Here is a mystery: I have heard a radio interview with actor Buddy Rogers
that was aired on WLW Cincinnati that obviously -- from the sound of it --
came from tape; it was a continuous 17 minute interview with the telltale
echo of print thru. But when I dated the recording from events discussed in
the interview, I discovered that it couldn't have been conducted after
February 18, 1948, the date from which the film under discussion opened.
How would it be possible for WLW to have access to tape so early? Powel
Crosley was a multimillionaire, manufactured radio sets and recording
equipment already. Perhaps tape technology was offered to him early, but he
declined to exploit it? I have no idea.
Uncle Dave Lewis
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Don Cox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 22/06/2012, Jon Samuels wrote:
> > It isn't an easy question to answer as to which was better at RCA,
> > tape or disc. In 1949 recordings, I never found both a metal part and
> > a tape for the same matrix. Some were missing both, and only existed
> > in tape dubs. The 1949 and 1950 metal parts did not have the tell-tale
> > sign of starting up surface noise at the beginning of the disc, which
> > would indicate a dub, but that's not in and of itself absolute proof
> > that they not dubs from tape. Most 1949 recordings, tape or disc, did
> > not have particularly good sound. Sound in 1950 was better on both
> > tape and discs. If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that the 1949
> > disc recordings were not dubbed from tape, but that the 1950 disc
> > recordings were. As far as comparing 1950 tapes to 1947 metals (the
> > last known year for recording only onto disc), I'd say the tape sound
> > is marginally better. Some 1947 metals have fantastic sound, but the
> > 1950 tapes are more uniformly good. And tape sound
> > improved from 1950 through 1953 (when RCA starting recording
> > binaurally).
> > As a tangentially related point, when RCA made simultaneous lacquer
> > and wax disc recordings (which was not done uniformly at RCA like it
> > was done at Columbia), the lacquer discs are noticeably sonically
> > superior.
> Interesting. Thanks.
> Don Cox
> [log in to unmask]