LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  December 2013

ARSCLIST December 2013

Subject:

Re: Record equalization

From:

Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:36:22 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (132 lines)

Hi Steve:

I don't think recording EQ curves were all "cosmetic," even if the acoustic players couldn't reverse 
them.

As I understand it, the electronic systems were capable of more level and much more low-frequency 
energy than the horns. So I think they needed to employ bass reduction into the cutter so as to 
produce trackable records and also to allow for 3-minute sides. I don't know if they were at all 
uniform about treble emphasis until the 1930s. Also, as Dennis pointed out, there were several 
recommended emphasis curves, and different engineers went in different directions. The difference 
from the later 78 era (1940s) was that those early curves appear to be undocumented or poorly 
documented, although Mike Biel indicates otherwise at Victor.

To my ears, the best 78-era transfers involved a lot of taste on the transfer engineer or producer 
parts. Eq'ing so the tone of instruments or voices is as natural as possible in a low-fidelity 
setting and using various tools to tastefully eliminate playback noise, these are definitely an art 
as much as a craft.

Bottom line, there are many older-era electricly-recorded records that need a custom curve, settings 
unlike any published curves to sound best.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven Smolian" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record equalization


> In this context, equalization has two meanings.  I'm making up the
> definitions here.
>
> 1. An alteration in the electrical signal applied before the recording
> occurs, to be reversed upon playback. Objective.
>
> 2. Cosmetic alteration of the audio signal.  The intent is to make it sound
> better.  Subjective.
>
> From Dennis' data it appears that, since the machines of the time were
> incapable of inverting the change to the recorded audio signal, its use was
> as in No. 2 above.
>
> My inqiry is specific to No. 1 above.
>
> Steve Smolian
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Biel
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 12:41 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record equalization
>
> Dennis' info is important because I think it is part of the technical info
> encoded on the Victor ledger sheets that is being IGNORED by the Victor
> discographical project.  Nick Bergh did a presentation at ARSC 2 years ago
> which shows that he has gone a long way to understanding that ledger
> technical information.  Of course it all means nothing without access to the
> info on the ledger sheets for the particular recording -- and librarians and
> archivists do not consider technical info to be "discographically
> significant".
>
> Mike Biel  [log in to unmask]
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record equalization
> From: John Haley <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, December 19, 2013 10:55 am
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Steve, won't your ears tell you whether phono-EQ was used or not? It can
> sometimes be hard to tell which EQ setting was used, when some EQ setting
> was used, but usually not so hard to tell if no EQ was used. That's not a
> small difference. As in many cases of determining EQ, the ears are the most
> reliable equipment.
>
> Best, John
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Dennis Rooney
> <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
>> When Western Electric brought electrical recording to Victor and
>> Columbia, several turnover/rolloff combinations were suggested, viz.
>> 300/0, 500/-10, 800/-10 and 500/-13.5. The choice was up to the
>> cutting engineer and examples of all the above were used from 1925. At
>> this point, it is useful to reiterate that there was no such thing as
>> a "standard" equalization for playback of 78rpm discs, although there was
> some stabilization by c1930.
>>
>> DDR
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Steve Smolian <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Do we know if the early commercial electrics by Victor and HMV used
>> > any equalization? Since there was no commercial record player on the
>> > home market that used an amplifier until November, 1925, there's an
>> > April-October or later period where there is no means of introducing
>> > a circuit that inverts any electronic change from what reached the
>> > cutting head.
>> >
>> > The record companies would not abandon the record market which used
>> > the acoustic playback process for half a year or create a product
>> > that
>> sounded
>> > poor on the installed base of home players. Yes the acoustic
>> Orthophonics
>> > were available by then but few could afford them.
>> >
>> > If this is so, such 78s should be played back flat.
>> >
>> > Any hard data on this question?
>> >
>> > Steve Smolian
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 1006 Langer Way
>> Delray Beach, FL 33483
>> 212.874.9626
>>
>
> 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager