Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2007 19:52:44 -0400
Reply-To:     Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: De-clicking
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
              reply-type=original

Hi Parker:

I'm sorry, I misunderstood what you were describing. Now I understand. That would absolutely work, 
but what an art form! Wow, I wonder what Jack experimented on to learn the art.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Parker Dinkins" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] De-clicking


> on 7/26/07 8:06 PM US/Central, Tom Fine at [log in to unmask]
> wrote:
>
>> But if you do Jack's method, you're left with the same problem as Terry -- a
>> microsecond of blank space, which is just as noticeable and annoying as the
>> click.
>
> By scraping off only the precise moment of the click, you're in effect
> creating a high speed fadeout and fade-in. It's audible, but less annoying
> than the click itself.
>
> There's an overview of analog and digital de-clicking at
> http://www.cedaraudio.com/intro/declick_intro.html - but without a
> description of manually scraping off the oxide.
>
> --
> Parker Dinkins
> MasterDigital Corporation
> Audio Restoration + CD Mastering
> http://masterdigital.com
>