would be it. Is there anyway to recover from any of this? Empansion, dynamic EQ based on music content and the the expected actions of the audio engineer at the controls in the 70's, a cartridge designed to ride in a different part of the groove??

Is the only real solution to get remastered CD's?

Thanx for your feedback.
Ron
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
New (old) guy here, listening to some Simon and Garfunkel and being disappointed about the audio quality.

Not a high end system Denon, B&W, Sony Turntable. Just none of the sparkle, depth or clarity of a good CD. So I've ordered a new cartridge and some CD versions of the vinyl but ..... (I have no interest in starting that old vinyl - CD war) what can I do to get the best out of the vinyl that I have. This post has beat RIAA to death but what about compression, dynamic eq to prevent blowing out a groove due to high level bass, wear and tear on the vinyl of the record, rumble control and a dozen other audio - mechanical - audio conversion issues I failed to mention? Currently listening to Blows Against The Empire and if I were to guess at what a worn out groove would sound like, this would be it. Is there anyway to recover from any of this? Empansion, dynamic EQ based on music content and the the expected actions of the audio engineer at the controls in the 70's, a cartridge designed to ride in a different part of the groove??

Is the only real solution to get remastered CD's?

Thanx for your feedback.
Ron

Well, first thing is, if it is a rubbish pressing, a badly mastered LP, there is no retrieving it... same as for a bad CD

So lets assume that this is NOT the problem.

If the problem is wear - then chances are it is limited to the path worn by "standard" conical/spherical and eliptical styli.

If you get a stylus with a Shibata or Micro-Line needle - then the long contact patch of that shape, will read the vinyl above and below the wear patch, giving you access to unworn "virgin" vinyl

Assumption is that the record has been well cleaned (basic LP hygiene...) - otherwise you would experience anything from pops and clicks from dust in the groove, to all sort of horrid effects if something sticky was on the LP - which will usually show up on the needle as a gathering of gunk!

Other issues - if running an MC cartridge - you need to get the right step-up or preamp, with the right loading to get thing right - not too hard.

With MM or MI cartridges (which were more common back in the day) - they are quite sensitive to loading and varying the resistive or capacitive loading can have quite a dramatic impact on the highs - it can roll them off or boost them... if you want your MM cartridge to sound like an MC, find a way to run it with extremely low capacitance (100pf or less). - some phono pre's have adjustable loading, and most original cables from the period, were at around 100pf... - typical onboard capacitance on most phono stages tends to be around 200pf (total therefore circa 300pf) - that will suit some cartridges well, but others less so.

Getting top notch sound from a record is harder work than achieving the same from a CD...
 

Jack Harrison

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2023
Messages
73
Likes
102
To answer the OPs question: The question to you is, if this is your situation, what do you do, commonly, to improve sometimes nasty recording character often found in old recordings? The stated purpose of the tone controls on my Quad 44 preamp is to improve the sound of records. And the tilt control and the top end filters actually do that quite well. i also find some older records sound better when I play them with a Shure M44G with a conical stylus instead of the Shure V15 iii with an SAS boron microline. But with some it’s the other way round. So it’s good to have the option. Also I can change the input capacitance to suit for instance Shure or AT carts. I can also choose to route the output from my phono preamp through a Wiim Mini which allows further equalisation without destroying the sound quality much if at all even though it doesn’t have a particularly well performing ADC. I listen to CDs, and I can also stream them from ripped lossless copies on our home server as well as streaming Amazon HD, so I don’t give a flick for the format wars. But to be honest I have some CDs which are unpleasant to listen to because of the mastering and production, the remastered sticker on a few of my CDs might as well read broken. And the LP plays better. I have a very few LPs which were problematic but cherished which I ripped to lossless and then tweaked in Audacity and used the ClickRemove tool. That all makes playing LPs seem a chore maybe but mostly I just stick them on the turntable with whatever cartridge is on it and play them and they sound great. And because I have to bend down to load the CD player its more of a pain playing a CD.
 
Last edited:

Robert C

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2017
Messages
90
Likes
91
Location
London, UK
The British Standards Institute published Gramophone records, transcription disk recordings and disk reproducing equipment in 1955, which standardised the manufacture of 'fine groove records' in the UK. It contains the RIAA curve and a 'standard' 78 curve. Companies started to change over, but of course there would have been some delay. Prior to that, record and playback equalisation of microgroove recordings was not standardised and a number of curves exist. Decca did have its own early LP curve, and there were also NAB and CCIR curves.

More info is here: https://wiki.audacityteam.org/wiki/78rpm_playback_curves#Early_33.E2.85.93_LP_labels_and_their_EQ
Here: https://www.vadlyd.dk/English/RIAA_and_78_RPM_preamp.html
and here: https://www.bl.uk/help/manual-of-analogue-audio-restoration-techniques

I like the Denon DL-103 cartridge for pre-standardised microgroove discs, general mono recordings up to ~1960, and speech recordings. It's a high quality spherical stylus and was the broadcast standard for many years.

I don't EQ the record beyond applying the correct playback curve.
 

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,625
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
The British Standards Institute published Gramophone records, transcription disk recordings and disk reproducing equipment in 1955, which standardised the manufacture of 'fine groove records' in the UK. It contains the RIAA curve and a 'standard' 78 curve. Companies started to change over, but of course there would have been some delay. Prior to that, record and playback equalisation of microgroove recordings was not standardised and a number of curves exist. Decca did have its own early LP curve, and there were also NAB and CCIR curves.

The Parks Puffin gives a bunch of choices as to eq 'curve' choices. For those with records scattered across the decades, that might come in handy.

Screenshots_2022-05-19-12-39-32.png
 

Chaconne

Active Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2021
Messages
152
Likes
266
Uh, no, you don't, unless the stylus was recently replaced.
I'm glad you added this. I have a Stanton 681 EEE from 1979. It has a new stylus on it, and it sounds quite wonderful. So you're saying it's generally true that most or all decades' old cartridges are okay as long as they have relatively new styli?
 
Top Bottom