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  March 2019

ARSCLIST March 2019

Subject:

Re: Recording Equalization

From:

Tim Gillett <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Thu, 7 Mar 2019 11:18:56 +0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (92 lines)

My initial understanding of Andrew Rose's use of the Har Bal tool was that
he wasnt so much trying to make the old recordings "sound like a modern
recording" - although up to a point that should happen as a byproduct - as 
to EQ it closer
to how it actually sounded live at the time of the original recorded
performance. I've not used Har Bal or  similar  tools
but I recently noticed a particular CD reissue of a Kathleen Ferrier live
performance which had a nasty, unnatural peak in the vocal and orchestral
sound, and the same harsh peak in the audience applause between items.
Manually reducing that peak made for a more natural and easier to listen to
sound.  I believe EQ is a powerful tool for good but equally for the bad in
unskilled hands.

Tim Gillett


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karl Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2019 11:55 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Recording Equalization


I am reminded of a lengthy conversation I had with John Eargle. John said 
that he had discussed this with many of the "old guys." John said that they 
all agreed that prior to RIAA, EQ was subjective. "Whatever sounded best." 
As Dennis has suggested it is a challenge and, ultimately, in my experience, 
somewhat subjective.
When I was teaching my class, I used to have the students listen to, and 
compare, restorations of the same recording done by different 
individuals...for example, a Mark O-T versus a Ward Marston version. Sure, 
one does not know the condition of the discs/pressings each guy used, but 
the differences in the results could be startling. Then you have someone 
like Andrew Rose who uses software to analyze the spectrum of a modern 
recording of a particular work and then apply that to his restoration of an 
old recording of that work. To my ears, one loses the acoustic of the 
original recording. For example, his restorations of the stuff recorded at 
Eastman, sound nothing like the distinctive acoustic of their hall.
Not doubt this is common knowledge in this email list...we apply the notion 
of EQ to the electrical process. However, when I think about it, I am 
reminded that a form of "EQ" was a part of the acoustic process. For 
example, it is known that, especially in the case of pianists, they were 
expected to adjust the dynamics of their playing, in different parts of the 
frequency range, to suit the particular qualities of the reproducers of a 
specific manufacturer.
Karl
    On Monday, March 4, 2019, 8:49:13 AM CST, Dennis Rooney 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 Dear Steve,

Recording equalization varied widely from the introduction of electrical
recording until the supremacy of the RIAA curve in the mid-fifties. The
ascertaining and applying the correct playback equalization is one of the
most challenging aspects of disc playback.

Other respondents will supply more information in answer to your queries.

DDR

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 9:26 AM Steve Smolian <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Companies that made 78s electrically used different systems at different
> times. This was usually indicated by a code in the dead wax, either as
> part of the matrix number or in another area. W in a circle was often used
> for Western Electric, for example. C was used by Columbia to indicate
> their own system about which I know nothing- was this their own 
> development
> or licensed from an outside source?
>
> Has anyone noticed a change in recording characteristics after the date
> this was changed? Does this affect the playback equalization settings?
>
> Has there been a study of these systems, dates, etc.?
>
> If there was no change, there's not much use chasing down some of this
> data.
>
> Steve Smolian
>


-- 
1006 Langer Way
Delray Beach, FL 33483
561.265.2976


---
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

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