Gennett had vertical cut records early in their production. If this was one 
of these, dubbed with a pantograph, a hum could be introduced there.-Mickey 
Clark

-----Original Message----- 
From: David Lewis
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 8:56 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Oddball record

What is the selection? UD

On Aug 13, 2017 5:39 AM, "BURNHAM" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> The hums could have been introduced at a later mastering stage!
>
> db
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 13, 2017, at 12:22 AM, Paul Stamler <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks:
> >
> > I'm working on a record that has me puzzled. It's a Gennett record from
> 1923. The authorities say that Gennett didn't take up electrical recording
> until 1926 or so, so I had  this pegged as acoustic.
> >
> > But it has *hum* on it. Significant hum; at this stage in processing the
> signal (two channels combined, no EQ, iZotope de-clicking applied) the hum
> signal is at about -38dBFS (about 24dB below my nominal 0vu level). 
> There's
> also an intermittent signal at 40Hz. The lowest signal frequency seems to
> be about 150Hz
> >
> > If this is an acoustical recording, how did those low frequencies get
> onto the record? If there was a mechanical rumble in the room, I would not
> expect the recording horn to respond significantly at 57Hz, let alone 
> 40Hz.
> (Heck, 150Hz is surprising.)
> >
> > And the thing is, it doesn't *sound* like an acoustical recording --
> there aren't the typical horn resonances coloring the sound. It sounds 
> like
> a good early electrical recording.
> >
> > But the 1923 date is reinforced by several sources -- well before
> Gennett is believed to have gone electric.
> >
> > Could this have been an experimental electrical recording (perhaps using
> the GE Photophone process) that somehow escaped into the catalog? Could it
> be turntable rumble during cutting? If so, why does the record sound
> electrical rather than acoustical?
> >
> > By the way, the flip side has virtually identical hum, though a cursory
> glance doesn't show the 40Hz component.
> >
> > Anyhow, I'm mystified. I know that record companies were experimenting
> with electrical disk recording before the majors adopted the Western
> Electric system, hence my speculation that this could have been one of
> those experiments.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > Peace,
> > Paul Stamler
> > St. Louis
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>