Can a phono pre make so much difference to surface noise?

[antcollinet]

For the last few years since I first resurrected an old turntable ive been using a Project Phono Box preamp (close to the cheapest I could get at a local dealer at the time). Since then I've replaced the turntable with a Rega P3, and am using the AT VM95ML cartridge.

I have a number of old records that suffer from surface noise and pops clicks to the extent they are annoying to listen to. I decided to upgrade the preamp to the Parks Audio waxwing - mainly because it has the "Magic" function, operating in the digital domain, intended to filter out minor clicks. It has a load of other functionality but that is mainly what I wanted. I'll also be able to connect to my amp via toslink when the new cable I've ordered arrives.

I have just installed it and am listening to some of those old records. I'm surprised to find that even with the Magic function disabled the surface noise is now nearly inaudible. I'm struggling to understand how the Waxwing is not picking that up. It is literally transformational.

I realise that lack of input headroom can be an issue in "enhancing" surface noise - but was my old Project so bad in this area to make such a difference? Is that possible?

 

[Speedskater]

Different:
phono cartridge>>total cable capacitance>>pre-amp input stage, configurations can have different very high frequency response.

That's just where pops & ticks live.

 

[WDeranged]

I was skeptical about it but headroom does make a very big difference to some (but not all) pops and clicks. Just the ones big enough to slam into the gain ceiling.

Your project fono box had almost zero headroom. The puffin is far better (but still not perfect) in this regard.

 

[Haflermichi]

I was skeptical about it but headroom does make a very big difference to some (but not all) pops and clicks. Just the ones big enough to slam into the gain ceiling.

Your project fono box had almost zero headroom. The puffin is far better (but still not perfect) in this regard.

I agree with this. I've been burning a bunch of my wife's vinyl to CD for her.
Signal path: Music Hall MMF-5, Goldring 1012 GX, Nakamichi CA-5, Sony CD-RW33, Meyer Sound HD-1s.
Some of her records are in horrendous condition with visible damage, baked in dust etc.
Every time I clean one and start burning I expect them to sound horrible but it seems the headroom in the Nak phono section is taking
things in stride and only overloads on really excessive pops or ticks.
We've played the same vinyl on her parents "lesser system"(AVR with phono input) and the same damage is unlistenable.
Part of the difference is the system, of course, but it's clear when the overloads happen on the cheap system.

 

[Chrispy]

I've never found something to alleviate the surface noise where I'd want to keep listening to it.....

 

[Robin L]

I realise that lack of input headroom can be an issue in "enhancing" surface noise - but was my old Project so bad in this area to make such a difference? Is that possible?

Probably. I've owned many different LP playback devices. I found that old tube phono stages had the least trouble with surface noise.

 

[Holmz]

For the last few years since I first resurrected an old turntable ive been using a Project Phono Box preamp (close to the cheapest I could get at a local dealer at the time). Since then I've replaced the turntable with a Rega P3, and am using the AT VM95ML cartridge.

I have a number of old records that suffer from surface noise and pops clicks to the extent they are annoying to listen to. I decided to upgrade the preamp to the Parks Audio waxwing - mainly because it has the "Magic" function, operating in the digital domain, intended to filter out minor clicks. It has a load of other functionality but that is mainly what I wanted. I'll also be able to connect to my amp via toslink when the new cable I've ordered arrives.

I have just installed it and am listening to some of those old records. I'm surprised to find that even with the Magic function disabled the surface noise is now nearly inaudible. I'm struggling to understand how the Waxwing is not picking that up. It is literally transformational.

I realise that lack of input headroom can be an issue in "enhancing" surface noise - but was my old Project so bad in this area to make such a difference? Is that possible?

I suspect that you are assuming that the poos and clicks are something on the surface.
If they are something in the electrical resonance of the cable and phone-pre, then a different phono-pre would perform differently.

^That^ does not explain why other LPs did not pop-n-click though.

 

[Platypus20]

I bought about 20 yrs ago, an Esoteric Audio Surface Noise Reducers, it you adjust it, it can greatly reduce the surface noise, but it will suck the life out of the music. It would be similar to hanging a towel over the speaker. Gave up using it very quickly

 

[mike70]

use clean records and without groove damage ... and in a decent system, forget about noise / clicks and pops. My vinyl listening have nothing to fear against digital, even in some cases it really sounds better.

Buy new copies with with at least VG+ graduation, clean it well ... and forget you're listening to vinyl.

 

[WDeranged]

I bought about 20 yrs ago, an Esoteric Audio Surface Noise Reducers, it you adjust it, it can greatly reduce the surface noise, but it will suck the life out of the music. It would be similar to hanging a towel over the speaker. Gave up using it very quickly

I got a SugarCube SC-1 Mini. Endgame click reduction. Shame the company seems to be hanging by a thread.

 

[DVDdoug]

Parks Audio waxwing - mainly because it has the "Magic" function, operating in the digital domain,

I remember somebody made a box like that back in the vinyl days. I don't think it was digital and I never heard it. I think I couldn't afford it because I never really investigated it. (And clicks and pops always drove me nuts!)

There is software for cleaning-up digitized vinyl. I have Wave Repair (manual) and Click Repair (automatic). Audacity also has a couple of tools for cleaning-up digitized vinyl..

Clicks & pops have an unusual transient characteristic. They are very-short in duration. Most musical transients have a sharp attack and a longer trail-off. A sound that completely comes-and-goes quickly is likely a defect. They often have a recognizable wave shape that you can see (if you can find it and zoom-in on the waveform) and sometimes the software can recognize it. In order to eliminate it, you need delay and memory* because you don't know if it's musical or a click until it's gone. Then the sound can be attenuated or muted, or a common technique is to replace the defect with the just-preceding sound.

Wave Repair has a few different algorithms and you can choose the one that works best for each click. One of it's methods is to copy from right-to-left or left-to-right. Often the click is only in one channel, or the left & right clicks are slightly offset in time. You don't notice the loss of stereo for a few milliseconds so this can work very well. Often the worst clicks and pops are the easiest to fix. Probably because they are the easiest to find.



* There were analog delay chips before digital audio was affordable.

 

[Bobmic]

In the old days, I used a Burwen Research TNE-7000A for click and pop removal during transfers. Even though it required patience in tweaking with each album to find the "sweet spot", it worked pretty dang well. I still have that unit (I have trouble getting rid of things sometimes), but it is left well in the dust by the computer based tools that are now available. Since it hasn't been mentioned in this thread, I would like to speak of the possibility of transferring and LP to digital, and using Acon Digital's VST3 tool called De-Click, which is nothing short of spectacular. It even allows you to listen to the delta of the signal so you can make sure you aren't taking away anything but the unwanted artifacts and leaving the signal as untouched as possible. I have SpectraLayers too for certain tasks, but the Acon tool is quite effective, and it doesn't dull the signal unless overused.

 

[Eric Natural]

use clean records and without groove damage ... and in a decent system, forget about noise / clicks and pops. My vinyl listening have nothing to fear against digital, even in some cases it really sounds better. Buy new copies with with at least VG+ graduation, clean it well ... and forget you're listening to vinyl.

this &(sadface) stop buying this media for new artist releases

 

[DSJR]

For the last few years since I first resurrected an old turntable ive been using a Project Phono Box preamp (close to the cheapest I could get at a local dealer at the time). Since then I've replaced the turntable with a Rega P3, and am using the AT VM95ML cartridge.

I have a number of old records that suffer from surface noise and pops clicks to the extent they are annoying to listen to. I decided to upgrade the preamp to the Parks Audio waxwing - mainly because it has the "Magic" function, operating in the digital domain, intended to filter out minor clicks. It has a load of other functionality but that is mainly what I wanted. I'll also be able to connect to my amp via toslink when the new cable I've ordered arrives.

I have just installed it and am listening to some of those old records. I'm surprised to find that even with the Magic function disabled the surface noise is now nearly inaudible. I'm struggling to understand how the Waxwing is not picking that up. It is literally transformational.

I realise that lack of input headroom can be an issue in "enhancing" surface noise - but was my old Project so bad in this area to make such a difference? Is that possible?

On a purely objective level, I'd have suggested an SH stylus instead of the 'rather relentless sounding' ML you have. I think we've been here before on another thread, but the AT ML's can be a little 'assertive' in reproduction quality up top and the SH keeps the subjective 'detail' but cleans it further so cymbals sound less 'one note' as they can with Ml diamond. Only places I can offer any evidence is Lowbeats.de that used to measure and provide sound-bites and also a YouTube channel that compared the naked elliptical, ML and SH versions of the OC9 MC cartridge. I'm hugely fond of the VM95ML though, so not criticising it.

I think the overload performance is vitally important as to the subjective 'effects' of surface noise and imperfections as some phono stages apparently oscillate fractionally when presented with a loud surface 'tick' or 'pop.'

Is the Waxwing 'flat' as regards accuracy to the RIAA curve?

I can't help but put my old Rega dealer hat on again here - Please remove the lid when playing and site the thing carefully for best bass reproduction. We always left the platter running in between records as it helps the belt to last longer. Every few years, lift out the inner hub to check the state of the EP80 gear oil used to lubricate it, as it dries out and rapid wear occurs on the spindle-tip if it's not dealt with - the bearing is so low friction you barely realise any issue, but a little 'running dimple' where the ball contacts it is allowed but shouldn't be a very large 'dimple' after thirty odd years...

 

[sq225917]

Any phonostage that has the headroom not to clip the signal on defects on the record will replay with less intrusion from these physical defects. It's the output signal banging into the limit of the circuits amplification ability that makes them sound so intrusive, usually because the recovery from crashing into the rails takes much longer to recover from than the actual event.

My phonostage has 26db of headroom with my cart choice, pop n ticks are virtually none existent.

 

[antcollinet]

Is the Waxwing 'flat' as regards accuracy to the RIAA curve?

Ruler flat - it does the riaa digitally (along with a whole bunch of alternative curves).

See the puffin review here - I suspect the waxwing will be close to identical, but (I think) higher bandwidth coming from higher sample rate.

 

[Balle Clorin]

Puffin is my best purchase ever, I never need another RIAA, …. Or maybe a Waxwing if I get lazy…since it can be controlled from listening position..

 

[mhardy6647]

clicks & pops... and phono preamps, you say?
Well... umm...

 

[antcollinet]

clicks & pops... and phono preamps, you say?
Well... umm...

now rendered redundant by the waxwing in about... oh, I dunno... 10% of the volume?

 

[Balle Clorin]

??