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  January 2018

ARSCLIST January 2018

Subject:

Re: Recording Process in 1920s

From:

Paul Stamler <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:46:41 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (62 lines)

On 1/22/2018 10:09 AM, Terri Brinegar wrote:
> Hello All,
> 
> Can anyone tell me if recordings in the 1920s were transferred to disc at exactly the same speed as they were recorded? In other words, if someone is singing an “F” pitch on the recording, is that the actual pitch sung or could the engineer possibly speed it up somehow, thus raising the pitch? Not sure if that was possible back then.

Hi Terri:

Recordings in the 1920s were made direct-to-disc, not transferred from 
an external storage medium, so if the master disc was rotating at the 
standard speed, then playing it back at the same speed would result in 
the correct pitches being reproduced. However...

Acoustically-made recordings, which were standard before 1925, were not 
made at what became the standard playback speed, 78.26 rpm. Columbia's 
acoustical discs, and Edison's, were typically recorded at 80 rpm, 
meaning they should be played back at that speed for the pitch to be 
correct. Victor's acoustical discs were typically cut at 76.6 rpm, which 
meant that if they were played at 78 rpm, pitches would be a bit sharp 
and tempi would be a bit fast. Victor's producers apparently thought 
thjis was a good thing, as the result would sound brighter and livelier.

When the industry converted to electrical recording beginning in 1925, 
most recordings apparently were standardized at 78.26 rpm. However, 
there were exceptions. One of the most famous is Mississippi John Hurt's 
recording of "Frankie" for OKeh in 1928; he told interviewers much later 
that because it was a long song, the engineers had slowed down the 
recording lathe to fit it all on the disc. Thus, if the disc was played 
at 78.26 rpm, the pitch would be sharp and the tempo would be fast. 
Early reissues (such as the well-known Harry Smith "Anthology of 
American Folk Music") were in fact played back at 78.26 rpm, and a whole 
generation of fingerpickers learned to play the piece fast. Later 
reissues, such as the Smithsonian/Folkways CD set of the "Anthology", 
were made with the disc playing at the correct speed.

I asked the listmembers a few years ago if there was a date by which 
most labels were cutting at 78.26 rpm, aside from anomalies like Hurt's 
disc. The consensus was that there wasn't, and that electrical 
recordings often deviated from 78.26, so the remastering engineer needs 
to do due diligence on every individual disc. However, I can testify 
that most of the major-label discs I've encountered matched the standard 
pretty well. Many of the minor-label discs too.

Peace,
Paul

Peace,
Paul

> 
> Thank you!
> 
> Terri Brinegar
> PhD Candidate in Ethnomusicology
> University of Florida
> [log in to unmask]
> [log in to unmask]
> 

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

December 2020
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