From: "Malcolm Rockwell" <[log in to unmask]>
> The one thing that's always puzzled me about both aluminum and glass
> bases, but especially glass. Why didn't the manufacturers put a light
> knurling or a fine sand-blasting etch on the side the lacquer adhered
> to? That would have given something for the flowed or sprayed lacquer to
> adhere to and we wouldn't be having the problems with flaking and
> peeling that we have now.
> Yeah, I know, that's all well and good in retrospect!
Actually, you just nailed the problem in your closing comment...! With
the exception of a few home-recorded copies of hit 78's, these discs
weren't expected to have a long lifespan; often they were just "step 1"
in mastering a commercial record...or were intended for a single use
In fact, the creators of commercial 78's didn't expect them to survive
the century-plus which they now have (or be worth the hundreds or
thousands of dollars that a few now bring...?!). An instantaneous-
recording copy of something was only (originally and in theory)
expected to last a single play; even the shellac record from which
it may have been copied was assumed to last not much more than
did its "hit" (if it WAS one?) status...?!
In fact, I can't help but wonder what would have been the reaction
of Robert Johnson, had he somehow learned that his recordings
would someday be worth several thousand dollars (probably more
money than he had ever seen in his entire life...?!)?
Steven C. Barr