Do you really need an external EQ with an original machine?

[Samjarl141]

Hi everyone!
I apologize for starting this up, but as someone who has wanted to make 78s since I was a little boy, I've had so many questions. I will start with this major question. Say I were to get a presto machine, such as a K8 with a 5c head, and it were fully functioning and everything worked as it should. Would I need to record with some type of external EQ as opposed to just plugging in my phone and recording straight to the disc? I want a machine that I can pick up, take to a performance, plug the signal from the mixer in, and record without having to fiddle around with a PC and setting up curves. or set up a single mic in a room and have the band play around it. am i just dreaming that something like this should work, or am i not completely out of my mind?
Thank any of you all for any answers to this!

[EmAtChapterV]

"fully functioning and everything worked as it should"

That's the big "if". And if it's true, you'll get something mid-fi, likely rolling off sharply below 80 Hz and above 8 kHz, with a high midrange peak. Back in the 50s, unless you were a pro studio with expensive alignment instrumentation, you'd get somewhere in the vicinity of the RIAA curve give or take 6 dB and call it "ehh, close enough as long as it's loud". If that's good enough for you 70 years later (assuming nothing in the cutting system has deteriorated from age), more power to you... but modern gear (whether in-the-box or outboard) can easily get things much much closer to standard now.

[displacedsnail]

I can chip in here, as I have a fully functional, restored Rek-O-Kut Challenger that's similar to the K8/5C combo you're thinking of buying. While a different machine, the head also rolls off around 8khz, and so the quality of the discs would likely be similar to those you can make with the K8. It'll be worth checking, too, if the K8 can make lead in/out grooves and lock-grooves, I'm not sure, but if it can't do any of those, you might end up with some weird records.

I'd say that when I'm running a full system of plugins and EQ through a powerful, new amp to my Presto 6D with a JE-1D (new build Johnny Electric head) and using an external motor, a casual music fan would be hard-pressed to hear the difference between one of my mono records and a traditional record.

When I'm running a full system of plugins and EQ through a new amp to the ROK with it's original head and using an external motor, I can probably hit about 75% fidelity of a pressed record, but it's going to be missing a lot of the highs and clarity, and the volume is a good bit lower. It'll sound pretty great for what it is, and the novelty of it is awesome if you're not cutting records any other way, but from a this-is-kind-of-my-job-now perspective, I only use this system when doing live-cutting events.

The times I've run straight from my phone/laptop/mixer to the original ROK amp, using the original amp EQ and straight to the cutting head, I usually get a pretty quiet record with relative distortion, some wow/flutter from the motor, and the records sound kind of under water. You know, one new year for fun I cut some copies of a 1940s recording of Auld Lang Syne using the original setup and they sounded great for what they were, but you're looking at maybe 60% fidelity of a pressed record. It's going to be more of a novelty product than something you'll likely listen to, particularly since recording live or from phones requires even more fine-tuning.

You know, if you can find a machine for a few hundred bucks and you love to tinker with machines, it's a great way to get started and a lot of fun. You can make some cool records. For how expensive these machines can be, and how finicky they are to repair and get working, it might not be worth it to you.

P.S. when I do live-cutting events, I go all analog bay-bee, so you don't have to bring a computer, you can use analog EQ and compressors to make pretty decent records on the spot, too.

[Samjarl141]

I can chip in here, as I have a fully functional, restored Rek-O-Kut Challenger that's similar to the K8/5C combo you're thinking of buying. While a different machine, the head also rolls off around 8khz, and so the quality of the discs would likely be similar to those you can make with the K8. It'll be worth checking, too, if the K8 can make lead in/out grooves and lock-grooves, I'm not sure, but if it can't do any of those, you might end up with some weird records.

I'd say that when I'm running a full system of plugins and EQ through a powerful, new amp to my Presto 6D with a JE-1D (new build Johnny Electric head) and using an external motor, a casual music fan would be hard-pressed to hear the difference between one of my mono records and a traditional record.

When I'm running a full system of plugins and EQ through a new amp to the ROK with it's original head and using an external motor, I can probably hit about 75% fidelity of a pressed record, but it's going to be missing a lot of the highs and clarity, and the volume is a good bit lower. It'll sound pretty great for what it is, and the novelty of it is awesome if you're not cutting records any other way, but from a this-is-kind-of-my-job-now perspective, I only use this system when doing live-cutting events.

The times I've run straight from my phone/laptop/mixer to the original ROK amp, using the original amp EQ and straight to the cutting head, I usually get a pretty quiet record with relative distortion, some wow/flutter from the motor, and the records sound kind of under water. You know, one new year for fun I cut some copies of a 1940s recording of Auld Lang Syne using the original setup and they sounded great for what they were, but you're looking at maybe 60% fidelity of a pressed record. It's going to be more of a novelty product than something you'll likely listen to, particularly since recording live or from phones requires even more fine-tuning.

You know, if you can find a machine for a few hundred bucks and you love to tinker with machines, it's a great way to get started and a lot of fun. You can make some cool records. For how expensive these machines can be, and how finicky they are to repair and get working, it might not be worth it to you.

P.S. when I do live-cutting events, I go all analog bay-bee, so you don't have to bring a computer, you can use analog EQ and compressors to make pretty decent records on the spot, too.

Thank you so much for your response. i am aiming for quality similar to say, the early electric recordings of the late 20s and mid 30s. i believe that the mics of that time and the cutting heads on those machines only went to about 8-10khz in the late 20s or so. i also don't mind having standard 3.0 mil grooves as i am a 78 collector and have the proper equipment to play the larger grooves back. i was also wondering what you mean by 60% or 75% of a pressed record? only that percentage of like an LP or modern pressing or a pressed 78 from the 20s 0r 30s? i really want to try to get that early electric era sound. so like those early jazz recordings or early country and blues style! am i wrong in thinking that if a machine such as the k8 or k10 has been rebuilt, and everything has been gone over that i could get results that sound similar if not slightly better than this era of recording? also i am aware that they were recording to wax masters and the whole process with that sort of thing. i apologize for going on and on but this is something ive been wondering and wanted to discuss since i was in jr highschool and its been very difficult to discuss with some people in the community whithout feeling like an idiot.

[Samjarl141]

"fully functioning and everything worked as it should"

That's the big "if". And if it's true, you'll get something mid-fi, likely rolling off sharply below 80 Hz and above 8 kHz, with a high midrange peak. Back in the 50s, unless you were a pro studio with expensive alignment instrumentation, you'd get somewhere in the vicinity of the RIAA curve give or take 6 dB and call it "ehh, close enough as long as it's loud". If that's good enough for you 70 years later (assuming nothing in the cutting system has deteriorated from age), more power to you... but modern gear (whether in-the-box or outboard) can easily get things much much closer to standard now.

Thank you so much for the reply! i was told that these kinds of machines were used for some semi-professional released 78 albums like the Library of Congress sets of indigenous music from the u.s. i am trying to get a sound likt those mid 20s and 30s early electric recordings. am i crazy in thinking that a k8 or a k10 would sound similar or better than the recordings of the early electric era? im very open to hearing facts and the details as i am really interested in hearing the why and how of this.

[Big Al]

I think if you had a machine that was restored to original spec then it should be possible to get a similar sound to the albums you mentioned that were recorded on the same machine.

I think when people are comparing the sound quality of ‘pressed records’ they are more than likely referencing high quality recordings perhaps from the 70’s onwards not 78’s from the 20’s that have a different quality.

Another thing to consider is the rest of the recording chain (not just EQ) that will effect the outcome.
The mic, and especially the pre amp for the mic will potentially have as much impact on the final disk sound as an external EQ.

[displacedsnail]

That's true, I was comparing them to modern records. It might be worth looking around these forums as well for cutting needles that would replicate that 78 sound. Modern music has so much space and energy, it might be hard to reproduce a 20s sound by cutting a band live through modern technology, but I'll tell you one thing - I haven't regretted anything I've tried with the lathes and I'm usually having fun!

I thought if I did some digging I could find some examples. I've attached two versions I'd cut of the song Heart Full of Love by garage jazz band The Blind Seekers. The first I cut on my Presto machine about a year ago. It's not the best recording or digitization, and my newer versions sound much cleaner, but it sounds good. This head rolls off around 12k and there's no wow or flutter, recorded at 33. I did my usual rounds of EQ - but again, much more basic than how I'm cutting now.

*Edit - I actually have a lathe rip of this song I did this year with my new EQ regime, so you can really see the progression of the cuts, ha!

The next was cut on a 1939 ROK before I took it apart and converted it to cut modern records. It was recorded at 78rpm (actually, more like 76), through a head that rolls off at 8k, like the 5C. Now, this head hadn't been serviced yet and was a little crunchy. The only EQ I did was an IRIAA curve between the laptop and computer.

I love the way the 1939 cut sounds, but anything other than this lo-fi garage jazz might not sound as good being so lo-fi, haha.

- Joe