Description RIAA-EQ-Curve.svg RIAA equalisation curve for vinyl records. This curve is applied to the signal from recorded record to restore a flat frequency reponse. Date 28 July 2006 Source Own work Author 20:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC) Permission My Own Work Licensing Public domain Public domain false false I, the copyright holder of this work, release this work into the.
This applies worldwide. In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so: I grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law. Public domain Public domain false false File history.
The RIAA equalization curve for playback of vinyl records. The recording curve performs the inverse function, reducing low frequencies and boosting high frequencies.
RIAA equalization is a specification for the recording and playback of, established by the (RIAA). The purposes of the are to permit greater recording times (by decreasing the mean width of each groove), to improve sound quality, and to reduce the groove damage that would otherwise arise during playback. The equalization curve was intended to operate as a global for records since 1954. Fnaf free full game. However, it is almost impossible to say when the change actually took place. Before then, especially from 1940, each record company applied its own equalization; there were over 100 combinations of turnover and frequencies in use, the main ones being Columbia-78, Decca-U.S., European (various), Victor-78 (various), Associated, BBC, NAB, Orthacoustic, World, Columbia LP, FFRR-78 and microgroove, and AES. The obvious consequence was that different reproduction results were obtained if the recording and playback filtering were not matched. Contents.
The RIAA curve RIAA equalization is a form of on recording and on playback. A recording is made with the low reduced and the high frequencies boosted, and on playback the opposite occurs. The net result is a flat frequency response, but with of high frequency noise such as hiss and clicks that arise from the recording medium. Reducing the low frequencies also limits the excursions the cutter needs to make when cutting a groove. Groove width is thus reduced, allowing more grooves to fit into a given surface area, permitting longer recording times.
This also reduces physical stresses on the which might otherwise cause or groove damage during playback. A potential drawback of the system is that from the playback 's drive mechanism is amplified by the low frequency boost that occurs on playback. Players must therefore be designed to limit rumble, more so than if RIAA equalization did not occur. RIAA equalization is not a simple low-pass filter.
It defines transition points in three places: 75 µs, 318 µs and 3180 µs, which correspond to 2122 Hz, 500 Hz and 50 Hz (rounded values). Implementing this characteristic is not especially difficult, but is more involved than a simple amplifier. In the past, almost all hi-fi preamplifiers, integrated amplifiers, and receivers had a built-in phono preamplifier with the RIAA characteristic, but it is often omitted in modern designs, due to the gradual obsolescence of vinyl records. Add-on phono preamplifiers with the RIAA equalization curve are available; these adapt a to an unbalanced −10 dBv consumer RCA input.
Web Page Development Tools
Some modern turntables feature built-in preamplification to the RIAA standard. Special preamplifiers are also available for the various equalization curves used on pre-1954 records. Often feature the ability to equalize audio samples using standard and custom equalization curves, removing the need for a dedicated hardware preamplifier when capturing audio with a computer. However, this can add an extra step in processing a sample, and may amplify audio quality deficiencies of the being used to capture the signal.
History Origins of pre-emphasis. This section does not any. Unsourced material may be challenged and. (December 2009) Equalization practice for electrical recordings dates to the beginning of the art. In 1926 Joseph P.
Maxwell and Henry C. Harrison from disclosed that the recording pattern of the 'rubber line' magnetic disc cutter had a constant velocity characteristic.
This meant that as frequency increased in the treble, recording amplitude decreased. Conversely, in the bass as frequency decreased, recording amplitude increased. Therefore, it was necessary to attenuate the bass frequencies below about 250, the bass turnover point, in the amplified microphone signal fed to the recording head.
Otherwise, bass modulation became excessive and overcutting took place, with the cutter into the next record groove. When played back electrically with a magnetic pickup having a smooth response in the bass region, a complementary boost in amplitude at the bass turnover point was necessary. Miller in 1934 reported that when complementary boost at the turnover point was used in radio broadcasts of records, the reproduction was more realistic and many of the musical instruments stood out in their true form. West in 1930 and later P. Voight (1940) showed that the early Wente-style contributed to a 4 to 6 dB midrange brilliance or pre-emphasis in the recording chain. This meant that the electrical recording characteristics of Western Electric licensees such as and had a higher amplitude in the midrange region. Brilliance such as this compensated for dullness in many early magnetic pickups having drooping midrange and treble response.
As a result, this practice was the empirical beginning of using above 1,000 Hz in 78 and 33 1⁄ 3 rpm records, some 29 years before the RIAA curve. Over the years a variety of record equalization practices emerged and there was no industry standard. For example, in Europe, for many years recordings required playback with a bass turnover setting of 250 to 300 Hz and a treble at 10,000 Hz ranging from 0 to −5 dB, or more. In the United States there were more varied practices and a tendency to use higher bass turnover frequencies, such as 500 Hz, as well as a greater treble rolloff like −8.5 dB, and more. The purpose was to record higher modulation levels on the record.
Standardization Evidence from the early technical literature concerning electrical recording suggests that it was not until the 1942–1949 period that there were serious efforts to standardize recording characteristics within an industry. Before this time, electrical recording technology from company to company was considered a proprietary art all the way back to the 1925 Western Electric licensed method first used by Columbia and Victor. For example, what Brunswick-Balke-Collender did was different from the practices of Victor. Broadcasters were faced with having to adapt daily to the varied recording characteristics of many sources: various makers of 'home recordings' readily available to the public, European recordings, lateral cut transcriptions, and vertical cut transcriptions.
Efforts were started in 1942 to standardize within the (NAB), later known as the National Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters (NARTB). The NAB, among other items, issued recording standards in 1949 for laterally and vertically cut records, principally transcriptions. A number of 78 rpm record producers as well as early LP makers also cut their records to the NAB/NARTB lateral standard. The lateral cut NAB curve was remarkably similar to the NBC Orthacoustic curve which evolved from practices within the National Broadcasting Company since the mid-1930s. Empirically, and not by any formula, it was learned that the bass end of the audio spectrum below 100 Hz could be boosted somewhat to override system hum and turntable rumble noises.
Likewise at the treble end beginning at 1,000 Hz, if audio frequencies were boosted by 16 dB at 10,000 Hz the delicate sibilant sounds of speech and high overtones of musical instruments could be heard despite the high background noise of discs. When the record was played back using a complementary inverse curve , signal to noise ratio was improved and the programming sounded more lifelike. In a related area, around 1940 treble pre-emphasis similar to that used in the NBC Orthacoustic recording curve was first employed by in his system of Frequency Modulation radio broadcasting. FM radio receivers using Armstrong circuits and treble de-emphasis would render high quality wide-range audio output with low noise levels.
When the Columbia LP was released in June 1948, the developers subsequently published technical information about the 33 1⁄ 3 rpm, microgroove, long playing record. Columbia disclosed a recording characteristic showing that it was like the NAB curve in the treble, but had more bass boost or pre-emphasis below 150 Hz. The authors disclosed electrical network characteristics for the Columbia LP curve. Nevertheless, the curve was not yet based on mathematical formulae, at least not explicitly.
In 1951, at the beginning of the post-World War II high fidelity (hi-fi) popularity, the Audio Engineering Society (AES) developed a standard playback curve. This was intended for use by hi-fi amplifier manufacturers. If records were engineered to sound good on hi-fi amplifiers using the AES curve, this would be a worthy goal towards standardization. This curve was defined by the transition frequencies of audio filters and had a pole at 2.5 kHz (approximately 63.7 µs) and a zero at 400 Hz (approximately 397.9 µs). RCA Victor and Columbia were in a 'market war' concerning which recorded format was going to win: the Columbia LP versus the RCA Victor 45 rpm disc (released in February 1949).
Besides also being a battle of disc size and record speed, there was a technical difference in the recording characteristics. RCA Victor was using 'New Orthophonic' whereas Columbia was using the LP curve. Ultimately the New Orthophonic curve was disclosed in a publication by R. Moyer of RCA Victor in 1953. He traced RCA Victor characteristics back to the Western Electric 'rubber line' recorder in 1925 up to the early 1950s laying claim to long-held recording practices and reasons for major changes in the intervening years. The RCA Victor New Orthophonic curve was within the tolerances for the NAB/NARTB, Columbia LP, and AES curves. It eventually became the technical predecessor to the RIAA curve.
Between 1953 and 1956 (before the stereo LP in 1958) several standards bodies around the world adopted the same playback curve—identical to the RCA Victor New Orthophonic curve—which became standard throughout the national and international record markets. However, although these standards were all identical, no universal name was used. One of the standard was called simply 'RIAA', and it is likely that this name was eventually adopted because it was memorable. It is possible that some niche record cutters were still using EQ curves other than the RIAA well into the 1970s. As a result, some audio manufacturers today produce Phono Equalizers with selectable EQ curves, including options for Columbia, Decca, CCIR, and TELDEC's. The Enhanced RIAA curve The official RIAA standard defines three time-constants with pre-emphasis rising indefinitely above 75 µs, but in practice this is not possible.
When the RIAA equalization standard was written the inherent bandwidth limitations of the recording equipment and cutting lathe imposed their own ultimate upper limit on the pre-emphasis characteristic, so no official upper limit was included in the RIAA definition. Modern systems have far wider potential bandwidth. An essential feature of all cutting lathes—including the Neumann cutting lathes—is a forcibly imposed high frequency roll-off above the audio band (20 kHz).
This implies two or more additional time constants to those defined by the RIAA curve. This is not standardized anywhere, but set by the maker of the cutting lathe and associated electronics. The so-called 'Enhanced RIAA' curve or 'eRIAA' curve attempts to provide complementary correction for these unofficial time constants upon playback.
Background In 1995 one non-academic source erroneously suggested that Neumann cutting lathes applied a single high-frequency pole at 3.18 µs (50 kHz) and that a complementary zero should therefore be included upon playback. However, no such pole exists. For example, the RIAA pre-emphasis in the popular Neumann SAB 74B equaliser reaches a maximum at 100 kHz, and in addition to this, the circuit also applies a second-order roll off at 49.9 kHz, implemented by a Butterworth (maximally flat) active filter, plus an additional pole at 482 kHz. This cannot be compensated for by a simple zero even if it were necessary, and in any case, other lathes will differ. Correction upon playback is not, in fact, required, as it is taken into account at the cutting stage when manual equalisation is applied while monitoring initial cuts on a standard RIAA playback system. Nevertheless, the use of the erroneous zero remains a subject of some debate among amateur enthusiasts. It is worth noting that many common phono preamplifier designs using negative feedback equalisation include an unintentional zero at high frequencies, similar to that proposed by Wright.
This was illustrated, for example, in the seminal 1980 work on RIAA Playback Equalisation by Lipshitz/Jung, though it was noted as unwanted. Some phono preamplifiers include additional circuitry to correct this and ensure that the output follows the RIAA curve accurately. In most, however, this is omitted. IEC RIAA curve In 1976, an alternative version of the replay curve (but not the recording curve) was proposed by the, differing from the RIAA replay curve only in the addition of a pole at 7950 µs (approximately 20 Hz). The justification was to reduce the subsonic output of the phono amplifier caused by disk warp and turntable rumble.
This so-called IEC Amendment to the RIAA curve is not universally seen as desirable, as it introduces considerable amplitude and—of more concern—phase errors into the low-frequency response during playback. The simple first-order roll-off also provides only very mild reduction of rumble, and many manufacturers consider that turntables, arm and cartridge combinations should be of sufficient quality for problems not to arise. Some manufacturers follow the IEC standard, others do not, while the remainder make this IEC-RIAA option user selectable. It remains subject to debate some 35 years later.
This IEC Amendment was withdrawn in June 2009, though. TELDEC/DIN Curve Telefunken and Decca founded a record company (Teldec) that used a characteristic proposed for German DIN-Standard on July 1957: DIN45533, DIN45536, DIN45537. It is similar, but not identical, to the RIAA. The extent of usage of this curve is unclear. Time constants: 3180 µs (50 Hz), 318 µs (500 Hz), and 50 µs (3183 Hz). Compare to RIAA time constants 3180 µs (50 Hz), 318 µs (500 Hz), and 75 µs (2122 Hz).
References Notes. Copeland, Peter (Sep 2008). London: The British Library. Archived from (PDF) on 2011-04-09.
^ 'Cut and Thrust: RIAA LP Equalization' by Keith Howard, Stereophile, Vol. 3, March 2009, pp. 53–62.
'On RIAA Equalization Networks' by Stanley P. Lipshitz, Journal of the AES, Vol.
6, June 1979, pp. 'AES Standard Playback Curve', Audio Engineering, Vol. 1, January 1951, pp.
'Evolution of a Recording Curve' by R. Moyer, Audio Engineering, Vol. 7, July 1953, pp. 19–22 and 53–54. 'Disc Playback Characteristics', Wireless World, April 1956, p. 'The Tube Preamp Cookbook' A. Wright, Vacuum State Electronics, 1995.
^ 'Small Signal Audio Design' D. Self, Elsevier, 2010.
'A High Accuracy Inverse RIAA Network' by Stanley Lipshitz and Walt Jung – The Audio Amateur, Issue 1/1980, pp. Amendment No. 4 to 'Processed Disk Records and Reproducing Equipment' (IEC 60098, 2nd Edition, January 1964), IEC Publication 60098/AMD4, Geneva, Switzerland, September 1976 (withdrawn in June 2009).
Bibliography. Powell, James R., Jr. The Audiophile's Technical Guide to 78 RPM, Transcription, and Microgroove Recordings. 1992; Gramophone Adventures, Portage, MI. Powell, James R., Jr. Broadcast Transcription Discs.
2001; Gramophone Adventures, Portage, MI. Powell, James R., Jr. And Randall G.
Playback Equalizer Settings for 78 RPM Recordings. Second Edition. 1993, 2001; Gramophone Adventures, Portage, MI. External links. Playback equalization for 78rpm shellacs and pre-RIAA LPs (EQ curves, index of record labels):.
Music-streaming software Aurous only, but it’s already being sued by the RIAA for “willful and egregious copyright infringement”, in a lawsuit that raises serious questions about the startup’s intentions. Some of the RIAA’s rhetoric is familiar – “This service is a flagrant example of a business model powered by copyright theft on a massive scale” explains its summary sent to journalists including Music Ally – but its allegations zero in on where Aurous is getting its music from. “By default, Defendants’ service directs users’ searches to what Defendants call ‘the Aurous Network’. The Aurous Network appears to consist of a single known pirate site based in Russia called Pleer,” claims the RIAA’s lawsuit, which notes that this site has been regularly complained about by Russian rightsholders. The lawsuit also notes that Aurous gives the option to search for music from MP3WithMe, VK and MP3Skull – all familiar foes for the music industry. The RIAA is seeking an injunction plus damages. “Like Grokster, Limewire or Grooveshark, it is neither licensed nor legal,” claimed the body.
Developer Software Tools
Aurous has responded with defiance. “Don’t worry, we’re not going anywhere, empty lawsuits aren’t going to stop the innovation of the next best media player,”. “For anyone curious the @RIAA principle complaint is that we’re ‘profiting’, anyone see any ads?
We sure don’t.” It went on to challenge music industry CEOs to arm-wrestle – “We win you drop your empty suit” – while developer Andrew Sampson: “Getting sued for 3 million when I haven’t made anything; thats how you know your idea was a good one.” Needless to say, Aurous and Sampson won’t be settling this lawsuit through arm-wrestling: and with no profits, the costs of defending the case could be ruinous in themselves. There are certainly questions to answer about the sources that Aurous is pulling from: Pleer and MP3Skull are a far cry from the legal aggregation of music via APIs from the likes of Spotify, YouTube and Apple Music that Sampson told Billboard about earlier this week: “We’re pulling content from sources that are licensed.” Such contradictions won’t help Aurous – hailed as ‘the Popcorn Time of music’ before its release in a comparison to the slick (but unlicensed) video-streaming service – seem like a good actor, even with its promises of a and tipping scheme for artist payments. One last thing, though. Aurous’ threat to the music industry is less grave than has been claimed. TorrentFreak, for example, on the grounds of catalogue and speed: “Yes, the Popcorn Time for music has arrived. Only it arrived more than half a decade ago, and it’s called Spotify,” claimed its early review. The music industry spends a lot of time thinking about how to make legal digital services ‘better than piracy’: well, if the hot new piracy thing is ‘worse than Spotify’ that’s encouraging.
Not that this could or should stop the RIAA from suing if it believes its case is strong; but it’s certainly a reason for rightsholders and musicians not to believe the more apocalyptic headlines out there about Aurous’ potential impact.