Your Vinyl Transfer Workflow (sharing best needledrop practices)*

I haven't done a direct comparison but the third sounds very good. I like having my files at this level, everything is the same as I switch between either files or Pandora my main streaming app.

 

My understanding is "no" - Izotope hasn't done a ton of work on the tools used in vinyl post-processing in several releases.

 

I don't know what you're talking about. The tools they have do a fantastic job of it. Name something they don't have that is vital to restoration.

 

That's not my understanding of @mantis4tons' statement, but that those already great and vital tools haven't had further improvement in recent versions.

 

Have you seen the new version?



And, you are very wrong about not having features to use for audio restoration. The new De hum is very useful for recordings that contain hum and buzzes that shouldn't be there. Azimuth correction helps for correcting tapes and vinyl where the audio is skewed. There are others, but, before I forget, Ozone has an Imager for fixing things that are off-balance, and we know that recordings aren't perfect. The Spectral Shaper and dynamic EQ offers even more precise correction in your audio. Getting back to RX, you can even de-mix your audio for even finer tuning and correction of problems you can';t get to within a full mix, like some vocal siblence and uneven vocals or instrumentation.

 

Are the upgrades and changes in RX10 worth the upgrade from previous versions?

 

Just for clarity, I'm not arguing that RX is anything but awesome for audio restoration. What I was trying to say is that my understanding (from talking to people who recently left Izotope) is that they haven't done much enhancement to the tools commonly used in vinyl rip post-processing in a few releases, so you probably won't gain much from an upgrade from RX8 or RX9 Advanced to RX10.

 

It depends on how old your current version is and your workflow, you know. Relying on a stranger's words doesn't work. All one has to do is try out the demo. It also depends on what level those people used. Was it Elements, Standard, or Advanced?

 

I thought I was clear, apparently not.

I use Izotope RX9 standard and I think its great. Essential even. I upgraded from from RX 7, and the de-hum improvement in particular was why I upgraded to RX9. My routine for processing a needledrop crucially depends on RX9. Are you all with me? I am fully vested in RX9 now...

Izotope has released RX10. To upgrade I need to shell out $299, that is the loyalty price, $100 off. My question, to be as clear as a crystal whiskey glass from Waterford is simple. Here it goes...

ARE THE UPGRADES IN RX10 SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO WARRANT BUYING THEIR LATEST RELEASE SINCE I HAVE RX9 ALREADY?

Sorry to yell, not sure folks read my first question correctly. And honestly, no disrespect, no one yet has answered my very specific question.

 

And I thought I was clear but maybe not. Again: it depends on YOUR workflow and how far you want to take your work.

There are FOUR tiers: Essentials, Standard, Advanced, and Pro (which is only available in the subscription model).

@ghost rider got it! He ''liked" my last post.

I answered you specific question! And, that is: no stranger off the internet can tell you what you need. What you should do is simply download the demo version, which is either fully functional, or has some kind of crippled output for something like 10 days. That way, YOU can decide what is best for your workflow. There is no harm in trying out the demos.

If you are looking for someone to tell you what to do, you may be looking for the wrong answers.

 

Izotope describes the differences between RX9 and RX10 here: iZotope Introduces RX 10 and Ozone 10—now with new intelligent features that make repair and mastering more intuitive than ever before

I really wish Izotope issued better release notes!

 

And I'm slower than the rest of the class.

 

@Grant did pretty much give the best advice " install the demo and see for yourself " something like that anyhow. You have nothing to chance.

 

I just might give that a try. I'm using a lot of old software. Sound Forge 12, RX7, and others probably 5 years old. I have sound Forge 15 but I find it cumbersome and the setup cartoonish. And I remember looking at other software and thinking no it's not giving me enough of an edge for the price. But I think I'll check out the new RX 10.

 

I support all the other previous responses to your question and I’m relating my own experience with my RX9 to RX10 Standard upgrade. 99% of the RX9 tools I used strictly for needledrop noise reductions have not been upgraded to more effective versions in RX10. These are Declick, Spectral Repair, and Fade. So while I could easily still be using RX9, I wanted to get the adaptive Dehum to use when I remaster my digital concert soundboard recordings as they sometimes have ground loop noise containing time varying enharmonic components and the RX9 version would not work well on those. I also wanted the new Spectral Recovery tool to see if I can improve some older LPs with poor audio quality or live concert tapes originally recorded on cassettes. Then I discovered that RX10 standard does not have that module and its only available with the Advanced version. Even with my loyalty discount the upgrade price is steep so I’m in a holding pattern on that. Oh, and by the way, I tried out the Assistant on a raw needledrop to see what it would do. Found that useless as it made some ridiculous decisions like invoking Dereverb and Declip which were unnecessary. Also, I listened to what kinds of vinyl noise the assistant settings was removing and there was very obvious music transients being blunted. So, the Assistant was not worth the upgrade in my opinion. Think about your own current workflow and what essential tools you use for needledrop repair, and what if any new or enhanced tools RX10 offers that would entice you to go that route.

 

Yes. And just about every single software company out there offers a trial version. No one has to rely on anyone else's opinion, especially if a company is going to ask for good money for its products.

 

This is true. But, those tools work well already. I am different in that I use much more for my work. We have different needs.

Same here. My loyalty discount offers RX10 Advanced at $299. Much better than the regular $1000 price tag, but still... There are times when an mp3 is all you have available, and you know some have that strange frequency totally missing at around 16,000 kHz? Whether you could hear that high, it still affects the frequencies you do hear. I also restore tapes, and the azimuth feature and pitch correction would come in handy. The good thing is if I have a one-time need, like a paid restoration project, I could simply rent the program and charge more for the service.

I never use the assistant. It is totally worthless, and believe the only reason they offer it is for beginners who don't know where to begin.

I also use Ozone9 and want to upgrade to 10 Advanced. It's a cheaper upgrade for me, but works hand-in-hand with RX. It offers a new EQ matching tool. As one who creates a lot of compilations, this tool is very useful, even though I am pretty good at doing it by ear. But, I also love the Low Focus tool, which adds bass to bass shy recordings. Rebalance in either program is great for pulling up or reducing drums, bass, and vocals, something I also like to do to really make recordings special. Too often, I find vocals are too loud, or bass and drums are too soft in a lot of songs. It does things that an EQ can't do. Let's face it: many older recordings aren't perfect. We don't have to settle for whatever comes off the cartridge or playback head anymore. A touch here, a bit there, and you could make that wonky-sounding album sound like a million bucks, or at least a lot better than it was.

De-mixing: remember the old days when DJs, and people who wanted to play that one controversial song around kids? Well, now you can create your own censored versions without having to edit, bleep, or just not play the song. Now you can play Curtis Mayfield's "Pusherman". You can play the album version of the Spinners' "One Of A Kind Love Affair". with no f-word.

Yeah, that's my main point.

 

Sounds like we have similar tool requirements for restoration, remaster, and remix projects. I already had Ozone9-Adv and the 10 upgrade was a good value. The only disappointment was when I discovered there was no standalone mode. Now I am forced to launch my DAW (Proto0ls Ultimate 2021 with HDX card) just to use some of the V10 tools. Nice to have those plugins when I’m working within Protools, but really miss that standalone mode. So I still use V9 alone when that has everything I need for a good portion of a project. I don’t do audio work for hire, but I do volunteer projects for friends and neighbors when requested. I’m retired and enjoy doing favors for other people. Helps me to get better results on work that is just for me.

 

Ozone 9 is a standalone program, but it's not easy to use in that mode. I just use Ozone9 Adv inside RX. RX is a DAW, but to iZotope's fault, they never seem to advertise this fact, and i've told them so. So, most people think it's nothing but a suite of plugins. I can use RX and Ozone in Sound Forge, Pro Tools, Oceanaudio, and Reaper, but, for what I do, it's just easier to launch it alone.

BTW, I did install Pro Tools Intro, but it's a monumental PITA to use, and not at all intuitive. It has a very high learning curve. I can't even seem to be able to load a file into it. It's a PITA to update. What is this crap? I should just uninstall it.

 

Huge shout-out to Grant and Icewater_7. My vinyl-to-CD process was essentially established by reading Grant's missives here over the years (and others) and conversing by BM with him. While I am familiar with the process in its basics, I am not a software guy and I am intimidated by it, and have taken most of my settings on my routine from those recommended here. I have done some selective trial and error settings to get it mostly right. But honestly, I have advanced here in competency on the backs of the great work done by others who have run the traps.

So thank you Grant for addressing my query and Icewater_7 for adding more substance to that. Yes, I can get into RX1o on my own, but to be frank, it would be like the deaf trying to hear what works. I'm just not that savvy, sorry to say. For example, I purchased Ozone a year or so back and have yet to open the software because I would not know where to start. So I look to folks who are experts to weigh in and I take guidance from that, rightly or wrongly.

 

Well I can guarantee it you install the demo you will get all the help you need to right here.

 

Everyone started somewhere.

When I started this needledropping thing back in 1997, my work stank! I used Diamond Cut DCArt 32, and Roxio CD Creator. These software programs were very primitive by today's standards. And, DCArt 32 had a vacuum tube processor that I went crazy with. I had little understanding of the words "restraint", "judicious", and "subtle". I went crazy using these tools. Then I found Syntrillium's Cool Edit96 and was on my way to learning about restoration and mastering. It took years after getting that to learn how it's done. I read tons of stuff by pro mastering engineers, including our host, Steve Hoffman. I got Cool EDit Pro, Sound Forge 5, Waves plugins, and just kept learning. I got better soundcards, all up to where I am now.

You aren't going to become an expert overnight. I'm not an expert now, and, the humbling thing in life is to remember that there is always someone out there faster, smarter, and more experienced than you in your field of interest. Like this needledropping thing: I consider Stefan the senior, expert advisor here, not because he holds some kind of certificate or had formal education, he, like me, just dove into this hobby and had a passion for it. He put more effort into it than, frankly, did. But, i've also developed my own workflow and signature. I'm always reevaluating my previous work and measuring it up to others' work, and streamed digital files. I am always happy at how close or better a lot of my work is in comparison. And, when I feel something could be improved, I remaster with RX10 Advanced and Ozone 9 Standard, plus a few other plugins. For my needs, I have very little use for any other software, though I have them. The only one right now that I do use for tapes is the DDi Codec, which a cheap app that decodes Dolby B tapes.

A fun thing for me is redoing a drop I did back in 2003, and comparing it with a brand new one using my current gear/software, and hearing how similar they sound. That tells me that I learned fast and was doing good work back then. But, there's always some improvement somewhere.

 

I don’t think it (RX 10) is a great improvement over RX 9 or even 7. On the other hand Rx is basically made for short, single instrument (or voice) tracks and it’s modules work best before mixing, while recording multi track. It’s modules are not very useful for vinyl needle drops, already mixed and mastered music. There is always a compromise of losing detail while removing noise. Don’t get me wrong I still believe RX is the best tool on the market for audio restoration but it’s hard to restore audio from vinyl without losing detail and SQ.

I heavily used it for vinyl digitization and restoration since RX 6. I lightly use just a couple of modules like de-click, spectral de-noise and if needed de-hum and de-ess.

 

I recommend not using any assistant or automated/default setting with any of the modules with RX when ripping vinyl records. Always set them by listening what is deleted by the module if that option is available. Using learn function with spectral de-noise and fiddling with frequency curve helps a lot to remove low frequency noise due to rumble and groove noise. It’s very important which parts of the noise you choose for learn function. There shouldn’t be any clicks or hum inside marked noise for learn function. Ideally clicks should be removed one-by one manually as well as extreme “S” or “Z” by de-esser.

It’s a must to set spectrogram to extended log for better low frequency control. Azimuth and wow&flutter functions can make a huge difference if you know what you are doing but mostly give more harm than good. I strongly recommend not to use them. I use them but I’m professionally restoring audio from vinyl records which don’t have a master tape.

 

Don't you believe this, folks! I do entire projects in RX (and Ozone).

And, if you (mtemur) believe that RX isn't good for restoration of mixed tracks (which is partially what it is intended for), what is? I'm curious as to what you come up with.