Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Garrard Music Recovery Module MRM101
On Wednesday, April 7, 1999 at 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, John and Lucy Hayward-Warburton wrote:
Thanks for reading this. Does anyone have information on the Garrard Music Recovery Module, type number MRM101? It's an analogue vinyl click-and-pop remover that looks for the signature of an LP scratch, and then briefly mutes the delayed output from the cartridge so that you hear approx. 1ms silence instead of a click. They were made in the late 1970s. I have such a beast, whose bucket-brigade delay, RIAA preamp and opto-electronics (to do the muting) are in perfect working order (and the amp, on its own, without the slightly noisy delay, sounds nice), However, the circuit (probably some kind of differentiator) that does the detection doesn't appear to work, although it *is* receiving an input. My manual contains a circuit diagram that OMITS the detector and opto-electronics! Even the ICs on the circuit-board have their numbers scraped off to prevent (my) reverse-engineering. Any ideas? It worked until 1984, and cost me £20 in 1979. Yours, John Hayward-Warburton I Have one and it is for sale |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Garrard Music Recovery Module MRM101
On 2/01/2017 1:21 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, April 7, 1999 at 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, John and Lucy Hayward-Warburton wrote: Thanks for reading this. Does anyone have information on the Garrard Music Recovery Module, type number MRM101? It's an analogue vinyl click-and-pop remover that looks for the signature of an LP scratch, and then briefly mutes the delayed output from the cartridge so that you hear approx. 1ms silence instead of a click. They were made in the late 1970s. I have such a beast, whose bucket-brigade delay, RIAA preamp and opto-electronics (to do the muting) are in perfect working order (and the amp, on its own, without the slightly noisy delay, sounds nice), However, the circuit (probably some kind of differentiator) that does the detection doesn't appear to work, although it *is* receiving an input. My manual contains a circuit diagram that OMITS the detector and opto-electronics! Even the ICs on the circuit-board have their numbers scraped off to prevent (my) reverse-engineering. Any ideas? It worked until 1984, and cost me £20 in 1979. Yours, John Hayward-Warburton I Have one and it is for sale They are so last-century. Like the OP. geoff PS - my Garrard 301 / SME-3009 never caused any scratches. |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Garrard Music Recovery Module MRM101
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 |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Garrard Music Recovery Module MRM101
On 3/01/2017 7:32 AM, Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
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. Weird post. You dismiss digital de-clicking as much over rated without considering the myriad of algorithms/software solutions available that work with a huge range of success depending on operator, yet go into greater detail of the relatively few analog solutions that were available, and all being poor compared to the best digital solutions available now. IME *ANY* real time system is doomed to failure, but a two or 3 stage digital process has a chance when coupled with an intelligent operator. The best de-clicking though is manual editing in a DAW, by far the best method with relatively few clicks IMO. Frankly I'd never digitise with the output of *any* processor without saving a non processed file first. Trevor. |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Garrard Music Recovery Module MRM101
On Sunday, January 1, 2017 at 7:21:40 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, April 7, 1999 at 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, John and Lucy Hayward-Warburton wrote: Thanks for reading this. Does anyone have information on the Garrard Music Recovery Module, type number MRM101? It's an analogue vinyl click-and-pop remover that looks for the signature of an LP scratch, and then briefly mutes the delayed output from the cartridge so that you hear approx. 1ms silence instead of a click. They were made in the late 1970s. I have such a beast, whose bucket-brigade delay, RIAA preamp and opto-electronics (to do the muting) are in perfect working order (and the amp, on its own, without the slightly noisy delay, sounds nice), However, the circuit (probably some kind of differentiator) that does the detection doesn't appear to work, although it *is* receiving an input. My manual contains a circuit diagram that OMITS the detector and opto-electronics! Even the ICs on the circuit-board have their numbers scraped off to prevent (my) reverse-engineering. Any ideas? It worked until 1984, and cost me £20 in 1979. Yours, John Hayward-Warburton I Have one and it is for sale Music Recovery? I do that manually!! Everyone admits, I excel at it! Jack |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Garrard Music Recovery Module MRM101
On Mon, 02 Jan 2017 20:32:10 -0000, Adrian Tuddenham
wrote: 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. According to Ted's website the Mousetrap is still available to order http://www.tedkendall.com/mousetrap.php -- JRP Music - http://www.jrpmusic.co.uk |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Data recovery for mac OS9? | Pro Audio | |||
FA:Garrad Music Recovery Module Model MRM 101... | Marketplace | |||
Professional Data Recovery Book ( World's First Book on Professional Data Recovery Programming ) | Pro Audio | |||
FA: Kelsey ProTour Talkback Module / Studiomaster Module / Patchbay Switcher | Pro Audio | |||
CD-R TOC Recovery | Pro Audio |