 |
 |
From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, September 04, 2014 6:54 am > I've always been surprised that MOST big recording sessions > didn't involve backup recorders in the pre-tape era. I guess, > during the depression, musicians cost less than backup equipment. > It's ironic that once tape came along, it became standard practice > among anyone who could afford it to run two machines at expensive > recording sessions Here's the answer. Do you know how often there were disc cutting failures in the pre-tape era? NONE. Or practically none. You can look at the ledgers. It is amazing to consider, but disc cutting whether on wax or lacquer was nearly perfect throughout the history of recording. Do you know why they sometimes DID run back-up machines when they were cutting to 78 masters? It was to be able to have a second master to use of an expected big hit for when the first master wore out. Again the ledgers show it. The back-up masters are not used until the regular master wore out. It was not the expense of the back-up equipment. It was the expense of the WAXES. And the processing of the waxes. Many companies during the depression only cut one take. Or, if they knew they did not like the first take and did record a second take, the first take was not even processed, and the wax was shaved and reused. Sometimes immediately. Mike Biel [log in to unmask]