Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

LP to CD on MAC -- best software?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
August 29, 2005 11:32:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have recently moved to a MAC and want to get back to recording my old
LPs so I can burn to CD, use in iTunes, ...

I knew how to do this on my PC so understand the hook up. What I need
advice on is the recording software. On PC I used Goldwave and EZCD
Creator 5 but they don't exist for MAC.

I see that Roxio has Toast Titanium, Toast with Jam and Boom Box but
can't figure out which of these is best for me or if there is another
program I should get.

I'm running OS X 10.3.9 and have iTunes 4.9 and plan to bring the music
in to a USB port with a Griffin iMic.

Any suggestions would be great.

Thanks

More about : mac software

August 30, 2005 6:11:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

by far your weakest link is the iMic.... at the very least you should
take a record out (tape out) if one is available on whatever plays
your LPs (dual RCA to stereo mini 1/8 inch phone plug) into the audio
line in on your mac. I also use soundstudio from felttip software.
You can mark each song, then edit--split by markers-- and have
individual tracks to burn to a CD. Drop them into toast titanium and
hit record....

peter
On 29 Aug 2005 07:32:32 -0700, "james.mcnee"
<james.mcnee@sympatico.ca> wrote:

>I have recently moved to a MAC and want to get back to recording my old
>LPs so I can burn to CD, use in iTunes, ...
>
>I knew how to do this on my PC so understand the hook up. What I need
>advice on is the recording software. On PC I used Goldwave and EZCD
>Creator 5 but they don't exist for MAC.
>
>I see that Roxio has Toast Titanium, Toast with Jam and Boom Box but
>can't figure out which of these is best for me or if there is another
>program I should get.
>
>I'm running OS X 10.3.9 and have iTunes 4.9 and plan to bring the music
>in to a USB port with a Griffin iMic.
>
>Any suggestions would be great.
>
>Thanks
Related resources
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 10:56:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

james.mcnee <james.mcnee@sympatico.ca> wrote:


> I'm running OS X 10.3.9 and have iTunes 4.9 and plan to bring the music
> in to a USB port with a Griffin iMic.

If you haven't bought an iMic yet, you might want to look at what else
is on the market. The iMic is a dreadful piece of kit; it just about
works on line input and is useless on microphones.

http://www.poppyrecords.co.uk/other/imic/imicmods.htm

--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 4:07:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Thanks Peter.

I have had my doubts about the iMic. The advantage was supposed to be
a built in pre amp but ...

So you think I'm better off going out from my amplifier and into my
iMac's "line in?"

Is the built in sound card up to the game?
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 7:54:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> james.mcnee <james.mcnee@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Peter.
> >
> > I have had my doubts about the iMic. The advantage was supposed to be
> > a built in pre amp but ...
> >
> > So you think I'm better off going out from my amplifier and into my
> > iMac's "line in?"
> >
> > Is the built in sound card up to the game?
>
> Most Mac internal sound cards are quite good enough for re-recording LPs
> - and anything's going to be an improvement on the iMic.
>
> --
> ~ Adrian Tuddenham ~

And for Macs that don't have audio in (iBooks, Minis, etc.), what is
the best way to connect up?

bob
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 2:57:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

james.mcnee <james.mcnee@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> Thanks Peter.
>
> I have had my doubts about the iMic. The advantage was supposed to be
> a built in pre amp but ...
>
> So you think I'm better off going out from my amplifier and into my
> iMac's "line in?"
>
> Is the built in sound card up to the game?

Most Mac internal sound cards are quite good enough for re-recording LPs
- and anything's going to be an improvement on the iMic.

--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 12:45:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<nabob33@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> > james.mcnee <james.mcnee@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Peter.
> > >
> > > I have had my doubts about the iMic. The advantage was supposed to be
> > > a built in pre amp but ...
> > >
> > > So you think I'm better off going out from my amplifier and into my
> > > iMac's "line in?"
> > >
> > > Is the built in sound card up to the game?
> >
> > Most Mac internal sound cards are quite good enough for re-recording LPs
> > - and anything's going to be an improvement on the iMic.
> >
> > --
> > ~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
>
> And for Macs that don't have audio in (iBooks, Minis, etc.), what is
> the best way to connect up?

There seem to be a number of external USB interface boxes on the market;
some with simple audio inputs, others with more complex mixing and other
facilities. I seem to remember seeing one device that included RIAA
equalisation, so a gramophone pickup could be plugged directly into it.
Sorry I don't remember who made it.

There is no single 'best' device, they all seem to be good value for
money and I haven't heard complaints about any of them except the iMic
[1]. You decide which facilities you absolutely must have, which you
would rather like to have - and how much you are prepared to pay. Check
that the device you are buying will work with the OS version on your
Mac.



[1] The iMic looks attractive because it is the most basic
single-input device; but believe me it is dreadful. It contains some of
the most basic design errors I have ever had the misfortune to try to
overcome. Having said that, I must admit that it will scrape through
with an adequate performance when it is used with a suitable level of
line input, but it doesn't even have a gain control.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 1:54:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

james.mcnee wrote:
> I have recently moved to a MAC and want to get back to recording my old
> LPs so I can burn to CD, use in iTunes, ...
>
> I knew how to do this on my PC so understand the hook up. What I need
> advice on is the recording software. On PC I used Goldwave and EZCD
> Creator 5 but they don't exist for MAC.
>
> I see that Roxio has Toast Titanium, Toast with Jam and Boom Box but
> can't figure out which of these is best for me or if there is another
> program I should get.
>
> I'm running OS X 10.3.9 and have iTunes 4.9 and plan to bring the music
> in to a USB port with a Griffin iMic.
>
> Any suggestions would be great.
>

It may be beyond your price range but I've been using a Sound Devices
USB Pre and it's one NICE piece of gear. Excellent-sounding preamps, a
variety of settings, and well made. I made a couple of CDs from LPs and
the people I gave them to were very surprised when I let them know that
the originals were LP.

I think the software I used was Sound Studio although I played with a
bunch of stuff and frankly wasn't happy with most of it.

Also, you're probably already aware but the LP pressing quality, the
turntable, cartridge and particularly alignment will likely affect the
transfer more than anything else.

Karl Winkler
Lectrosonics, Inc.
http://www.lectrosonics.com
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 4:17:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Adrian Tuddenham wrote:

> [1] The iMic looks attractive because it is the most basic
> single-input device; but believe me it is dreadful. It contains some of
> the most basic design errors I have ever had the misfortune to try to
> overcome. Having said that, I must admit that it will scrape through
> with an adequate performance when it is used with a suitable level of
> line input, but it doesn't even have a gain control.

Thanks for your very informative response. Based on the link you posted
earlier, the iMic is clearly deficient as a mike input. But using a
line-level input from a phono preamp would appear to make most of its
faults largely irrelevant. If you do professional, or even serious
amateur, production work, this is not the right tool for the job. But
if all you're doing is converting LPs, it may well suffice. And my
brief survey of the marketplace suggests that better performance will
come only at a substantial price premium.

bob
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 6:36:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> <nabob33@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> >
> > > [1] The iMic looks attractive because it is the most basic
> > > single-input device; but believe me it is dreadful. It contains some of
> > > the most basic design errors I have ever had the misfortune to try to
> > > overcome. Having said that, I must admit that it will scrape through
> > > with an adequate performance when it is used with a suitable level of
> > > line input, but it doesn't even have a gain control.
> >
> > Thanks for your very informative response. Based on the link you posted
> > earlier, the iMic is clearly deficient as a mike input. But using a
> > line-level input from a phono preamp would appear to make most of its
> > faults largely irrelevant. If you do professional, or even serious
> > amateur, production work, this is not the right tool for the job. But
> > if all you're doing is converting LPs, it may well suffice. And my
> > brief survey of the marketplace suggests that better performance will
> > come only at a substantial price premium.
>
>
> Good summary.
>
> Bear in mind that you will almost certainly need some way of controlling
> the output level from the phono preamp, otherwise you risk over-driving
> or under-driving the a/d converter in the iMic.

Which would suggest that you are better off using your pre-out rather
than your tape-out from your preamp. Many non-professionals (me, for
example) would assume that the tape-out would be the logical way to go.

bob
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 1:45:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<nabob33@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
>
> > [1] The iMic looks attractive because it is the most basic
> > single-input device; but believe me it is dreadful. It contains some of
> > the most basic design errors I have ever had the misfortune to try to
> > overcome. Having said that, I must admit that it will scrape through
> > with an adequate performance when it is used with a suitable level of
> > line input, but it doesn't even have a gain control.
>
> Thanks for your very informative response. Based on the link you posted
> earlier, the iMic is clearly deficient as a mike input. But using a
> line-level input from a phono preamp would appear to make most of its
> faults largely irrelevant. If you do professional, or even serious
> amateur, production work, this is not the right tool for the job. But
> if all you're doing is converting LPs, it may well suffice. And my
> brief survey of the marketplace suggests that better performance will
> come only at a substantial price premium.


Good summary.

Bear in mind that you will almost certainly need some way of controlling
the output level from the phono preamp, otherwise you risk over-driving
or under-driving the a/d converter in the iMic.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 1:24:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<nabob33@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> > <nabob33@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> > >
> > > > [1] The iMic looks attractive because it is the most basic
> > > > single-input device; but believe me it is dreadful. It contains some of
> > > > the most basic design errors I have ever had the misfortune to try to
> > > > overcome. Having said that, I must admit that it will scrape through
> > > > with an adequate performance when it is used with a suitable level of
> > > > line input, but it doesn't even have a gain control.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your very informative response. Based on the link you posted
> > > earlier, the iMic is clearly deficient as a mike input. But using a
> > > line-level input from a phono preamp would appear to make most of its
> > > faults largely irrelevant. If you do professional, or even serious
> > > amateur, production work, this is not the right tool for the job. But
> > > if all you're doing is converting LPs, it may well suffice. And my
> > > brief survey of the marketplace suggests that better performance will
> > > come only at a substantial price premium.
> >
> >
> > Good summary.
> >
> > Bear in mind that you will almost certainly need some way of controlling
> > the output level from the phono preamp, otherwise you risk over-driving
> > or under-driving the a/d converter in the iMic.
>
> Which would suggest that you are better off using your pre-out rather
> than your tape-out from your preamp. Many non-professionals (me, for
> example) would assume that the tape-out would be the logical way to go.

Sorry I can't help you on that one, I've never used a commercial pre-amp
(I design my own systems for non-standard applications). Perhaps
someone else on this group will be able to contribute some practical
experience.

If you don't get an answer, I imagine it would be very little trouble
for you to try it both ways and see which one works best.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 3:25:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> <nabob33@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> > > <nabob33@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > [1] The iMic looks attractive because it is the most basic
> > > > > single-input device; but believe me it is dreadful. It contains some of
> > > > > the most basic design errors I have ever had the misfortune to try to
> > > > > overcome. Having said that, I must admit that it will scrape through
> > > > > with an adequate performance when it is used with a suitable level of
> > > > > line input, but it doesn't even have a gain control.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your very informative response. Based on the link you posted
> > > > earlier, the iMic is clearly deficient as a mike input. But using a
> > > > line-level input from a phono preamp would appear to make most of its
> > > > faults largely irrelevant. If you do professional, or even serious
> > > > amateur, production work, this is not the right tool for the job. But
> > > > if all you're doing is converting LPs, it may well suffice. And my
> > > > brief survey of the marketplace suggests that better performance will
> > > > come only at a substantial price premium.
> > >
> > >
> > > Good summary.
> > >
> > > Bear in mind that you will almost certainly need some way of controlling
> > > the output level from the phono preamp, otherwise you risk over-driving
> > > or under-driving the a/d converter in the iMic.
> >
> > Which would suggest that you are better off using your pre-out rather
> > than your tape-out from your preamp. Many non-professionals (me, for
> > example) would assume that the tape-out would be the logical way to go.
>
> Sorry I can't help you on that one, I've never used a commercial pre-amp
> (I design my own systems for non-standard applications). Perhaps
> someone else on this group will be able to contribute some practical
> experience.

Tape-out is generally line-level and unaffected by the preamp's volume
control. (Recording levels set by the tape deck, of course.) Pre-out is
intended to feed an amplifier, and is affected by volume/tone controls.

As a practical matter, I suppose it's possible that tape-out from a
preamp would typically give you a signal level that wouldn't overload
the ADC, but would be high enough to capture whatever dynamic range is
available on the LP. If that's the case, that would be yet another
reason to deem the iMic adequate for this particular task.

bob
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 12:45:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

My experiences with the iMic have been fine.

My specific gear:
Thorens 124 w/ Audio Technica AT440ML cartrige to Pioneer VSX4500S reciever
phono pre amp. Tape out of reciever to iMic. iMic to iBook. Sound Studio
software. AIFF files to iTunes to burn CD or convert to MP3

Never had an issue where the receiver tape out level was so hot it clipped
the iMic, nor so low that i couldn't get clean gain in Sound Studio.

YMMV
Anonymous
September 10, 2005 3:52:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

i plan on doing something like this soon, as well. very good info,
guys.

i was going to dedicate an old 8100-G3/500 upgrad with an audiomedia II
Nubus card, a soundcraftsman preamp and a Numark DJ turntable and as
yet unidentified shure cartridge.

the AM II is audio -10, but what's the output considerations of a
standard run-o-the-mill home stereo preamp (that has an adjustable
on-board phono pre) and the AM II? tape out and rock 'n roll?

TIA,

gary0
Anonymous
September 10, 2005 5:48:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 1 Sep 2005 14:36:56 -0700, nabob33@hotmail.com wrote:

>> Bear in mind that you will almost certainly need some way of controlling
>> the output level from the phono preamp, otherwise you risk over-driving
>> or under-driving the a/d converter in the iMic.
>
>Which would suggest that you are better off using your pre-out rather
>than your tape-out from your preamp. Many non-professionals (me, for
>example) would assume that the tape-out would be the logical way to go.

If pre-out is affected by the volume control, fine.

If you want to get quality audio into a computer, optimum levels are
your paramount consideration. A mixer with metering is practically
essential.
Anonymous
September 11, 2005 8:51:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<oleyar@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126378325.197020.53020@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> i plan on doing something like this soon, as well. very
> good info, guys.
>
> i was going to dedicate an old 8100-G3/500 upgrad with an
> audiomedia II Nubus card, a soundcraftsman preamp and a
> Numark DJ turntable and as yet unidentified shure
> cartridge.
>
> the AM II is audio -10, but what's the output
> considerations of a standard run-o-the-mill home stereo
> preamp (that has an adjustable on-board phono pre) and
> the AM II? tape out and rock 'n roll?

I find that the preamp main out, and its volume control, is
the better choice.
Anonymous
September 11, 2005 11:53:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

We shouldn't forger an obvious solution. The op had a pc that he was
using before. Why not go on using it?
!