[licensedtoquill]

Sorry if this question has been asked a million times but I am still
trying to figure out how to get my vinyl onto an iPod (or possibly an
Archos)

I have a Linn-Dynavector Ruby set up with a Beard Audio Systems
pre-pre-amp and was wondering what I needed to do to get it onto the
player" Presumably there is no way whatsoever of inputting the music
from either the deck or the pre-pre-amp directly into the IN plug of
the computer's sound card? Presumably I need a pre-amp to make a .wav
file and input that into iTunes (or MusicMatch?) in the .aac format at
something like 160 KBPS in real time? What sort of quality do I need in
the pre-amp or is this related more to the quality of the sound card (I
will probably be using a 1GHz G4 Powerbook) so does the quality of the
pre-amp matter all that much? Which one is the limiting factor? The
pre-amp, the sound card or the playing program?

Lastly there used to be something called Pinnacle Clean Plus versions 4
or 5 (no one seems to know the difference) which enabled you to put its
own sound 'card' into a desktop computer and use IT'S pre-amp without
needing to use one of your own (I suppose I could use a desktop
computer for the iTunes library and could in theory use a PC or a Mac).
Is there some reason why the company pulled it from the market without
superceding it with an improved version of its own? Is there any
advantage to using such a device? As it is classical, I won't need to
do any serious editing, simply inputting the whole of the classical LP
into the .wav file.

[Richard Crowley]

"licensedtoquill" wrote ...
Sorry if this question has been asked a million times but I am still
trying to figure out how to get my vinyl onto an iPod (or possibly an
Archos)

I have a Linn-Dynavector Ruby set up with a Beard Audio Systems
pre-pre-amp and was wondering what I needed to do to get it onto the
player" Presumably there is no way whatsoever of inputting the music
from either the deck or the pre-pre-amp directly into the IN plug of
the computer's sound card?

Not likely. You have phono-level (and RIAA EQ) signal.

Presumably I need a pre-amp

Yes, for two reasons...
1) to boost the signal to something around line-level,
2) to decode the RIAA equalization.
These functions are typically combined in an RIAA phono
preamp. There are a very wide variety of them available
from $20-30 up to hundreds (thousands?) of $$$.

to make a .wav file

Recording to a WAV (or any other) file is a function of the
software, not the hardware.

and input that into iTunes (or MusicMatch?) in the .aac format at
something like 160 KBPS in real time?

What software are you using for loading music into your
player now? Likely you can use the same application for
home-made files. Just need to be sure you know which
file formats your player software accepts, and select a
recording application that writes a compatible format.

What sort of quality do I need in
the pre-amp or is this related more to the quality of the sound card (I
will probably be using a 1GHz G4 Powerbook) so does the quality of the
pre-amp matter all that much? Which one is the limiting factor? The
pre-amp, the sound card or the playing program?

Depends on who you ask. The limiting factor may very
much more likely to be the MPEG encoding, the player,
and/or the earbuds/headphones) that you are using
to listen with.

Lastly there used to be something called Pinnacle
Clean Plus versions 4 or 5 (no one seems to know
the difference)

I didn't see anything named "Clean" on the Pinnacle
website. Pinnacle has a pretty rotten reputation in
video circles. Dunno about their audio stuff (if they
even still offer it?)

[licensedtoquill]

On Jan 23, 12:48 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
"licensedtoquill" wrote ...

Sorry if this question has been asked a million times but I am still
trying to figure out how to get my vinyl onto an iPod (or possibly an
Archos)

I have a Linn-Dynavector Ruby set up with a Beard Audio Systems
pre-pre-amp and was wondering what I needed to do to get it onto the
player" Presumably there is no way whatsoever of inputting the music
from either the deck or the pre-pre-amp directly into the IN plug of
the computer's sound card?Not likely. You have phono-level (and RIAA EQ) signal.

Presumably I need a pre-ampYes, for two reasons...
1) to boost the signal to something around line-level,
2) to decode the RIAA equalization.
These functions are typically combined in an RIAA phono
preamp.
What I was wondering was whether there was a software way of creating
the appropriate RIAA curve to correct the signal but actually I was
more concerned about getting a signal of a few microvolts out of the
cartridge or a few millivolts out of the pre-pre amp into the
computer's 200-300 millivolt Line Input and wondered if there was a way
of doing that!
There are a very wide variety of them available
from $20-30 up to hundreds (thousands?) of $$$.

And I have numerous of these and was wondering if the quality of which
one I use would be likely to make any difference to the quality of the
mp3 or aac file I ultimately use with my Sennheiser HD545 headphones
and/or play on my stereo if that proves more convenient.

to make a .wav fileRecording to a WAV (or any other) file is a function of the
software, not the hardware.

and input that into iTunes (or MusicMatch?) in the .aac format at
something like 160 KBPS in real time?What software are you using for loading music into your
player now?
I am using iTunes but could also use MusicMatch (which Archos
recommends) if anyone thinks that there is any difference in quality
between the two pieces of software. Otherwise there is apparently a way
of using iTunes with the Archos

Likely you can use the same application for
home-made files. Just need to be sure you know which
file formats your player software accepts, and select a
recording application that writes a compatible format.

What sort of quality do I need in
the pre-amp or is this related more to the quality of the sound card (I
will probably be using a 1GHz G4 Powerbook) so does the quality of the
pre-amp matter all that much? Which one is the limiting factor? The
pre-amp, the sound card or the playing program?Depends on who you ask. The limiting factor may very
much more likely to be the MPEG encoding, the player,
and/or the earbuds/headphones) that you are using
to listen with.

Lastly there used to be something called Pinnacle
Clean Plus versions 4 or 5 (no one seems to know
the difference)I didn't see anything named "Clean" on the Pinnacle
website.
They either bought this software from a German company called Steinberg
or they bought the whole company in the US and closed it down a few
years ago. No one knows why.

Pinnacle has a pretty rotten reputation in
video circles.
Yes, I had heard that they produced all sorts of scratchy video
products which play in tiny boxes in the middle of your screen and then
wont support them when users complain.
Dunno about their audio stuff (if they
even still offer it?)
They dont!

[bob]

licensedtoquill wrote:
Sorry if this question has been asked a million times but I am still
trying to figure out how to get my vinyl onto an iPod (or possibly an
Archos)

I have a Linn-Dynavector Ruby set up with a Beard Audio Systems
pre-pre-amp and was wondering what I needed to do to get it onto the
player" Presumably there is no way whatsoever of inputting the music
from either the deck or the pre-pre-amp directly into the IN plug of
the computer's sound card?

It's not impossible, but it's not recommended. Much better to run the
signal through a phono preamp first.

Presumably I need a pre-amp to make a .wav
file and input that into iTunes (or MusicMatch?) in the .aac format at
something like 160 KBPS in real time?

Uh, no. All the phono preamp does is reverse the RIAA EQ and bring the
signal up to somewhere around normal line-level. Your sound card is
what makes the .wav (or .aiff) file. You'll then need an audio editor
to, at the very least, divide each album side into tracks (and clean up
some noise, if you want to). Once that's done, you can import each
track into iTunes, and convert to AAC. Real time? Fuggedaboutit.

For an audio editor on a Mac, I use Amadeus II (which may now be
Amadeus Pro). It does the job, and comes with a half-decent manual.

What sort of quality do I need in
the pre-amp or is this related more to the quality of the sound card (I
will probably be using a 1GHz G4 Powerbook) so does the quality of the
pre-amp matter all that much? Which one is the limiting factor? The
pre-amp, the sound card or the playing program?

If your goal is a compressed AAC file, I wouldn't spend hundreds of
dollars on a preamp. But given that you have a high-end TT and cart,
you must also have a phono preamp somewhere in your system. (Q.: In
your system, what does your pre-preamp connect to?) If it's good enough
to listen to, it's good enough for this job.

bob

[Richard Crowley]

"licensedtoquill" wrote ...
What I was wondering was whether there was a
software way of creating the appropriate RIAA curve
to correct the signal

I have heard that there are ways of doing the RIAA
decoding in software, but I am pretty dubious as it
pushes the limits of the dynamic range of even high-
end computer sound equipment. It is SO much easier
and simpler to do it in hardware (RIAA phono preamp)

but actually I was more concerned about getting a
signal of a few microvolts out of the cartridge or a
few millivolts out of the pre-pre amp into the computer's
200-300 millivolt Line Input and wondered if there was
a way of doing that!

But that is *exactly* the job-description of an RIAA phono
preamp. It doesn't get any more perfect than that.

And I have numerous of these and was wondering if the
quality of which one I use would be likely to make any
difference to the quality of the mp3 or aac file I ultimately
use with my Sennheiser HD545 headphones and/or play
on my stereo if that proves more convenient.

So if you already have several phono preamps, nobody is
in a better position than you to do the evaluation. So take
your best and the worst preamps and do a test all the way
through MP3/AAC encoding and playback.

I am using iTunes but could also use MusicMatch (which
Archos recommends) if anyone thinks that there is any
difference in quality between the two pieces of software.
Otherwise there is apparently a way of using iTunes with
the Archos

If you are talking about MP3 encoding, you can try it for
yourself. Otherwise, just for shuttling files back and forth,
it doesn't seem to be a question of "quality" but rather
an issue of compatibility and/or convienence. I use an
application called Easy CD-DA to do MP3 and AAC conversion
and I like it a lot.

[bob]

Richard Crowley wrote:
"licensedtoquill" wrote ...
What I was wondering was whether there was a
software way of creating the appropriate RIAA curve
to correct the signal

I have heard that there are ways of doing the RIAA
decoding in software, but I am pretty dubious as it
pushes the limits of the dynamic range of even high-
end computer sound equipment.

It is possible. (Amadeus, for one, will do it.) And if you've got any
really old pre-RIAA standard records, other EQ curves can be decoded
via the same software. The real problem, as you note, is that weak
input signal won't give you enough dynamic range.

It is SO much easier
and simpler to do it in hardware (RIAA phono preamp)

Agreed. right tool for the job.

bob

[Timothy Lange]

Hi,

I just bought a phono pre amp ($25) and got it last Saturday from
Phonopreamps.com. This does the RIAA fix. From the pre amp to my sound card
(with supplied cables) and then I used Audacity from
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/, free software to record from my vinyl. It
will export to WAV and MP3 files. MP3 loses a little in the compression but I
found the CDs I made from WAV files and from MP3 files are same as far as my
ears are concerned.

Hey, I'm a newbie, it works, and it is cheap.

Tim.

[Arny Krueger]

"Timothy Lange" wrote in message



I just bought a phono pre amp ($25) and got it last
Saturday from Phonopreamps.com. This does the RIAA fix.

http://www.phonopreamps.com/ looks pretty good on paper.

These guys have a lot of different options, too:

http://www.kabusa.com/phonpre.htm

From the pre amp to my sound card (with supplied cables)
and then I used Audacity from
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/, free software to
record from my vinyl. It will export to WAV and MP3
files. MP3 loses a little in the compression but I found
the CDs I made from WAV files and from MP3 files are same
as far as my ears are concerned.

Most relevant weakness - lack of flexibility in the noise, tic, and pop
reduction department.

Most common way to address - upgrade to Adobe Audition which costs way more
bucks.

Hey, I'm a newbie, it works, and it is cheap.

What you're doing is pretty much the preferred way to do it.

[licensedtoquill]

Once that's done, you can import each
track into iTunes, and convert to AAC. Real time? Fuggedaboutit.
But one has no option!!
For an audio editor on a Mac, I use Amadeus II (which may now be
Amadeus Pro). It does the job, and comes with a half-decent manual.

What sort of quality do I need in
the pre-amp or is this related more to the quality of the sound card (I
will probably be using a 1GHz G4 Powerbook) so does the quality of the
pre-amp matter all that much? Which one is the limiting factor? The
pre-amp, the sound card or the playing program?If your goal is a compressed AAC file, I wouldn't spend hundreds of
dollars on a preamp. But given that you have a high-end TT and cart,
you must also have a phono preamp somewhere in your system. (Q.: In
your system, what does your pre-preamp connect to?) If it's good enough
to listen to, it's good enough for this job.
That is my whole problem. I have this really great-sounding tube
pre-amp called a Berning which has REALLY lousy reliability. It's
circuit board is infested with large numbers of poor quality caps next
to each tube which have all been replaced (by the manufacturer) once
and which now leak again so badly that the unit starts emitting a sort
of low pitched wind after about an hour of use and has to be turned off
for a day or so to cool down. If you don't use it too much, Berning is
OK

So doing anything in real time is a non-starter. it was for THIS reason
that I was wondering whether I should use some lesser pre-amp and
whether in practice it would make any difference. You are suggesting
that with a compressed .aac file, there wouldn't effectively be any
difference.
bob

[licensedtoquill]

On Jan 23, 3:02 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
"licensedtoquill" wrote ...

What I was wondering was whether there was a
software way of creating the appropriate RIAA curve
to correct the signalI have heard that there are ways of doing the RIAA
decoding in software, but I am pretty dubious as it
pushes the limits of the dynamic range of even high-
end computer sound equipment. It is SO much easier
and simpler to do it in hardware (RIAA phono preamp)

but actually I was more concerned about getting a
signal of a few microvolts out of the cartridge or a
few millivolts out of the pre-pre amp into the computer's
200-300 millivolt Line Input and wondered if there was
a way of doing that!But that is *exactly* the job-description of an RIAA phono
preamp. It doesn't get any more perfect than that.

And I have numerous of these and was wondering if the
quality of which one I use would be likely to make any
difference to the quality of the mp3 or aac file I ultimately
use with my Sennheiser HD545 headphones and/or play
on my stereo if that proves more convenient.So if you already have several phono preamps, nobody is
in a better position than you to do the evaluation. So take
your best and the worst preamps and do a test all the way
through MP3/AAC encoding and playback.
You are of course absolutely right and I of course knew this: I only
asked the question to save myself a gigantic amount of time in polling
cognoscenti to see if anyone had tried this already and if everyone
thought that there was little noticeable difference between a Mark
Levinson or Krell pre-amp and a Realistic or Pinnacle or
phonopreamps.com one in practice.
I am using iTunes but could also use MusicMatch (which
Archos recommends) if anyone thinks that there is any
difference in quality between the two pieces of software.
Otherwise there is apparently a way of using iTunes with
the ArchosIf you are talking about MP3 encoding, you can try it for
yourself. Otherwise, just for shuttling files back and forth,
it doesn't seem to be a question of "quality" but rather
an issue of compatibility and/or convienence. I use an
application called Easy CD-DA to do MP3 and AAC conversion
and I like it a lot.

[Arny Krueger]

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message

"licensedtoquill" wrote ...
What I was wondering was whether there was a
software way of creating the appropriate RIAA curve
to correct the signal

Many people have done this with software that can be used to create
arbitrary response cuves, such as Audition/CEP. Most have sworn off of it,
if they tried it.

I have heard that there are ways of doing the RIAA
decoding in software, but I am pretty dubious as it
pushes the limits of the dynamic range of even high-
end computer sound equipment.

That is exactly right. The RIAA demphasis curve is quite extreme -
operating over a 40 dB range. If implemented the worst possible way, you
need a preamp with about 140 dB dynamic range to do it right, and that is at
or beyond the SOTA.

It is SO much easier
and simpler to do it in hardware (RIAA phono preamp)

Agreed.

Potential sources:

A legacy stereo receiver or integrated amplifier

http://www.kabusa.com/phonpre.htm

http://www.phonopreamps.com/

Your local electronics store.

A legacy preamp from eBay - Dyna PAT-5, Heath AP 1615, Hafler DH 101, c.

[licensedtoquill]

Potential sources:

A legacy stereo receiver or integrated amplifier

http://www.kabusa.com/phonpre.htm

http://www.phonopreamps.com/

Your local electronics store.

A legacy preamp from eBay - Dyna PAT-5, Heath AP 1615, Hafler DH 101, c.

So we are agreed then: This isn't an "a chain is only as strong as its
weakest link" situation, it is an "the compression stage makes more
difference than the quality of the signal you are putting into the
computer" situation! (I have a Luxman L210, a Hitachi HTA-70F, a
Mitsubishi DA-R35, a Nakamichi CompactReceiver 1 and a Sansui Classique
2001)

[Richard Crowley]

"licensedtoquill" wrote ...
So we are agreed then: This isn't an "a chain is only as strong as its
weakest link" situation, it is an "the compression stage makes more
difference than the quality of the signal you are putting into the
computer" situation! (I have a Luxman L210, a Hitachi HTA-70F, a
Mitsubishi DA-R35, a Nakamichi CompactReceiver 1 and a Sansui Classique
2001)

Actually, I think many of us believe the MP3/AAC compression &
recovery to be the "weakest link" that will mask any difference
in phono preamps. But nobody can do the experiment with your
particular mix of hardware/software but you. Also, only you can
make the final evaluation with your own ears about what is
acceptable or worth whatever tradeoffs.

[Michael Black]

"Richard Crowley" ) writes:
"licensedtoquill" wrote ...
So we are agreed then: This isn't an "a chain is only as strong as its
weakest link" situation, it is an "the compression stage makes more
difference than the quality of the signal you are putting into the
computer" situation! (I have a Luxman L210, a Hitachi HTA-70F, a
Mitsubishi DA-R35, a Nakamichi CompactReceiver 1 and a Sansui Classique
2001)

Actually, I think many of us believe the MP3/AAC compression &
recovery to be the "weakest link" that will mask any difference
in phono preamps. But nobody can do the experiment with your
particular mix of hardware/software but you. Also, only you can
make the final evaluation with your own ears about what is
acceptable or worth whatever tradeoffs.


I read his statement as meaning the same thing, as in "compressing
is going to change things enough that other things don't matter". But
I see now he seems to be suggesting that "a better grade of compression"
is the real issue.

Obviously the solution lies elsewhere.

You archive to .wav's or something similarly uncompressed, and then
do a good job of transferring to digital. Then you can burn those
files to a CD, and hopefully have that material forever.

Then, when it's time to fill the Ipod, make MP3 versions of the songs.

Then you have the portability of MP3s, but a good backup that you can
always return to. If a different/better compression scheme comes along,
you have the .wavs to work from rather than decompressing and then
compressing to the new format (and losing more along the way).

Then it's worth doing the conversion to digital right in the first place,
because the extra time there will mean you won't have to repeat yourself
later.

Michael

[bob]

On Jan 24, 1:59 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
Actually, I think many of us believe the MP3/AAC compression &
recovery to be the "weakest link" that will mask any difference
in phono preamps. But nobody can do the experiment with your
particular mix of hardware/software but you. Also, only you can
make the final evaluation with your own ears about what is
acceptable or worth whatever tradeoffs.

In particular, if you like the distinctive sound of a particular
preamp--such as a tube unit--then using a different preamp may
disappoint you. And yes, some of what makes that favorite preamp
distinctive may well survive the digitization/compression process.
(Distinctions among well-designed solid state preamps should be much
more subtle--and it wouldn't surprise me if you could buy a
well-designed phono preamp for less than $100.)

bob

[Arny Krueger]

"licensedtoquill" wrote in
message
ups.com
Potential sources:

A legacy stereo receiver or integrated amplifier

http://www.kabusa.com/phonpre.htm

http://www.phonopreamps.com/

Your local electronics store.

A legacy preamp from eBay - Dyna PAT-5, Heath AP 1615,
Hafler DH 101, c.

So we are agreed then: This isn't an "a chain is only as
strong as its weakest link" situation,

Agreed.

it is an "the
compression stage makes more difference than the quality
of the signal you are putting into the computer"

True to a certain extent. A crappy analog phono subsystem puts different
kinds of flaws into a recording than a substandard job of MP3 encoding.

(I have a Luxman L210, a Hitachi HTA-70F, a
Mitsubishi DA-R35, a Nakamichi CompactReceiver 1 and a
Sansui Classique 2001)

[licensedtoquill]

I think that this is agreed then but that is bad news: If I like the
sound of my tube pre-amp, it is unlikely I will be satisfied with the
sound of the wav file made with some cheapo pre-amp on the CD. (for
whenever something comes along which makes a better job of compression
than those techniques currently available or for playing on the CD
player should I want to do that)

Am beginning to wonder if I should look for a tube pre-amp on E-Bay
which isn't made by Berning? My thirties radios are sometimes only now
starting to suffer from leaky caps!

[In fact I had suspected that there wasn't much difference between aac
and mp3 assuming similar levels of compression]

On Jan 24, 2:12 pm, (Michael Black) wrote:
"Richard Crowley" ) writes:
"licensedtoquill" wrote ...
So we are agreed then: This isn't an "a chain is only as strong as its
weakest link" situation, it is an "the compression stage makes more
difference than the quality of the signal you are putting into the
computer" situation! (I have a Luxman L210, a Hitachi HTA-70F, a
Mitsubishi DA-R35, a Nakamichi CompactReceiver 1 and a Sansui Classique
2001)

Actually, I think many of us believe the MP3/AAC compression &
recovery to be the "weakest link" that will mask any difference
in phono preamps. But nobody can do the experiment with your
particular mix of hardware/software but you. Also, only you can
make the final evaluation with your own ears about what is
acceptable or worth whatever tradeoffs.I read his statement as meaning the same thing, as in "compressing
is going to change things enough that other things don't matter". But
I see now he seems to be suggesting that "a better grade of compression"
is the real issue.

Obviously the solution lies elsewhere.

You archive to .wav's or something similarly uncompressed, and then
do a good job of transferring to digital. Then you can burn those
files to a CD, and hopefully have that material forever.

Then, when it's time to fill the Ipod, make MP3 versions of the songs.

Then you have the portability of MP3s, but a good backup that you can
always return to. If a different/better compression scheme comes along,
you have the .wavs to work from rather than decompressing and then
compressing to the new format (and losing more along the way).

Then it's worth doing the conversion to digital right in the first place,
because the extra time there will mean you won't have to repeat yourself
later.

Michael

[bob]

On Jan 24, 3:00 pm, "licensedtoquill"
wrote:
I think that this is agreed then but that is bad news: If I like the
sound of my tube pre-amp, it is unlikely I will be satisfied with the
sound of the wav file made with some cheapo pre-amp on the CD. (for
whenever something comes along which makes a better job of compression
than those techniques currently available or for playing on the CD
player should I want to do that)

Am beginning to wonder if I should look for a tube pre-amp on E-Bay
which isn't made by Berning?

What makes you think another tube pre will sound like yours? Tube gear
can vary much more than solid state, as a rule. And you can't listen
before you buy on eBay.

My thirties radios are sometimes only now
starting to suffer from leaky caps!

[In fact I had suspected that there wasn't much difference between aac
and mp3 assuming similar levels of compression]

This is quite wrong, and nobody said anything of the sort. At 128kbps
or 160kbps, AAC is widely considered superior to MP3.

bob

[Richard Crowley]

"licensedtoquill" wrote ...
I think that this is agreed then but that is bad news: If I like the
sound of my tube pre-amp, it is unlikely I will be satisfied with the
sound of the wav file made with some cheapo pre-amp

Am beginning to wonder if I should look for a tube pre-amp on E-Bay
which isn't made by Berning? My thirties radios are sometimes only now
starting to suffer from leaky caps!

I don't understand. If you already have a tube preamp whose
sound you like, why do you need to buy another one?

on the CD. (for whenever something comes along which makes
a better job of compression than those techniques currently
available or for playing on the CD player should I want to do that)

You can store CDs on the shelf as your "original/master/archive"
source and re-rip and encode/compress them whenever a new
compression candidate comes along. In a similar manner, I would
expect that you would save your WAV files recorded from vinyl as
your "originals" and apply compression (of whatever variety) only
when you want to create files for your player, etc.

[Peter Larsen]

licensedtoquill wrote:

[riaa preamp choice]

And I have numerous of these and was wondering if the quality
of which one I use would be likely to make any difference

Of course it will.

to the quality of the mp3 or aac file

You don't come across as a mp3 kind of person, don't do lossy
compression.


Regards

Peter Larsen

[SkiFastBadly]

"licensedtoquill" wrote in message
oups.com...
Sorry if this question has been asked a million times but I am still
trying to figure out how to get my vinyl onto an iPod (or possibly an
Archos)

I have a Linn-Dynavector Ruby set up with a Beard Audio Systems
pre-pre-amp and was wondering what I needed to do to get it onto the
player" Presumably there is no way whatsoever of inputting the music
from either the deck or the pre-pre-amp directly into the IN plug of
the computer's sound card? Presumably I need a pre-amp to make a .wav
file and input that into iTunes (or MusicMatch?) in the .aac format at
something like 160 KBPS in real time? What sort of quality do I need in
the pre-amp or is this related more to the quality of the sound card (I
will probably be using a 1GHz G4 Powerbook) so does the quality of the
pre-amp matter all that much? Which one is the limiting factor? The
pre-amp, the sound card or the playing program?

Lastly there used to be something called Pinnacle Clean Plus versions 4
or 5 (no one seems to know the difference) which enabled you to put its
own sound 'card' into a desktop computer and use IT'S pre-amp without
needing to use one of your own (I suppose I could use a desktop
computer for the iTunes library and could in theory use a PC or a Mac).
Is there some reason why the company pulled it from the market without
superceding it with an improved version of its own? Is there any
advantage to using such a device? As it is classical, I won't need to
do any serious editing, simply inputting the whole of the classical LP
into the .wav file.


Sounds like a software problem. I use Sony's EZ-Audio. It'll start and
stop recording, has some clean up utils that can be used or ignored, you can
adjust track start and stop, etc. Haven't tried any others, there might be
better ones.