Print

Print


At 03:21 PM 8/10/2005, Scott Phillips wrote:
>I remember having to install these in radio stations. They were heavy as
>lead, expensive, and the rumble...well, everyone else here has THAT
>exactly right..
>

Hi, Scott,

I was reflecting on this discussion and it finally dawned on me.

The thing that was bothering me was why we were finding the rumble so
objectionable while a few contemporary copies of circa 1947 ETs
(electrical transcriptions, i.e. disks) back to tape that were in the
Mullin-Palmer tape collection sounded so much better.

As I said, it finally dawned on me. Most of these behemoth turntables
were designed in the days of mono where only lateral motion was
reproduced (well, except in hill-and-dale recording systems--but
remember, I don't do disks) and then in about 1958 POOF--stereo LPs
were unleashed on the world. I suspect that a good percentage of the
rumble was vertical.

One other thought. Does anyone know what the low-end response of a
typical 1947-1955 cartridge looked like? I don't. I recall the GE
Variable Reluctance cartridge was used in at least some applications.
But then we started having things like the Stanton 500 and 681 and
various Shure cartridges (M44 and V15 Type whatever) that were stereo
and might have had a better low end...it only took 14 years to get
really low-rumble direct drive turntables.

Please chime in here if I messed up the history or if you think any
of my assumptions of off base.

Cheers,

Richard


Richard L. Hess                           email: [log in to unmask]
Vignettes
Media                           web:   http://www.richardhess.com/tape/
Aurora, Ontario, Canada             (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm