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  June 2012

ARSCLIST June 2012

Subject:

Re: Magnetic Tape/Recorders

From:

Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Mon, 25 Jun 2012 20:43:36 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (149 lines)

Hi Scott:

Regarding "Earthquake," you mean "subwoofers all around." I do remember how KEWL it was to feel 
bowel-loosening rumbling in a regular movie theater in 1975. I was 9 years old and thus that movie 
was right on my maturity and mentality level.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott D. Smith" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Magnetic Tape/Recorders


The Stephens machine was really quite something to behold. Based
(loosely) on the 3M Iso-Loop design, it boasted a capstan-less
transport, and in it's day was the smallest 8 track 1" machine
available.

The servo mechanism could, however, be cranky, which occasionally
resulted in the transport taking off at high speeds, or stopping
altogether. Because of this, two machines were always kept on hand for
the production of "Nashville".

Despite these shortcomings, the ability to record 8 tracks of dialog
on location in 1974 was quite an achievement. I personally think that
Jim Webb was deserving of at least an Oscar nomination for his
efforts, but he was snubbed by the Academy. (In typical fashion, the
Oscar for Best Sound in 1975 was handed to the loudest movie released,
being "Earthquake". Not to take away from the engineering efforts of
W.O. Watson and his team at Universal, but I'm not sure that
Sensurround really made a huge artistic contribution to the film).

Jim did, however, go on to win the British Academy Ward for Best Sound
that year, so he didn't go away empty-handed. (Those Brits always had
better taste when it came to sound anyway...and I speak as a member of
the Academy).

--Scott

Scott D. Smith CAS

Quoting Roderic G Stephens <[log in to unmask]>:

> Thanks for the heads up,Tom. On pg. 21 of the (IATSE) 695 Quarterly  magazine article "When Sound 
> Was Reel" http://www.695quarterly.com/695QuarterlyPDFs/695-Quarterly-2009-Spring.pdf there is a 
> shot of one of my brother's (John Stephens) 8 track decks used by Jim Webb and others (Robert 
> Altman) for location  recording.
> Rod Stephens
>
> --- On Fri, 6/22/12, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Magnetic Tape/Recorders
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Friday, June 22, 2012, 2:52 AM
>
> I agree with Mike except to say that Capitol and Mercury started  doing most recording onto tape 
> in the 1948 timeframe. Capitol was  one of the first customers for the Ampex 200 and later 300 
> model  tape machines, at their studio in California (I don't think they had  their own studio in 
> NYC in those days). Mercury used three early  adopters of tape recorders for much of their 
> recording in the late  40's -- Radio Recorders in Hollywood, Universal Recording (Bill  Putnam) in 
> Chicago and Reeves Studios in NYC. Reeves was fully  equipped to do both tape and disk recording 
> in 1948, as detailed in  a series of articles in one of the magazines of the day, reprinted  by 
> Fairchild (the main supplier of recording equipment to Reeves at  that time).
>
> That said, concurrent disk and tape recordings were often made, at  least in the case of Mercury, 
> based on session books I've seen. If a  complete take yielded a master, then the disk was probably 
> used for  production because it was "direct cut" with a successful take. If  editing was required, 
> or re-recording (primative over-dubbing), then  tape was more likely used for the convenience and 
> fidelity. I don't  think there were any hard and fast rules, everyone was learning and 
> experimenting.
>
> Hopefully Dennis Rooney and others will chime in about Columbia and  RCA. I do think they were 
> more conservative about switching over to  tape.
>
> Mike is correct that in reality, there was nothing new under the  sun. Hollywood had perfected 
> sound-on-sound, re-recording and mixing  techniques and equipment in the early days of optical 
> film recording  with rooms of motor-locked optical dubbers.
>
> By the way, ARSC member Scott Smith has written a superb series of  articles of (IATSE) 695 
> Quarterly magazine. Googling on "When Sound  Was Reel" (Scott's series title) yields the site 
> right away. Here's  the link to all the past issues:
> http://695quarterly.com/previous-issues/
> Scott's series started right with the first issue in Spring 2009,  and continues in the current 
> issue (link to that on the front page).  Relavant to this thread, see Scott's article on the 
> transition from  optical to magnetic recording in Hollywood.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Biel" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 12:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Magnetic Tape/Recorders
>
>
> You've asked a bunch of questions that have been discussed here many
> times, and it is tough to go through it all again. Last question first,
> overdubbing was possible way before tape recording. It was common
> practice in film production, and was even done on disc. Even Les Paul
> was doing it on disc before he started using tape.
>
> In a quick oversimplified paragraph, in general, broadcasters started
> using tape before the record companies. Jack Mullen was recording Bing
> Crosby's Philco Radio Time from the second season on tape -- the first
> season was recorded and edited on disc. ABC did their Daylight Saving
> Time delay recordings on tape in 48. For various reasons the major
> record companies stayed with disc mastering into 1950-51 with occasional
> uses of tape from 49 on. But all the first year or two of LPs were disc
> dubs with one major exception. Murrow & Friendly's "I Can Hear It Now"
> was tape mastered and edited, with release in late Nov 1948 on LP & 78.
> "South Pacific" is said to be Columbia's first major session with tape
> used as a back-up in 49. One of the CDs was issued off the tape, but
> had to be recalled because they used a shortened take of "Carefully
> Taught". I think they went back to the disc masters after that for the
> CDs. Tape was used more in 50 and 51, but by 52 and 53 just about
> everything was being mastered on tape.
>
> There have been books written on the equipment and there are plenty of
> websites. The Brush Soundmirror was one of the first portable machines
> in 1947, and RangerTone, Magnacord, Stetchel-Carlson, and of course
> AMPEX followed in the next year, among others.
>
> Mike Biel [log in to unmask]
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Magnetic Tape/Recorders
> From: rod smear <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, June 21, 2012 9:57 pm
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Reading about the Spanish Civil War here, I'm reminded of a book I've
> just
> finished reading, called ZigZag, about WW II british spy/espionage, and
> got
> to wondering about the German magnetic tape machines that were found in
> Germany during/after the war. What were the first U.S. record companies
> to
> use this medium for recording? When? Anyone know the progression of
> events
> in this field? Equipment? Wasn't this the beginning of having the
> capability
> to overdub easily?
>
> Rod
>

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