Print

Print


no, the surface noise stays constant

at the beginning the piano is quite distant

at the end it's forward

Joe Salerno
713-6688650
Industrial Video Services
http://joe.salerno.com

Steve Abrams wrote:
> Maybe there is a simpler explanation.  Gain riding on the tape.
> 
> SA
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Brock-Nannestad" 
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 5:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar - acoustical recordings
> 
> 
>> From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad
>>
>> Joe Salerno said:
>>
>>> Interesting.
>>>
>>> The reason I ask is that I have a tape of an
>>> acoustical Columbia side by Josef Hofmann. The piano
>>> sounds quite distant from the horn at the beginning
>>> but by the end of the side the sound is much closer.
>>> The pianist plays continuously.
>>>
>>> I have wondered how this came to be.
>>>
>> ------ that sounds interesting, and the explanation logical. Columbia 
>> made
>> some quite good "distant" recordings. But if moving the piano (or the
>> recording machine for that matter was used - I have never seen it.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> George
>>
>>
>>>
>>> George Brock-Nannestad wrote:
>>> > From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad
>>> >
>>> > Hello,
>>> >
>>> > Joe Salerno asked:
>>> >
>>> >> Is there any reference to the piano being placed on
>>> >> a system of rails or some such to move it closer to
>>> >> or farther from the horn?
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > ----- I have not seen any reference to this. But I have seen a letter
>>> > describing that the Gramophone Company for some records (and I suspect
>>> only
>>> > for a period, which IIRC would have been before 1910) used two 
>>> pianos > for
>>> > accompaniment. I have no information whether they played in unison or
>>> four-
>>> > hand. I suspect unison.
>>> >
>>> > Kind regards,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > George
>>> >
>>> >> Don Cox wrote:
>>> >>> On 28/05/07, George Brock-Nannestad wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Don Cox asked:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> On 27/05/07, George Brock-Nannestad wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> I would guess that in most cases, if not all, the original 
>>> room >>>>>> was
>>> >>>>>> not designed at all, apart from such things as putting the 
>>> piano >>>>>> up
>>> >>>>>> on a platform.
>>> >>>>> The Gramophone Company
>>> >>>>> in their recording rooms in Hayes (post 1912) had ceilings that
>>> >>>>> could be raised or lowered by rack and pinion according to the 
>>> >>>>> task.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Interesting. Do you have a reference for that?
>>> >>>> ----- I have seen it with my own eyes, both from below and from the
>>> >>>> loft. It would have been in the early 1980s, when I spent quite 
>>> some
>>> >>>> time in the archives, before their move. The "studio" had been
>>> >>>> restored some time prior to that, and in itself it was a hard room,
>>> >>>> with pine panelling. I would be surprised if there were no
>>> >>>> contemporary reports of the restoration.
>>> >>> Your eyes are good enough for me.
>>> >>>>>> ----- Edison also performed experiments with performers placed on
>>> >>>>>> squares drawn on the floor (Harvith & Harvith).
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>> Distance from the horn is obviously critical, but that isn't the
>>> same
>>> >>>>> as the design of the studio. Nowadays, everyone is aware of things
>>> >>>>> like live and dead ends, etc.
>>> >>>> ----- now, we cannot draw a direct line from amateur recording on
>>> >>>> cylinder machines to record companies, but in the manuals for
>>> amateurs
>>> >>>> they already then described how to use screens and cubicles for 
>>> some
>>> >>>> instruments.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>> Regards
>>> >
>>> > __________ NOD32 2296 (20070529) Information __________
>>> >
>>> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
>>> > http://www.eset.com
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 
> 
> __________ NOD32 2298 (20070530) Information __________
> 
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
> 
> 
>