Audio enhancement filters for vinyl rips

[Trackside]

In image processing there are various filters that are applied to increse teh perceived resolution and detail in an image which is commonly refered to as sharpening. Applied clumsily it looks nasty but with care it can restore some edge definition loses associated with copying original prints or transparencies. What audio processing software is available to achieve the same thing ( apart from adding some treble lift)

[Hanuman]

It's an interesting question.

I'm not sure there's any audio equivalent to edge-detection, which is often used in conjunction with sharpening, to restrict the effect just to the edges. A quick Google search reveals that this is called gradient filtering and I can't see any reference to it in relation to audio processing.

I think an audio version of Unsharp Mask can be simulated to some extent by setting up a fairly steep high-pass filter on a channel, cutting off everything below about 7-10K. You can control the influence of the remaining frequencies by using the fader to add it to the final mix. Obviously the effect is similar to a regular EQ but I don't think you can get the same control and precision out of most EQs.

[Dimal]

Have you had a look at iZotope "Ozone" and "RX2"?

These products, in combination, allow you to achieve almost anything that is possible with an audio file; in a similar sense to that which is applied to enhance images...

Mal.

[Trackside]

I have been playing with some iZotope mastering effects that were in Adobe Audition and am very impressed. The Tube-moddeled compressor and multi band compressor if used sensibly can inject a bit 'life' and clarity back into the recording. If I take the process of copying flat artwork in photography then with even the highest resolution sensor and lens there are still losses to contrast, colour saturation and edge definition ( sharpness) which need to be accounted for in post production to create a copy that is closer to the original.

[thespirit3]

Given the wide frequency response of vinyl I'm unsure what 'enhancement' would be needed. Sure, you could add some high end, push the whole lot through some multiband compression but ... if the original artist had wanted it to sound like this they'd have done that in the recording studio

[thespirit3]

I should add - when dealing with graphics the captured image is always lacking in some way. However, sampling an analogue waveform should (providing a decent soundcard/ADC is used) be *identical* to the original (up to 20KHz where the sampling hardware low pass filters). The LP version may have some higher frequency content (although >20KHz being very dependent on cartridge) but otherwise they should be identical. Hence, no need to modify this in any way (modifying for 'personal taste' should be done on playback, not permanently applied). This of course just being my opinion

[Trackside]

Ideally yes - no losses of any kind would occur but in the real world this is unlikley. Even the recording artist may have only approved the mater tape used to cut the disk and is unlikley to have personally approved every pressing from 2nd and 3rd generation master disks. Also A/D quality is variable - I have 3 units and they all sound slightly different and measure with slight changes in frequency response.

[ripblade]

Diamond Cut Productions makes audio forensics software expressly for the purpose of enhancing audio. I have DC 6 and have had some use for it, but my take is that the best digital transfer possible is the better way. No enhancement will fix a bad transfer.

[Trackside]

Diamond Cut Productions makes audio forensics software expressly for the purpose of enhancing audio. I have DC 6 and have had some use for it, but my take is that the best digital transfer possible is the better way. No enhancement will fix a bad transfer.

I'll check that out - agree that the most important factor is the transfer which in my book is the quality of the TT, Cart, Arm and Phono stage.

[ripblade]

Well, if you're using the likes of an SB16 card thinking digital is only number crunching, you'll be in for a surprise. Analogue replay is important - no doubt about it - but it has to get on the hard disk in one piece. This is a bigger challenge than many would think.

[Trackside]

Well, if you're using the likes of an SB16 card thinking digital is only number crunching, you'll be in for a surprise. Analogue replay is important - no doubt about it - but it has to get on the hard disk in one piece. This is a bigger challenge than many would think.

Well obviously a soundblaster is not a good idea but you don't have to spend huge sums to get something good enough not to be the limiting factor in the quality of your rip's

[ripblade]

Well, if you're using the likes of an SB16 card thinking digital is only number crunching, you'll be in for a surprise. Analogue replay is important - no doubt about it - but it has to get on the hard disk in one piece. This is a bigger challenge than many would think.

Well obviously a soundblaster is not a good idea but you don't have to spend huge sums to get something good enough not to be the limiting factor in the quality of your rip's

Yes, and for years I thought an Audiophile 2496 should be good enough...