No, I think he was saying your argument is ludicrous since the 45RPM LP is what he says is the best
source. Therefore proving my point about late-era 78's, that in most cases they will be the
worst-case/worst-quality example and therefore are needed only as an absolutely last resort.
In any case, I wasn't advocating dumpstering anything, just saying that the late-era 78 material
would not be what I'd take to a desert island or care about very much unless, as I clearly stated
has been the case a couple of times, that was the only extant source for something.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Richter" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 2:11 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] National Recording Preservation Board (NRPB) Study
> David Lennick wrote:
>> Mike Richter wrote:
>> Tom Fine wrote:
>> > Well, one question immediately comes to mind. Who CARES about 78's
>> > issued after the advent of tape (1947-48), unless the tape master has
>> > been lost? Even if only a good-condition LP exists (post-1948), it is
>> > almost guaranteed to sound better and have a wider frequency/dynamic
>> > range than the 78. So I ask again, who cares about what's gotta be the
>> > vast majority of late-era 78's? I mean, they might make a nice novelty,
>> > but they have little or no historical value since they're a
>> > worst-case/obsolete-technology version of something.
>> Matter of fact, this argument is ludicrous. The only good-sounding original issue of "South
>> Pacific" was the 45-RPM set. The 78s are overmodulated, the first LP pressings sound like short
>> wave, the subsequent ones keep adding layers of echo, the CD issues were a disaster, proving that
>> Sony may own the rights and the original master but doesn't know its acetates from a hole in the
>> ground about what to do with them. Anyone want to challenge me on this, meet me out back.
> I think David means that Tom Fine's position is ludicrous - since David and I are in agreement.
> There is no reason to assume that the source materials still exist. I know of at least one case in
> which there are no masters for a series of substantial opera recordings and that the publisher
> does not even have clean copies of many of the LPs. (I've not yet determined whether they are
> without any copy of some titles.)
> The record companies (and film companies) have a shameful record of failing to keep master
> materials. Those that have been retained may not have been stored adequately. I have often been
> called on to supply transfers from my own copies for performers who have been told that the
> publisher has nothing from which to provide a copy.
> So it may well be that the reason recent issues of "South Pacific" have had poor sound is that the
> publishers no longer have copies of the 45s or of the tape from which they were made.
> [log in to unmask]