The SugarCube all-in-one vinyl noise removal

[J. PUPSTER]

Hi. Soundfield

Great buy, I have been copying my Quad LP`s through a phono preamp to my computer and using ACOUSTICA 7 software to do the declicking it has presets which do a good job but I have found tweaking the presets half its intensity gives me the less of any artifacts which accoures if it over does things, but this is not bone in real time of course it all takes time.

With this unit you have bought does it in real time takes all the hard work & time in doing the copying, and I have not had NO problem with Deckling with my softwares, and in decoding through my SM unit there definitely is NO degrading of the Quad decoding.

But my software also does denoising and you would only denoise after decoding when you have the 4 Quad files that's the only time you would denoise, if you denoise the Stereo file you will degrade the Quad decoding..

Tell us your findings when you put it through a more thorough test.
BBQ...…….…….7

The more I read and study this forum ; the more I realize how little I know ...

 

[4-earredwonder]

The more I read and study this forum ; the more I realize how little I know ...

Seek and Ye Shall Find ....... Start with the "As,"JP! we all have a LOT to learn about INFINITY!

 

[Soundfield]

Hi. Soundfield

Great buy, I have been copying my Quad LP`s through a phono preamp to my computer and using ACOUSTICA 7 software to do the declicking it has presets which do a good job but I have found tweaking the presets half its intensity gives me the less of any artifacts which accoures if it over does things, but this is not done in real time of course it all takes time.

With this unit you have bought does it in real time takes all the hard work & time in doing the copying, and I have not had NO problems with Decliking with my softwares, and in decoding through my SM unit there definitely is NO degrading of the Quad decoding.

But my software also does denoising and you would only denoise after decoding when you have the 4 Quad files that's the only time you would denoise, if you denoise the Stereo file you will degrade the Quad decoding..

Tell us your findings when you put it through a more thorough test.
BBQ...…….…….7

Thanks BBQ, yes will do, but I'm very pleased with it so far, it is a very high quality bit of kit both in terms of build and performance. I'm not interested / far too lazy to faff about with the manual software manipulation of audio files so a hardware solution was ideal for me. One of the many advantages of this box is to be able to change the repair 'depth' on the fly and to be able to instantly compare the resulting repaired audio with the original or with the extracted clicks & pops alone (which is very revealing).
Your advice on de-noising is noted, and I was not planning any further 'electronic' processing in that regard. Frankly the only way I might tackle this residual problem is to get an ultrasonic record cleaner so as to present as pristine a feed to the Sugar Cube as possible.
Cheers

 

[bigbillquad]

YES great idea that is one of the best moves I made getting a ultrasonic record cleaner.

 

[atrocity]

I had this Pink Floyd vinyl bootleg a long time ago that turned out to be a bootleg of a bootleg. What I mean is it was near mint vinyl that was a recording of crackly scratched damaged vinyl. There was even a repeating skip in the middle of Echoes that looped a dozen times before someone nudged the tonearm. Let's see how this box does with that!

You're reminding me of a blue vinyl boot I got 40 years ago containing the 3 most common tracks from the 1971 BBC show. No skipping, but still clearly a dub of a different vinyl copy. For all its flaws, it may still be my favorite version of that material because there's no damaging noise reduction and it's in very wide stereo, unlike the mono "Early Years" version.

 

[jimfisheye]

You're reminding me of a blue vinyl boot I got 40 years ago containing the 3 most common tracks from the 1971 BBC show. No skipping, but still clearly a dub of a different vinyl copy. For all its flaws, it may still be my favorite version of that material because there's no damaging noise reduction and it's in very wide stereo, unlike the mono "Early Years" version.

The BBC stuff on that TER box...
Stunning that they didn't even have the stereo mix anymore for 1971. Not sure why they stepped on the mono mix like that either.
Grab the BBC transcription disc vinyl rip in 24/48 off Yeeshkul for stereo 1971. I was going to give this one a once over if and when I finish the 1967-1969 sessions. (Little but of burn out combined with the fact that these are official now - stepped on as they are - which will make it harder to share this genuinely full quality set.)

Still remember the eyebrow raiser that was that bootleg of a bootleg! I never considered anyone would do such a thing before that. Now of course I'm aware that even record labels release sub-bootleg quality stuff all the time. I remember thinking I was losing my mind for a minute there though watching pristine vinyl spinning and the tone arm tracking away and hearing mad damage and finally this repeating skip!

 

[atrocity]

Grab the BBC transcription disc vinyl rip in 24/48 off Yeeshkul for stereo 1971.

Oh, nice! Thank you for the tip! A quick scan through there says this is one without John Peel. Not that I'm complaining, it's just fascinating to me how many different permutations of this are out there. Some with him, some without, some with a bit of his commentary but not all of it, etc.

The fact that the stereo master appears to have gone missing is incredibly sad. I know that the stereo mix is a bit primitive, but I absolutely love it. It's just never had the same impact for me in mono.