 |
 |
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 high-quality EQ in/for your system!). Virtually all the EQ settings for the earlier days of electric recordings were specific to the recording...set by the "recording experts" "on the fly!" Ledgers usually note the settings...but this data is only useful IF you have the schematics of the amplifiers as well as the info on which knob (and thus 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 from other issues, virtually ALL 78's (except a few of the final examples) were 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 record purchaser! It probably wasn't until c.1950 and thereafter that "fidelity" became "high"...?! In fact, even in my youth-hood...the :rock'n'roll" era of the late fifties...we listened to our favourite "hit tunes" on table-top 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 twenties...like, for example, the bass notes 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. http://www.eset.com __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4080 (20090515) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com