Help (Plaintively).  Can someone please tell me how to get a digest version 
of this list which I find very interesting.
Terence in South Africa.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Biel" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] playback curves for some 78s

From: "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]>
> I'm wondering about what's a good playback curve (turnover and rolloff
> settings) for:
> 1. the Columbia reissue Bix and Tram disks, albums were put out in the
> late 1940s.
> If these are just re-pressings from the original Okeh metal
> parts, then they need the original Okeh early-electric playback
> characteristics, right?

Usually you can tell if they are original master pressings by looking at
the lead-out grooving and the matrix numbers.  Columbia often grafted a
new style lead out on top of the original lead out, creating a very
complicated looking mess.  Some of these Columbia reissue sets were
original masters in their earlier pressings and then got dubbed masters
when the original metals wore out.

> But if they are disk-to-disk transfers, I'm
> thinking they'd be the 1940's Columbia curve, no?

No, because it would also be affected by the curve Columbia would have
used to play the original discs.  Of course you could just ask George
Avakian and see if he remembers what the engineers did.  Anybody got his
email address?  He used to come to the NJ Jazz Bash that is coming up
next month.

By the way, the current ARSC Journal has Gary Gallo's definitive article
on the Columbia LP curve and its relationship to the NAB curve for ETs.

Mike Biel  [log in to unmask]

> 2. what about Swan records? I couldn't find any reference online. These
> are "dixieland revival" records by Don Redman and others made I think in
> the mid or late 40's. I'm wondering if these use a Majestic-like curve or
> more a Capitol-like curve?

From: "Steven C. Barr" <[log in to unmask]>
The simple answer here is "Set it by EAR!" (assuming you have a
in/for your system!). Virtually all the EQ settings for the earlier days
recordings were specific to the recording...set by the "recording
"on the
fly!" Ledgers usually note the settings...but this data is only useful
you have
the schematics of the amplifiers as well as the info on which knob (and
which NUMBER) adjusted WHAT?!

Worse yet...the "playback" of a 78 can probably NEVER provide the actual
sound of the "musical event" recorded on the disc in question! Aside
other issues, virtually ALL 78's (except a few of the final examples)
NOT recorded in "high" fidelity...the whole point was to get an example
of the "hit-to-be" that could be heard and enjoyed(?) by the average
purchaser! It probably wasn't until c.1950 and thereafter that
became "high"...?! In fact, even in my youth-hood...the :rock'n'roll"
of the late fifties...we listened to our favourite "hit tunes" on
45 players NOT noted for their "fidelity!" Since most of these hits were
used for dancing, all we cared about was whether we could hear the
beat; if the highest octave (8000-16000 Hz) wasn't reproduced (or
for that matter HEARD?!) we didn't really care!

The surprising thing is the degree of reproduction one can still hear on
electrical recordings of the, for example, the bass
on Jesse Crawford's recordings...?!

It is also interesting to hear the way Duke Ellington used to set up his
band so that the bass (usually string) could ALWAYS be heard!!

Steven C. Barr

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature 
database 4080 (20090515) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4080 (20090515) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.