 |
 |
I wonder what Columbia rigged up to record 90 musicians, if that was indeed what was captured? Photos of Columbia's "recording lab" where Prince's band often worked show a cramped studio with a relatively small recording horn. They would have needed to use a different space altogether to fit 90 musicians. And, I would think you'd need a much bigger horn to capture detail and low-frequency content I hear on that record. I know Edison had some massive recording horns. Did Columbia also go that route? And what recording venue did they use in 1916 that would accomodate 90 musicans? Is a massive-horn acoustic recording rig portable? -- Tom Fine ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mickey Clark" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2015 6:16 PM Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch > I'd love to see one. I was told that Prince recorded the Schubert Unfinished Symphony in 1910 - I > have that too. The limit in the 1910 studio was 13 musicians. A different studio was used for the > 1917 recording. This info came fron Jolyon Hudson - he kindly recorded the 1910 for me - I was > doing my Prince anthology wanted wanted to include some milestone recordings that were attributed > to him.-Mickey Clark > Follow me on Twitter > https://twitter.com/MickeyRClark > M.C.Productions Vintage Recordings > 710 Westminster Ave. West > Penticton BC > V2A 1K8 > 1-250-462-7881 > http://mcproductions.ca > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2015 2:34 PM > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch > > >> Are there any photos of this recording session? I'm surprised by how much bass content was picked >> up by the horn, also that there is detail to the violins when the horns are playing. I'm guessing >> they used a very large horn and set the orchetra up in a very specific way. I wonder if there is >> an article with a photo in one of the old record magazines from the period. >> >> -- Tom Fine >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mickey Clark" <[log in to unmask]> >> To: <[log in to unmask]> >> Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2015 4:21 PM >> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >> >> >>> Hello - I have done a high definition transfer of the 1917 recording of the Rienzi Overture as >>> conducted by Charles A.Prince. Any one on the list is welcome to download The record label >>> boasts that 90 musicians were used to record this milestone - I have put a wav soundfile for >>> you - thanks-Mickey https://www.dropbox.com/sh/l76p5necoanlnvs/AABDqeCW3CbSDoncPuugvN9ra?dl=0 >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Steven Smolian" <[log in to unmask]> >>> To: <[log in to unmask]> >>> Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2015 9:10 AM >>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>> >>> >>>> I've been working on this at the acoustical recording end. The pieces are >>>> finally coming together and I expect to give a presentation at ARSC in 2016. >>>> Rather than go into the hardware, I'm analyzing the improved (or not) >>>> results by year based on a number of criteria. Stay tuned to this horn. >>>> >>>> Steve Smolian >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List >>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brandon Michael Fess >>>> Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2015 11:50 AM >>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>> >>>> Thank you, gentlemen. While I'm just starting my professional career in >>>> audio preservation, this project may be on the back burner for a while. That >>>> said, I'm seriously interested in seeing if I can't begin gathering material >>>> for an eventual history. I've considered doing the same sort of work on live >>>> sound production for several years, so they might turn into >>>> joint/complementary productions. >>>> >>>> Brandon Fess >>>> LIS Candidate, Class of 2015 >>>> Graduate Assistant, Belfer Audio Archive >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List >>>> <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of John Haley <[log in to unmask]> >>>> Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2015 12:55 PM >>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>> >>>> HI, Brandon, >>>> >>>> Keep in mind that the ARSC Journal happily publishes articles exploring >>>> topics involving recordings, especially historical recordings. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> John Haley >>>> >>>> On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Brandon: >>>>> >>>>> If you undertake research, ping me off-list and I'll share what I know >>>>> and point you to what I've found online. This is definitely a topic >>>>> deserving of some macro-view writing -- how orchestral music has been >>>>> recorded over the eras. >>>>> >>>>> -- Tom Fine >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brandon Michael Fess" >>>>> <[log in to unmask]> >>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]> >>>>> Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2015 10:52 AM >>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Tom, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the brief introduction. I have some recording experience >>>>>> myself, but as graduate assistant at Belfer for the past 2 years, my >>>>>> interest in historic recording in every sense of that phrase) has >>>>>> really been piqued. I'll have to investigate the suggestions you >>>>>> make. Thanks for pointing me towards good starting points. >>>>>> >>>>>> Brandon Fess >>>>>> LIS Candidate, Class of 2015 >>>>>> Graduate Assistant, Belfer Audio Archive >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List < >>>>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Tom Fine < >>>>>> [log in to unmask]> >>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 1, 2015 9:23 AM >>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Brandon: >>>>>> >>>>>> It's a topic that could use a good summary, written in plain English >>>>>> (but scholarly in the sense of having plenty of references and >>>>>> footnotes). Going back to the acoustic era, there were different >>>>>> methods used in different places. You could start by reading the >>>>>> Sooey brothers' memoires, online at the David Sarnoff Library's >>>>>> website. Also should read books and memoires by early EMI people and >>>>>> other Berliner associates. In the electronic recording era, it's >>>>>> worth paying attention to methods used by EMI/HMV, Columbia, RCA >>>>>> Victor and other major producers of orchestra recordings in the 78 >>>>>> era. My interest has mainly been in the tape era, specifically about >>>>>> 1950 into the 1970s. I also have interest in the early digital era, >>>>>> but haven't focused on what if any changes were made in such things >>>>>> as how sessions ran and microphone techniques (and there were >>>>>> changes, simply for the fact that early digital rigs didn't offer as >>>>>> much multi-track/remix options as people at Columbia, RCA and EMI >>>>>> were used to by the late 70s). >>>>>> >>>>>> In more recent years, the big change has been the shrinking budgets >>>>>> and marketplace for orchestral classical recording, which has forced >>>>>> mostly live recording in the US. >>>>>> The typical recording is >>>>>> primarily live performances with a "patch up" session held after a >>>>>> performance. Low-budget labels like Naxos mine overseas broadcast >>>>>> orchestras (sometimes just releasing broadcast recordings) and >>>>>> 3rd-tier US ensembles either without unionized musicians or with >>>>>> cheap/flexible contracts, to make low-budget recordings, usually with >>>>>> quantity trumping quality. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Tom Fine >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "Brandon Michael Fess" <[log in to unmask]> >>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]> >>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 8:49 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I've known Deb Fox for years; I was an early supporter of Pegasus >>>>>> Early >>>>>>> Music when they were just >>>>>>> starting out. The Hochstein concert was my only option for seeing >>>>>>> the concert, as I work in Rochester on weekends. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for all the interesting info on early orchestral recording. >>>>>>> It's rather fascinating for me, as someone surrounded by thousands >>>>>>> of such records at Belfer, to have that information as part of my >>>>>>> understanding. Are there any other written works on the history of >>>>>>> orchestral recording practice that you know of? If not, I can sense >>>>>>> an opportunity for some scholarly work of my own... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Brandon Fess >>>>>>> LIS Candidate, Class of 2015 >>>>>>> Graduate Assistant, Belfer Audio Archive >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List < >>>>>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Tom Fine >>>>>>> <[log in to unmask]> >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 9:05 PM >>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carl, thanks again for referring us to that article. It makes for >>>>>>> interesting reading. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If I do my presentation on the evolution of classical recording in >>>>>>> the US again, I'll definitely use some info from it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Those mic diagrams illustrate some of the reasons that classical >>>>>>> recordings from that era don't sound very good to my ears. There are >>>>>>> too many mics with too many arrival times. Even with post-session >>>>>>> mixing from the multi-tracks, there is no way to prevent the problem >>>>>>> of collapsing stereo image when the orchestra gets going full-tilt. >>>>>>> The sound becomes muddy and the image collapses because there are >>>>>>> too many sounds arriving at too many different times to too many >>>>>>> mics. >>>>>>> Perhaps today, you could transfer those multi-track tapes to a >>>>>>> Protools rig and mess with time-alignment during the loud passages, >>>>>>> to clarify the stereophony. >>>>>>> These techniques evolved >>>>>>> because producers and engineers wanted to ever greater "inner detail" >>>>>>> clarity during soft >>>>>>> passages. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carson Taylor used fewer mics than the Columbia and RCA guys, and he >>>>>>> generally mixed the orchestra to 2-channel at the sessions. But he >>>>>>> got some strange frequency combing by using those coincident stereo >>>>>>> mics at different distances from the orchestra. On some sessions, >>>>>>> he'd put an AKG stereo mic about just behind the strings and a >>>>>>> Neumann stereo mic above and behind the conductor, out in the hall. >>>>>>> The problem is, if the brass gets going, it makes a very >>>>>>> strange-sounding balance between primary sounds and reverb because >>>>>>> both are hitting the stereo mics at different times. But, with the >>>>>>> other mics Taylor used, he was building on the classic Lewis Layton >>>>>>> RCA Living Stereo approach of filling in the quieter sections and >>>>>>> mixing the mics low relative to the front array. This worked very >>>>>>> well for Layton into the early 60s, but he kept adding mics and the >>>>>>> sound got muddier, as detailed in Mike Gray's history of recording >>>>>>> Reiner/Chicago original published in The Absolute Sound. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Tom Fine >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>> From: "Carl Pultz" <[log in to unmask]> >>>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]> >>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 7:19 AM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Parenthetically, the 1/1972 issue of Recording Engineer/Producer >>>>>>>> contains a >>>>>>>> very informative article on the contemporary orchestral recording >>>>>>>> practices of the three major US producers, via interviews with Max >>>>>>>> Wilcox, John McClure, and Carson Taylor. Taylor speaks about his >>>>>>>> rearrangement of seating for Cleveland and his experience in >>>>>>>> Chicago. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Scans are available at http://www.americanradiohistory.com/ >>>>>>>> originally from the collection of Doug Pomeroy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I recently recorded performances of Monteverdi's Vespers conducted >>>>>>>> by Paul O'Dette. Their tuning was A466, determined in part by the >>>>>>>> tuning of the cornetti. That was mean-tone, so it's a whole >>>>>>>> different scheme and effect. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List >>>>>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tom Fine >>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 9:57 PM >>>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Part of John Marks' research into that article included contacting >>>>>>>> the Cleveland Orchestra's music librarian and archivist. Not >>>>>>>> surprising to those familiar with George Szell's music and >>>>>>>> biography, he was an absolute stickler for consistent tuning to >>>>>>>> A=440. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The bigger issue I was surprised and somewhat dismayed to learn >>>>>>>> details of is EMI's practice of using 3rd generation dub tapes as >>>>>>>> their master of record for almost everything recorded by Carson >>>>>>>> Taylor in the U.S. That got me acquiring some copies of the >>>>>>>> original LPs and I was shocked to hear how much better many of them >>>>>>>> sound, even compared to late 90s "Recordings of the Century" >>>>>>>> remasters by Abbey Road. It goes to show that even if you have a >>>>>>>> good playback and a good digital chain, with skilled engineering, >>>>>>>> if you have a several-generations dub tape there's only so much >>>>>>>> fidelity you can get out of it. Plangent would help, but it's still >>>>>>>> better to get as close to first generation as is practical, >>>>>>>> particularly with classical music (because the dynamics, pitch and >>>>>>>> instrument tones are so effected by the slightest aspects of >>>>>>>> output<>input inherent to all tape dubs). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> According to what I learned from talking to people with knowledge >>>>>>>> of EMI Classics' practices (still in effect with Warner Classics), >>>>>>>> using the 3rd generation tapes is the path of least resistence >>>>>>>> because Capitol had some way to keep what were Angel master tapes >>>>>>>> in the US and only send out dubs for UK pressing. Apparently in the >>>>>>>> cases when a UK crew came over here and made recordings (standard >>>>>>>> practice after about 1980), then the master tapes were retained in >>>>>>>> England. In those cases, if the Angel LP was cut at Capitol, it was >>>>>>>> likely cut from a dub tape, so the UK EMI LP is likely to sound >>>>>>>> better. Taking it back to the modern era, I still can't get a >>>>>>>> definitive answer if the Capitol-made EMI classical recordings' >>>>>>>> tapes are in a vault here, and if they'll ever be used to make a >>>>>>>> new series of remasters. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- Tom Fine >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>> From: "Steve Smolian" <[log in to unmask]> >>>>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]> >>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 8:51 PM >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A-440, was speaking of pitch >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I can't find the references at the moment, but I gave a paper at a >>>>>>>>> long-ago >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ARSC about this issue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm depending on memory for the dates, but it'll be pretty close. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The U.S. Navy adopted A-440 in 1916. The National Bureau >>>>>>>>> Standards did so >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> in or about 1918. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm pretty sure that the bands of most or all U.S. Armed Service >>>>>>>>> bands >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> that were in training and >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> later participated in WW I were equipped with A-440 instruments. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It is my speculation that many older instruments were given by >>>>>>>>> masters to >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> servants or found their >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> way into hock shops, which thus made such instruments available to >>>>>>>>> poorer >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> musicians. I've not >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> seen any writing about this issue during the formative jazz band >>>> years. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Those more versed in the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> reminiscences of the early layers may have encountered comments >>>>>>>>> about >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> adjusting or not adjusting >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> tunable instruments and, where impractical, living with the sound. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In the early 1960s I contacted a piano tuner through Steinway, a >>>>>>>>> fellow >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> whose responsibilities >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> included the instruments used by Victor during Caruso's day. He >>>>>>>>> told me >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> that they always tuned >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> tuned to A= 440. I believe I included this somewhere in one of my >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> American Record Guide columns >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> then as a result. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Each orchestra has a collection of tuning forks, or, at least, >>>>>>>>> used to, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and their period of use >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> is often documented. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As to older situations, read "The Story of A" by - can't recall >>>>>>>>> his name. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It carefully explain s >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> and documents pitch issues over the centuries when a court in >>>>>>>>> Germany >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hired an Italian or French >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> court composer who then had instruments made for use during his >>>> tenure. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It also talks about the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> issues of different pitches for instrumental and instruments with >>>>>>>>> vocal >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> music and organ keyboards >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> that played in either of two pitches, depending on the type of >>>> service. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Pitch is also affected by temperature. The way concert halls are >>>>>>>>> and were >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> heated had a direct >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> effect as well. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It's really complicated and fascinating. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Steve Smolian >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> From: Tom Fine >>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 6:12 PM >>>>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] >>>>>>>>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] speaking of pitch >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://www.stereophile.com/content/fifth-element-89 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is a good telling of John Marks' tortured journey on >>>>>>>>> discovering a >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> seemingly small but very >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> audible pitch error. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I did some further reporting with people I know who are very >>>>>>>>> familiar with >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the EMI classical >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> library. Apparently, the fast-pitched tape from which all digital >>>>>>>>> media >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> have been mastered came >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>>> Capitol USA, and no one can locate the original 2-track master >>>>>>>>> tape made >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> by Carson Taylor, from >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> which the first edition USA albums were mastered. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Now, after all of this consternation, it seems to me that one >>>>>>>>> could do as >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I did -- own the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> HDTracks >>>>>>>>> 96/24 download and then simply apply pitch-correction software to >>>>>>>>> it. I >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> couldn't hear any audible >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> degradation after doing that and, in fact, it sounded better >>>>>>>>> because it >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> turns out that once it's >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>> A=440 (to which Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra strictly tuned), >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> music relaxes and flows >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> better, just from that very slight slow-down in tempo. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> My personal opinion is that John Marks' dream of remastering this >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> recording from the 4-channel >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dynatrack tapes will never happen, but I do hope that Carson >>>>>>>>> Taylor's >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> original 2-track master (ie >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> second-generation tape, made directly from the Dyntrack session >>>>>>>>> tapes) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> will be found and this >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> pitch >>>>>>>>> error then corrected in all current in-print media. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- Tom Fine >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> --- >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>> http://www.avast.com >>> >>> >> > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > http://www.avast.com > >