Here's a few:

Plattensammler88
MusicProf78
edmundusrex
Onkel Greifenklau
Ashot Arakelyan
Ryan Barna
Timo Gramophone
2minute Albany Archive
Edmund StAustell
PartyRecords

These I separate out as they are "hosted," but the hosts are relatively
interesting, if playback is less than ideal:

marstonrecords
EMGColonel
MusicBoxBoy
David Lewis

regards,

David N. Lewis



On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Dennis Rooney <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Dear Steve,
>
> I don't know what if any circuit investigations have been made of the phono
> stages in the various brands of (radio)phonographs from the late twenties
> to 1955. It would certainly be a worthy effort and now would require
> tireless energy to locate surviving examples.
>
> The answer for now, however, is that what was cut in the groove was often
> at variance with how it sounded in playback on a contemporary commercial
> phonograph. Enough has been written about how sales departments wanted
> something that sounded smooth and rich, which usually meant heavy hf
> de-emphasis to suppress surface noise, high passed lf and a rather boomy
> mid-range. Mastering engineers seem to have chosen the curves they used
> irrespective of a company "sound". EMI was more consistent than either
> Victor or Columbia in this respect. After about 1932-35, everything became
> more standardized; however, about then or slightly later, Victor began
> employing limiter-compressors in their recording chain, which added a whole
> new set of variables.
>
> DDR
>
> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Steven Smolian <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Dennis,
> >
> > Is it correct to assume that the eq used by a given company at a given
> > time, on ethat made its own phonographs,
> >
> > When a record company also made phonographs, as so many of them did
> > through the late 340s anyhow, is it safe to assume that the
> non-adjustable
> > playback eq hard-wired into the playback amplifier matched what was used
> to
> > make that company's records at the time the amplifier schematic was drawn
> > up?  And, if so, could these schematics be a source of accurate playback
> > curves for that company at that time?
> >
> > Steve Smolian
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
> > [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dennis Rooney
> > Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2016 12:06 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The best of YouTube?
> >
> > In fact, what emerged as the RIAA playback curve was one of those
> > originally published by Western Electric and used occasionally by Victor,
> > Columbia and HMV in the late twenties. However, it was used far less than
> > those customarily associated with 78rpm playback
> >
> > DDR
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Lou Judson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > Of course it is standard procedure to not use RIAA curve on 78s. It
> > > should go without saying! It is only for Lps, and not all of those…
> > > <L> Lou Judson Intuitive Audio
> > > 415-883-2689
> > >
> > > On Jun 4, 2016, at 2:03 AM, Inigo Cubillo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >  During many years I did direct tape transfers of 78s, with no eq,
> > > > and I always noticed a better sound from
> > > the
> > > > tapes than thru the RIAA amp, for the RIAA spoiled the sound due to
> > > > its
> > > eq,
> > > > while the sound on the tapes was direct from the ceramic cart. Years
> > > after
> > > > I learned about eq for 78s and I realised this was the reason of
> > > > better sound on the tapes.
> > > > Saludos,
> > > >
> > > > Inigo
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 1006 Langer Way
> > Delray Beach, FL 33483
> > 212.874.9626
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 1006 Langer Way
> Delray Beach, FL 33483
> 212.874.9626
>