Hey Henri,
For those of us who took Spanish....and still can't speak it....can we get a translation??....of the monologue, I mean. ;-)
Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Henri Chamoux
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 4:03 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The best of YouTube?
No catagorization, explanation or excuse for the Pétomane (Fart Man) record in 1904, maybe, but still audio material deserving preservation.
Excusable or not, another copy of the same fart man record is audible on the Phonobase and more or less this record may be taken as a historical source. As so it will have to remain available as well as recordings by Leo XIII or Claude Debussy...
The following excerpt is an answer from Alfred Clark, then director of the Compagnie française du Gramophone, to the Gramophone headquarters in London.
This was about another terrible monologue that I know... Maybe it gives more explanation or excuse :
"I am indeed sorry to find that it was eventually catalogued, and I am having the whole list of these songs gone over carefully, with the idea of striking off any others of the same kind, if they exist. I would say however, that in France it is very difficult to draw the line and to say just what is suitable for a catalogue, as the French standard of morals as regards comic songs, is not comparable to the English, and what seems to you quite improper, is taken in France without comment."
[Original preserved at EMI Group Archive Trust].
Henri Chamoux
Le 09/06/2016 04:02, David Lewis a écrit :
> Then, of course, there are things for which there is no
> categorization, explanation or excuse, like this:
>
> https://youtu.be/tixKopGjn5s
>
> David N. Lewis
>
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 7:00 AM, David Lewis<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Here's a few:
>>
>> Plattensammler88
>> MusicProf78
>> edmundusrex
>> Onkel Greifenklau
>> Ashot Arakelyan
>> Ryan Barna
>> Timo Gramophone
>> 2minute Albany Archive
>> Edmund StAustell
>> PartyRecords
>>
>> These I separate out as they are "hosted," but the hosts are
>> relatively interesting, if playback is less than ideal:
>>
>> marstonrecords
>> EMGColonel
>> MusicBoxBoy
>> David Lewis
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> David N. Lewis
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Dennis
>> Rooney<[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Steve,
>>>
>>> I don't know what if any circuit investigations have been made of
>>> the phono stages in the various brands of (radio)phonographs from
>>> the late twenties to 1955. It would certainly be a worthy effort and
>>> now would require tireless energy to locate surviving examples.
>>>
>>> The answer for now, however, is that what was cut in the groove was
>>> often at variance with how it sounded in playback on a contemporary
>>> commercial phonograph. Enough has been written about how sales
>>> departments wanted something that sounded smooth and rich, which
>>> usually meant heavy hf de-emphasis to suppress surface noise, high
>>> passed lf and a rather boomy mid-range. Mastering engineers seem to
>>> have chosen the curves they used irrespective of a company "sound".
>>> EMI was more consistent than either Victor or Columbia in this
>>> respect. After about 1932-35, everything became more standardized;
>>> however, about then or slightly later, Victor began employing
>>> limiter-compressors in their recording chain, which added a whole
>>> new set of variables.
>>>
>>> DDR
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Steven Smolian<[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi, Dennis,
>>>>
>>>> Is it correct to assume that the eq used by a given company at a
>>>> given time, on ethat made its own phonographs,
>>>>
>>>> When a record company also made phonographs, as so many of them did
>>>> through the late 340s anyhow, is it safe to assume that the
>>> non-adjustable
>>>> playback eq hard-wired into the playback amplifier matched what was
>>> used to
>>>> make that company's records at the time the amplifier schematic was
>>> drawn
>>>> up? And, if so, could these schematics be a source of accurate
>>>> playback curves for that company at that time?
>>>>
>>>> Steve Smolian
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
>>>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dennis Rooney
>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2016 12:06 PM To:[log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The best of YouTube?
>>>>
>>>> In fact, what emerged as the RIAA playback curve was one of those
>>>> originally published by Western Electric and used occasionally by
>>> Victor,
>>>> Columbia and HMV in the late twenties. However, it was used far
>>>> less
>>> than
>>>> those customarily associated with 78rpm playback
>>>>
>>>> DDR
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Lou Judson<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Of course it is standard procedure to not use RIAA curve on 78s.
>>>>> It should go without saying! It is only for Lps, and not all of
>>>>> those… <L> Lou Judson Intuitive Audio
>>>>> 415-883-2689
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 4, 2016, at 2:03 AM, Inigo Cubillo<[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> During many years I did direct tape transfers of 78s, with no
>>>>>> eq, and I always noticed a better sound from
>>>>> the
>>>>>> tapes than thru the RIAA amp, for the RIAA spoiled the sound due
>>>>>> to its
>>>>> eq,
>>>>>> while the sound on the tapes was direct from the ceramic cart.
>>>>>> Years
>>>>> after
>>>>>> I learned about eq for 78s and I realised this was the reason of
>>>>>> better sound on the tapes.
>>>>>> Saludos,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Inigo
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 1006 Langer Way
>>>> Delray Beach, FL 33483
>>>> 212.874.9626
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 1006 Langer Way
>>> Delray Beach, FL 33483
>>> 212.874.9626
>>>
--
--
Henri CHAMOUX
The many adventures of the Archeophone phonograph :http://www.archeophone.org/windex.php
École normale supérieure
LARHRA - UMR 5190
Pôle histoire numérique
Tel : 33 6 64 80 00 81
[log in to unmask]
http://larhra.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/membre/113
|