Print

Print


Have there been any birds recorded that have since become extinct? The bit about if it was the 1913 or 1910 recording preferred by Respighi is one of the most interesting questions I ever heard.  Roger > Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:19:01 -0400> From: [log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Phonobomb examples? [specifically Respighi]> To: [log in to unmask]> > Also, although Respighi lived well into the era of electrical recording and reproduction, he insisted that a specific recording of nightingales, (its number noted in the score), be played on an acoustic gramophone in the percussion section. I would love to hear it performed in this manner, it would sound quite haunting, but in spite of the fact that there are so many authentic performance enthusiasts around these days, it's never done.  > > db> > Sent from my iPhone> > > On Jun 18, 2014, at 5:56 PM, George Brock-Nannestad <[log in to unmask]> wrote:> > > > From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad> > > > > > In the unpublished "Bird Songs on Historic Records" discography > > the following information is given:> > > > > > All the nightingale records were originally issued single-sided. Regarding > > the coupling discussed, the 1910 recording was made 3 May 1910. The 1913 > > recording was recorded during the week ending 24 May 1913. The Victor 64161 > > (Red Seal) is neither of these two recordings.> > > > Among the double-sided versions,  R. 6105 was from Italy; the UK market had > > B. 390. > > > > "The British HMV company transferred B. 390 to its "Number 2 Catalogue" of > > records of unique and historical interest in 1929. This was because the > > composer Respighi required a gramophone record of Nightingale song to be > > played during a movement of his orchestral work "The Pines of Rome", composed > > in 1925. Actually, the score requests the record by its Italian number > > (R.6105), and does not say whether the 1910 recording or the 1913 one is > > preferred. B. 390 remained in the "Number 2 Catalogue" until its deletion in > > 1942; there, both sides were given the date "1910"."> > > > Personally, I find the term "phonobomb" absolutely silly, reminding me of a > > sort of Italian ice cream, and although nobody will care I shall refrain from > > using it to describe the phenomenon alluded to. But given enough publicity, > > no doubt it will catch on and end up on the Library of Congress Recording > > Registry.> > > > Kind regards,> > > > > > George> > > > ------------------------------------> >> > >> It also came on Victor and was redone electrically.  > >> > >> I seem to recall that the parts for Pines of Rome were rental only and> >> when> >> your packet arrived, a copy of the 78 was packed with it.  I don't know if> >> the later, electrical one arrived in your packet after 1925 or whenever it> >> was remade.  I kinda think the acoustical one was used for a while> >> afterwards.  Maybe someone at the Fleisher Orchestra Music Collection at> >> the> >> Free Library of Philadekphia would know.> >> > >> Of couse, this implied that the performing orchestra would have a> >> phonograph> >> available, and a model with sufficient volume to be heard in  the back of> >> the balcony.  This was not a sure thing.  Some members of some> >> professional> >> orchestra boards of the time opposed the whole idea of recording, just as> >> they did when broadcasting came along- cheapened the merchandise or, in> >> this> >> case, cheepened it. > >> > >> Steve Smolian> >> > >> -----Original Message-----> >> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Don Cox> >> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 3:38 PM> >> To: [log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Phonobomb examples? [specifically Respighi]> >> > >>> On 18/06/2014, Williams, Tim wrote:> >>> > >>> For Don and any others curious about whose nightingale recording > >>> Respighi used for Pines of Rome...> >>> > >>> A couple years ago, we had a library patron who does orchestra program > >>> notes who also wondered this.> >>> > >>> The short answer is probably Carl Reich in 1910 or 1913.  > >>> > >>> Here's what we came up with for the patron:> >>> > >>> In the 1925 Ricordi score for Pini di Roma, Respighi, lists Grammofono > >>> in the instrumentation and there's a footnote that states "No. R. 1605 > >>> del 'Concert Record Gramophone': Il Canto dell'usignolo."> >>> > >>> The "1605" is incorrect. Page 55 of the score, when the Grammofono is > >>> actually used, has the correct footnote: "No. R. 6105 del 'Concert > >>> Record Gramophone: Il canto dell'usignolo."> >>> > >>> That R. 6105 entry in the Italian record catalog is for "VOCI DELLA > >>> NATURA (Bremen)," dates 1910 and 1913.> >>> > >>> So in the His Master's Voice: The German Catalogue (1898-1929) book, > >>> there is an entry for "NACHTIGALL-SCHLAG, Besitzer Carl Reich > >>> (Bremen)" and the recordings were made in May 1910 and May 1913. Those > >>> dates and location match up with the "VOCI DELLA NATURA (Bremen)"> >>> entry in the Italian catalog. So I think we can assume that the "Il > >>> canto del usignolo" recording used by Respighi was the one made by > >>> Carl Reich and issued in both Germany and Italy (and possibly > >>> elsewhere).> >>> > >>> > >>> It's also interesting that the percussionist of the orchestra for > >>> which these liner notes were researched talked about all the different > >>> formats they've used over the years (phonograph, reel-to-reel, > >>> computer, etc.) but also said, that if any of them don't work, he's > >>> prepared to just whistle a nightingale's bird call himself!> >>> > >> That's very interesting. Thanks.> >> > >> Regards> >> --> >> Don Cox> >> [log in to unmask]