Just a footnote to Tom Fine's post about wavering L-R stability of a
recording of a soloist with orchestra. A cellist, who is seated, with the
instrument pegged to a spot on the floor, isn't the best example. It's a
violinist, who is standing, and who rotates his/her body continuously one
way or the other as he/she plays. This is fairly common and we have all
seen them in action. Older players especially seem to really need to shift
around some to change their body alignment, since what they are doing with
their arms and shoulders is anything but a "natural" kind of movement, and
I think the constant movement is a comfort thing, avoiding any kind of
"locking up" of the hips and torso. In a hall, this rotating-in-position
is not noticeable in the sound produced, coming from the stage. But on
particular stereo recordings, you can get sea-sick from the soloist being
flung from one side to the other, and Tom has just explained why--the
center mike needs to be an omni. Back to our mobile violinist, what is
often not OK is when they get tired and let the instrument head drop down,
which affects the alignment of the fingers on the fingerboard and can
result in flat intonation. Some very famous players are guilty of this
from time to time.
Very interesting batch of posts about mike placement.
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Dave Burnham <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks for this, Mike, I didn't go back that far when I was trying to find
> the source.
> Sent from my iPhone
> > On Aug 31, 2014, at 1:12 AM, Michael Biel <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Great discussion! To bring this back full circle to why the subject
> > header, below is the ORIGINAL posting from Lani Spahr on Aug 5. We got
> > into Blumlein when on the 30th Tom Daly replied that he would think it
> > was Blumlein, Paul Stambler reminded him he was killed during the war,
> > and I responded this meant that it was not Blumlenn. Besides, Blumlein
> > was in R&D, not recording, and Arthur C. Keller was doing stereo before
> > Blumlein. Let me add at this point that Keller did get a single-groove
> > patent, which as someone noted would have expired by the 50s. Patents
> > were not renewable like copyrights were back then, so 45/45 was now P.D.
> > Keller, by then not working recording but still at Western Electric,
> > told me that around 1957 he got a phone call from someone at the Westrex
> > stereo team asking him why he had not told them about his expired patent
> > -- it meant that all their work would be P.D. "Nobody ASKED me!" he
> > told me his reply was!
> > Now for the original posting: Mike Biel [log in to unmask]
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: [ARSCLIST] Accidental stereo (again)
> > From: Lani Spahr <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Tue, August 05, 2014 12:19 pm
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Hello All - I'm sure you're all familiar with the YouTube clip of Keith
> > Hardwicke throwing cold water on the "Californian idea" that there were
> > 2 independent cutters working at HMV from which it's possible to create
> > " Accidental Stereo" ..In case you're not -
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmr4x1V4OJY
> > My question is, does anyone know the name of the engineer who Keith
> > refuses to name? He said this man made the very first recordings at
> > Abbey Road.
> > We know that the first recording made was on 11 November 1931. It was
> > Elgar conducting his Falstaff. The famous official "Opening" in the
> > Pathe Newsreel was from the next day, 12 November.
> > The matrix #s for this session have a prefix (indicating the engineer)
> > of 2B, and in fact all of Elgar's subsequent recordings in Abbey Road
> > were done by the same engineer, 2B. (see Elgar on Record, JN Moore) I
> > found a file online
> > http://www.recordingpioneers.com/docs/grurks/SUFFIX-PREFIX.pdf that
> > gives prefix #s for almost everyone (pg 4) except 2B.
> > I know this might open a can of worms but I'd like to know who this was.
> > In Elgar on Record on there is a picture (facing pg 161) of Edward
> > "Chick" Fowler at the lathe. In the Pathe clip there is another,
> > different engineer at the lathe. Fowler had a matrix ID of 0F or 2F, so
> > it wasn't him.
> > Thanks in advance
> > Lani Spahr