Print

Print


Gramola and the ES prefix are Czech.

Jon Samuels


--- On Sun, 11/25/12, DAVID BURNHAM <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

From: DAVID BURNHAM <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Interesting history of DGG-Polydor-Polygram-Berliner Studios-SACD-etc
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Sunday, November 25, 2012, 4:13 AM

You
 fellows obviously know your stuff in this area; do any of you know 
where "Gramola" came from?  I have Franz Schalk's recording of 
Beethoven's "Pastoral" on this label.  The album itself is an HMV album 
with a cheap looking "Gramola" label pasted over Nipper on the front 
cover, (the Nipper on the spine and on the inside front cover are left
 exposed).  The records themselves have a black label with no country of
 manufacture indicated and a design which looks nothing like an HMV 
label.  The catalog numbers are ES 443 - ES 447.

Thanks!
db



>________________________________
> From: Roger Kulp <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask] 
>Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2012 1:59:43 AM
>Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Interesting history of DGG-Polydor-Polygram-Berliner Studios-SACD-etc
> 
>Thanks
 a lot Don.I know what you mean about Polydor being used for records 
exported outside Germany.I have a couple of Deutsche Grammophon records 
from the 20s,that have paper Polydor semicircle labels glued over top of
 Nipper.
> 
>All I know about Opera Disc is what I read in 
the article on the Mainspring Press site.I have sold a bunch of these on
 eBay,but a few years ago,on eBay,I bought the only Opera Disc I 
actually kept,a Richard Strauss.I also have one of his acoustic DGG 
records,waltzes from Der Rosenkavelier.1914 I think.I believe my Opera 
Disc record,is the first one actually issued in the US with Richard 
Strauss as conductor. 
> 
> 
>But I would really love to have those early Polydor Bruno Walters.
> 
>Roger
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Donald Tait <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask] 
>Sent: Saturday,
 November 24, 2012 2:45 PM
>Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Interesting history of DGG-Polydor-Polygram-Berliner Studios-SACD-etc
>  
>  
 Basically, DGG had the legal right to use the Nipper logo until the end
 of World War II in 1945. That was part of the agreement between 
Britain's Gramophone Company (HMV) and Deutsche Grammophon Gesellschaft 
(DGG), finalized around 1925. DGG ("German Gramophone Company") had been
 the German branch of the Gramophone Company until World War I, during 
which the relationship was dissolved due to the war. There are more 
details on-line.The dispute was not resolved until about 1925. In 1926 
HMV (British) established its new German branch, which was named 
Electrola. But DGG retained rights to the Nipper logo until 1945, and 
before then Electrola never used it. I own numerous DGG 78s with Nipper 
labels of various types, too. And as I understand it, the 1920s Polydor 
label was put on records intended
 for export beyond Germany. The same records intended for the domestic 
German market had handsome labels featuring the Nipper painting (e.g. 
Oskar Fried's
>Bruckner 7th). The "Opera Disc" records circulated 
in the USA during the early 1920s were another example. They were lovely
 German pressings from HMV masters (Caruso, Kreisler, etc.) held in 
Germany after 1914, but with "Opera Disc" labels pressed upon the 
HMV-owned discs. It was all intended to avert the legal trouble between 
HMV and DGG. It didn't work. If  I recall correctly, Victor sued. 
Perhaps HMV too. Exit Opera Disc records.
>
>  I hope all of
 this is accurate. In any case, I believe that the business about DGG's 
ownership of the Nipper symbol until 1945 is.
>
>  Don Tait
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger Kulp <[log in to unmask]>
>To: ARSCLIST <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Fri, Nov 23, 2012 11:27 am
>Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Interesting history of DGG-Polydor-Polygram-Berliner Studios-SACD-etc
>
>
>I understand a little more about the DGG 78 timeline I was so fuzzy on,but it 
>still does not really explain to my satisfaction about DGG's use of Nipper on 
>the labels until the end of the war.DGG 78 pressings in the war years,and 
>immediately afterwards are on a mish mash of labels.My copy of the 1938 von 
>Karajan Zauberflote is on a Siemens label.I found it on YouTube on a Polydor 
>pressing. I have later tulip pressing 78s of Furtwangler that were first cut in 
>the early 30s.I have blue Nipper DGG 78s dated 1944.It seems
 they may have just 
>been using whatever labels they had on hand for their 78s at the time given the 
>chaos that was going on there during this time,it would make perfect sense.
>
>Roger
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask] 
>Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 9:05 AM
>Subject: [ARSCLIST] Interesting history of DGG-Polydor-Polygram-Berliner 
>Studios-SACD-etc
>  
>http://www.emil-berliner-studios.com/en/chronik1.html
>
>I'm not vouching for 100% accuracy, but Peter Burkowitz is not
 ill-informed or 
>ignorant, so I'd give him the benefit of the doubt.
>
>Another interesting written piece by Berkowitz is his 1977 AES Journal article, 
>"Recording, Art of the Century?"
>http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=3311
>
>In the timeline linked at the top, interesting vector of how the classical music 
>business went off the rails in the 1995-2005 period. First they glutted the 
>market with product, then started nickel and diming all the most-qualified 
>people to death, then the megaglomeration and resultant consultants (ie "fire 
>anyone who costs anything, in other words anyone with experience or historical 
>knowledge" and "why do you have all those slow-selling old CDs in print? cut 
>them out" -- which shows a complete ignorance of the lucrative "long tail" 
>aspect of a
 classical catalog), then the outsourcing (what is now called Decca 
>Classics no longer oversees its own archives, no longer owns mastering 
>facilities and no longer owns manufacturing plants, so it's more a production 
>company than any traditional notion of a record company). Sony has followed very 
>much the same route, but I think they own at least some of their manufacturing 
>still, and they do have remastering
>operations, small-scale compared to the 90's, in NYC and Japan. EMI has had a 
>similar but somewhat less drastic trajectory (we'll see if Abbey Road and 
>Capitol Studios end up staying under the UMG umbrella). The result is much less 
>new product, but a last-ditch bonanza for collectors of back-catalog (all of 
>those wonderful $2-or-less-per-CD box sets of recent years).
>
>-- Tom Fine
>
>
>