LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


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 2010

ARSCLIST December 2010

Subject:

Re: Rachmaninoff Concerto #2 recording by the composer

From:

Roger Kulp <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Tue, 7 Dec 2010 16:27:20 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (156 lines)

There is a 12" acoustic set from 1924.

Roger

 





________________________________
From: Michael Biel <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tue, December 7, 2010 5:19:57 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Rachmaninoff Concerto #2 recording by the composer

Since I was directly involved, let me give the details.  The 1924
acoustical version was issued a disc at a time, not as a set, and they
never got the set finished before electrical recording came in.  They
have metal parts and pressings, both shellac and vinyl, but for decades
nobody had ever seen the parts for the unissued side.   Finally, during
a trip to the Victor vaults to pull parts for the Stokowski society,
Mark Obert-Thorn got the bright idea to look in the TEN-INCH section,
and by golly, there were the missing parts for the side.  The new
versions of the CD include it instead of the electrical side.  I don't
have the sheets for the session at hand and do not know if they give
horn info.  



However, this is only the story about the acoustical recording.  My part
of the story is the electrical one.  When RCA put out the first CD issue
of the 2nd it was done while John Pfeiffer was on vacation.  When he
returned, the completed and issued CD was on his desk, and according to
Mike Gray, he hit the roof.  He was furious.  It sounded HORRIABLE. 
They had used the forked stylus to play the metals and it was a dreadful
transfer.  He immediately withdrew the CD but luckily I was able to find
a copy.  It is DREADFUL.  Next step was to dump the RCA engineers and
contract Ward Marston do do another transfer.  He did and the resultant
issue has the exact same number and packaging as the first -- it doesn't
even say RE.


About a year earlier I had found a scroll label set.  I had always
wondered why the four ring label sets I had did not have oval VE logos
except for side eight.  This set had the oval VE logo on all ten sides. 
I then checked the take numbers.  EVERY ONE WAS DIFFERENT except for
side eight.  The differences are minor, but most noticable is on side
ten where there is a section where several runs of notes are played
one-at-a-time-in-perfect-rhythm.  On the take used for the scroll label
set they are in precise proper rhythm.  In the ring set there is one
note that is played out of rhythm.  Checking every LP version and the
first CD, the rhythm was broken.


Then, before I had a chance to get the reissued CD, I saw that Musical
Heritage Society was offering it on their label so I got it.  It is
licensed from BMG and credits Ward.  And the notes are in absolutely
perfect rhythm.  I called Ward up.  First of all, he was astonished it
was on MHS because they didn't tell him or PAY him for it.  Then I asked
him what masters he used.  He told me it was his personal Z shellac set.
And no, he hadn't bothered to ask anybody to read the take numbers, and
he never reported to Victor what takes he used.  They still listed the
old set of take numbers, not the ones Ward actually used.


I checked the session sheets.  I first went to the manila artist folder
which compiles all the recordings of a performer.  The session sheet
lists the later set of takes as M for master.  If that is true, why do
the EARLIER pressings have a different set of masters?  Answer, the
sheet in the artist folder is a forgery.  I went to the ORIGINAL session
sheets still in the binders.  Those sheets show that the scroll label
takes were the M takes, with one or two other takes on all sides except
side eight are marked HC, or Hold Conditional.  Other takes -- some
sides had four takes -- were marked D for Destroy.  On side eight there
were only two takes, one was marked M and the other was marked D.  We
checked the computerized warehouse inventory, and most of the takes that
were not marked D still exist.

Next thing I know I get a phone call from Mark Obert-Thorn.  He does not
have any ring label sets and could I loan him mine so he could put out
an ALTERNATE RACHMANINOFF CD.  I did, and he did Biddulph LHW-036. Mark
also remastered the proper set of takes on Naxos Historical 8.110601.  

Last year at ARSC when I had the chance to meet Ward Marston in person
(we had only had phone calls and letters) when I introduced myself he
immediatly responded with "Oh, Mr. Alternate Rach Two!"  


Mike Biel  [log in to unmask]





  -------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Rachmaninoff Concerto #2 recording by the
composer
From: Karl Miller <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, December 07, 2010 5:04 pm
To: [log in to unmask]

--- On Tue, 12/7/10, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Rachmaninoff Concerto #2 recording by the composer
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 3:13 PM


Factual information on the following questions much appreciated.

1. The date listed for the Rachmaninoff-Stokowski recording on the 1992
CD reissue is 1924. So this is originally an acoustic recording? Any
information on how this was done, for instance were multiple horns used?
Where was it done?

2. Any information on the source material and the transfer methods used
for the 1992 CD reissue?

3. Any information on the source material and the transfer methods used
for the RCA reissue LP LCT 1014?

*************************************************************
  
I will look up the exact information when I get home, but for starters,
he recorded the Second Concerto acoustically and then electrically.
There is an interesting story about the first (to the best of my
knowledge) LP issue of the acoustic recording. It was part of a multi
disc set of the "Complete" Rachmaninoff. Yet, it did not include the
piano rolls. When they issued the acoustic recording on LP they "could
not find" the last disc of the first movement. That was because they
were looking in the file of 12 inch records and the last part of the
first movement was recorded on a 10 inch disc, or so I was told. I think
my source of that information was Harry Anderson....So, to fill in the
"missing" part of the first movement, they spliced in the electric
recording. It makes for curious listening.
  
Subsequent issues, the CD set in particular, included the "lost" side.
I also have a vague recollection that the original shellac issue of the
acoustic recording was limited to the second and third movements, (all
single sided) but I will need to check.
  
Since you have the CD, is the producer listed? 
  
You might also like to look at
  
http://victor.library.ucsb.edu/index.php/talent/detail/28362/
  
Karl



      

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

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