Scott Dorsey wrote:
wrote:
On Wednesday, April 7, 1999 at 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, John and Lucy Hayward-War=
burton wrote:
I Have one and it is for sale
Back in 1999 there was basically no market for the things; I believe if you
look in the archives people told him that it wasn't worth repairing.
The Packburn ...
[Packard]
...and Burwen machines that cost a fortune back in the seventies
and were considered a revolution in noise reduction technology now are no
better than scrap metal because digital systems are capable of doing this
stuff so much more effectively. In part because it's possible to do clean
delay in the digital world.
Digital de-clicking is much over-rated. In skilled hands it can
sometimes produce good results if it is used with a light touch, but
more usually the results sound absolutely horrible.
Ted Kendall's "Mousetrap" used some ideas in common with the Packburn,
but worked much better. It was far superior in its engineering and also
offered a much greater range of equalisation curves for records made
before RIAA standardisation. They were made to special order and
secondhand ones still command high prices.
My own design of analogue declicker works in real time and can be
'driven' manually to cope with rapidly-changing damage to archival
discs. This makes digitising a much faster and more accurate process
than continual iteration with clunky menu-driven software.
The Garrard and SAE boxes were never in the same league with the Packburn and
aren't of much use today. However, they were part of that revolution that
happened back in the seventies and there might be some demand from a museum
for the things. You might try contacting the Audio History Library, they are
likely to take it as a donation and get you a tax break.
The Philips/Marrantz de-clicker had a superb algorithm for detecting
damage and noise, far superior to any other digital de-clicker I have
tested. Unfortunately the designer seems to have 'run out of steam'
after that, because having detected the noise, the processor doesn't
seen to have a clue what to do with it and replaces each click with an
audible 'bloop'. This is immensely frustrating because it has the
potential to be a really brilliant de-clicker - but isn't.
--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk