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  April 2021

ARSCLIST April 2021

Subject:

Re: [EXT] Re: [ARSCLIST] [78-L] What happened to Columbia's masters and the masters from some of the other companies? Could they still be used?

From:

Dennis Rooney <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 9 Apr 2021 11:05:05 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (387 lines)

Dear Maristella,

Test pressings were always labelled with the matric number. If they are
pressings with white labels they are tests, not safeties. Those were always
filed under the Job Number.

Ciao,

DDR

On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 9:25 PM Feustle, Maristella <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> We have a number of XCO records in our Whit Ozier collection at the
> University of North Texas. They're described as test pressings, but I do
> wonder if these were indeed lacquer "safety" discs. There are just under
> 150 discs here:
>
> https://findingaids.library.unt.edu/?p=collections/findingaid&id=1002
>
> Maristella
>
> ________________________________
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <
> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Stewart Gooderman <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 6:25 PM
> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [EXT] Re: [ARSCLIST] [78-L] What happened to Columbia's masters
> and the masters from some of the other companies? Could they still be used?
>
> Wow! I really do appreciate this encapsulation of Columbia’s early Lp
> creation and magnetic tape usage. Lots of questions answered.
>
> It will be very interesting to listen to the new Sony release of the
> complete Ormandy/Philadelphia Orchestra mono recordings coming out
> tomorrow. It is my understanding that each release has been completely
> remastered. Hopefully, there will be a discussion of sources and how it was
> done.
>
> Thank you again!
>
> DrG
>
>
> > On Apr 8, 2021, at 3:21 PM, Dennis Rooney <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >
> > To Stewart Gooderman's query as to what was the source of most of the
> > earliest Lp releases that Columbia made in the first one or two years of
> > the format’s existence, the answer is:
> >
> > The first Lps were produced from lacquer parts dubbed from the master
> > lacquers either as discrete tracks for compiled releases or slip-cue
> joins
> > to an interstitial lacquer submaster that was then dubbed to produce the
> > tracks of a multi movement symphony, sonata or quartet, or an overture
> or a
> > single movement work. Therefore, the earliest Lps in most cases were two
> > generations from the master generation and sometimes three. Columbia
> > introduced magnetic tape  in late 1948 and it was used in tandem with two
> > lathes to produce the usual sets of lacquer discs. Regardless of the
> > medium, everything continued to be recorded in 78rpm side lengths until
> > 1951. Tape parts produced before that date were filed under co or xco
> > matrix numbers depending on the length of side chosen, wound on reels
> with
> > leader separating each part. Because Columbia's tape recorders went
> through
> > a period of adjustment, together with the traditional caution of the
> > engineering staff, lacquer "safeties" continued to be made until tape
> > ultimately became the dominant mastering medium. At that point, the
> > earliest lp and xlp parts began to be replaced by new dubs from the
> master
> > lacquers to tape. However, the program was inconsistent and all too often
> > some masters were merely copied to tape for further production. That's
> why
> > *South** Pacific* exists from two different sources.
> >
> > DDR
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 6:20 PM Stewart Gooderman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >> This is fascinating! Thank you for all this info.
> >>
> >> I do have a question. What, then, was the source of most of the earliest
> >> Lp releases that Columbia made in the first one or two years of the
> >> format’s existence. Tape was not really introduced until mid-1949 at the
> >> very earliest. Was the source of those Lps the 78 rpm disks or the 33
> 1/3
> >> lacquers?
> >>
> >> I’m especially interest in Columbia’s Lp release of Kurt Weill’s Street
> >> Scene. According to Masterworks Broadway’s web site, its Lp release was
> on
> >> April 4, 1949 (it was recorded in 1947). The cast recording of South
> >> Pacific was released a few weeks later, May 9, 1949 (it was recorded
> just a
> >> few weeks earlier.) South Pacific was the first Columbia cast recording
> >> that was recorded on tape (as an afterthought), although the source for
> the
> >> that first Lp release was not the taped version. The taped version was
> used
> >> for the first CD release of the recording, but not subsequent CD
> releases.
> >>
> >> DrG
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Apr 7, 2021, at 10:21 AM, Dennis Rooney <[log in to unmask]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Someone asked me to join this thread. Ask and ye shall receive.
> >>>
> >>> First, thanks for the kind words re MASTERWORKS HERITAGE series.
> Columbia
> >>> masters of various types are stored in western Pennsylvania. Metal
> parts
> >>> include master negatives, positives ("mothers") and stampers.
> >>>
> >>> Beginning with the Sale of Columbia Records to CBS from ARC in late
> 1938,
> >>> the label began mastering on 33-1/3 lacquer discs that were
> subsequently
> >>> used to produce the 78rpm dubs used for commercial manufacture. Two
> >> lathes,
> >>> very occasionally three, were set up for each session in order to yield
> >> an
> >>> "A" and "B" set of discs. Therefore, every Columbia record manufactured
> >>> after that date is a dub, i.e. second generation. The lacquer discs are
> >> the
> >>> genuine master generation and exhibit significantly superior audio
> >>> characteristics in comparison to all second generation source.
> >>>
> >>> Fortunately, much of the lacquer inventory has survived and is mostly
> in
> >>> good condition, especially the Masterworks division materials. Seth
> and I
> >>> used lacquers as the prime source when they were available for our
> work.
> >>> However, we occasionally had to rely on metal parts, but often chose
> late
> >>> 1940s tape copies of the original lacquers in preference because of the
> >>> poor condition of the post-1939 metals. Columbia cheapened the
> metalwork
> >>> process after that date, which is what makes them generally undesirable
> >> for
> >>> use in a/d transfer. As for the metal jigs necessary to press the
> parts,
> >>> they are difficult but not impossible to replicate. Columbia often
> placed
> >>> stampers in bakelite-like beds that were employed to stabilize the
> part.
> >>> For the aforementioned reasons, Columbia 78rpm metal parts after 1939
> are
> >>> mostly unsuitable for use, especially if first-generation source is
> >>> available.
> >>>
> >>> Vinyl pressings made from stampers were occasionally employed. In our
> >> work,
> >>> my experience often was that a negative metal part carefully played
> with
> >> a
> >>> bi-radial stylus, gave better results than the vinyl pressing. Striking
> >> new
> >>> pressings also adds cost, and in the present state of the industry is
> >> only
> >>> rarely done anymore. Usually, earlier tape dubs are copied and heavily
> >>> processed, and that product is frequently characterized as being "from
> >> the
> >>> original masters" when in fact it comes from an inferior intermediate
> >>> generation. Properly played back with available signal processing, the
> >>> Columbia lacquers offer sound quality that is quieter than tape and
> >>> possesses greater dynamic range than any commercial pressings ever
> >>> produced. One of the reasons that a second generation production master
> >> was
> >>> chosen was the possibility of post-production (i.e. gain riding,
> >>> equalization) in the copying from 33-1/3rpm to 78rpm, a technique that
> >>> governed the making of every Columbia record after 1939. Thus only the
> >>> lacquer discs contain the original audio product of the recording
> session
> >>> and truly qualify as original masters.
> >>>
> >>> DDR
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 9:07 AM Tim Gillett <
> [log in to unmask]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks for those extra comment Andreas,  not surprised it was done by
> >>>> people who knew what they were doing and using a good original.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tim.
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> From: [log in to unmask]
> >>>> To:<[log in to unmask]>
> >>>> Cc:
> >>>> Sent:Wed, 7 Apr 2021 07:53:36 -0500
> >>>> Subject:Re: [ARSCLIST] [78-L] What happened to Columbia's masters and
> >>>> the masters from some of the other companies? Could they still be
> >>>> used?
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello Tim,
> >>>>
> >>>> Paul Robeson - -MWH reissue from the late 90's? That was a Dennis
> >>>> Rooney and Seth Werner production at Sony music Studios when it
> >>>> existed.
> >>>> I assisted on that project and was learning from Seth and the rest of
> >>>> the engineers at Sony during that time about early media. It was a
> >>>> great reissue series that ended too soon.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am unsure about the plates as well, but have been told they are
> >>>> necessary for fitting the disc to the machine. Standards today don't
> >>>> fit the 78 negatives or the stampers.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Andreas
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2021-04-06 21:42, Tim Gillett wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hello Andreas,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the information. Yes photos would be interesting. I'm
> >>>> still
> >>>>> not sure what function the plates serve. Are they adaptor plates to
> >>>>> allow for the different dimensions of the metal master?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I remember the first time I hear a CD taken from a 78 vinyl
> >>>> pressing
> >>>>> from the metal master (Paul Robeson: Songs of Free Men, I think)
> >>>> and
> >>>>> was impressed with the much lower noise floor than the shellac
> >>>>> pressing could have ever been.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards, Tim
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> From: [log in to unmask]
> >>>>> To:<[log in to unmask]>
> >>>>> Cc:<[log in to unmask]>
> >>>>> Sent:Tue, 06 Apr 2021 07:57:48 -0500
> >>>>> Subject:Re: [ARSCLIST] [78-L] What happened to Columbia's masters
> >>>> and
> >>>>> the masters from some of the other companies? Could they still be
> >>>>> used?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello Tim,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In the early 1950's, a number of 78 metal parts of Victor's was
> >>>> vinyl
> >>>>> pressed before the factory and machines were destroyed. When we
> >>>> call
> >>>>> up the parts for reissue projects, sometimes we get them along with
> >>>>> the metal. That is usually a happy day as they sound much quieter
> >>>> than
> >>>>> positive metal and definitely shellac pressings. I have inquired
> >>>>> with a number of current pressing plants if they could press from
> >>>> the
> >>>>> original negative masters, but no one has the correct plates to fit
> >>>>> current vinyl pressing machines. Some didn't even know what to do
> >>>>> with the 78 that are still in there original shellac beds.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have a large project coming in next week that should include
> >>>>> examples of all 78 formats we receive from the vault. I will try to
> >>>>> get pictures to the membership through this list. Perhaps someone
> >>>>> here can suggest a new pressing technique. I would love to press
> >>>>> vinyl for these projects. The metal can be a real pain in the a$sh
> >>>>> to work from. This big issue: cost.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Andreas
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2021-04-06 07:48, [log in to unmask] wrote: Hello
> >>>>> Andreas,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I understood that from the metal parts a 78 RPM vinyl disc could be
> >>>>> pressed from which a digital dub could be made. The vinyl would be
> >>>>> quieter than the shellacs originally pressed. Is that so? Or is it
> >>>>> even difficult to press the 78 RPM vinyl because of the shortage of
> >>>>> suitable plates?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Rgds
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tim Gillett
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> From: [log in to unmask]
> >>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >>>>> Cc:
> >>>>> Sent: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 07:24:48 -0500
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] [78-L] What happened to Columbia's masters
> >>>> and
> >>>>> the masters from some of the other companies? Could they still be
> >>>>> used?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello Eric,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I receive original metal parts from Victor and Columbia catalog
> >>>>> regularly from their vault for remastering jobs. Much of it still
> >>>>> exists, but condition varies from pristine to unplayable. If you
> >>>> are
> >>>>> looking to press new 78's from them, the biggest issue is getting
> >>>> the
> >>>>> plates that fit their format. Those were all destroyed at the
> >>>>> manufacturing plant and as far as my inquiries have gone, no one
> >>>> has
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> knowledge how to make new ones for modern pressing facilities. If
> >>>> you
> >>>>> wish to license, email me directly and I can get you in touch with
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> correct people at Sony.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Andreas
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2021-04-06 06:57, ERIC BYRON wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Jay,
> >>>>>> Thank you. I greatly appreciate your help.
> >>>>>> Eric
> >>>>>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2021, 07:47:49 AM EDT, Jay Bruder
> >>>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here is a part of the answer from Allan Sutton's blog post.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F78records.wordpress.com%2F2020%2F12%2F02%2Ftales-from-the-vault-the-unauthorized-columbia-vinyl-pressings-1960%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7CMaristella.Feustle%40UNT.EDU%7C91cdf86f9507439ba2bc08d8fae64b9d%7C70de199207c6480fa318a1afcba03983%7C0%7C1%7C637535214312443202%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&amp;sdata=hsJiVDIq%2Fxf3JZCBZ02HNigDVlhWMOOIWqkxiGLrev4%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Given the money and necessary permissions you can certainly make
> >>>>> records from old metal parts if they are still in decent condition.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jay
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> >>>>> <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of ERIC BYRON
> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 6:29 PM
> >>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
> >>>>>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] [78-L] What happened to Columbia's masters and
> >>>>> the masters from some of the other companies? Could they still be
> >>>>> used?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I know many of Victor's masters were destroyed when Victor
> >>>>> demolishedits Camden warehouse. Does anybody know what happened to
> >>>>> Columbia'smasters and the masters from some of the other companies?
> >>>> If
> >>>>> these masterswere found, would it still be possible to make
> >>>> recordings
> >>>>> from them?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Take care,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Eric
> >>>>> -------------------------
> >>>>> Email sent using Optus Webmail
> >>>>
> >>>> -------------------------
> >>>> Email sent using Optus Webmail
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 1006 Langer Way
> >>> Delray Beach, FL 33483
> >>> 561.265.2976
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > 1006 Langer Way
> > Delray Beach, FL 33483
> > 561.265.2976
>


-- 
1006 Langer Way
Delray Beach, FL 33483
561.265.2976

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

October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
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