 |
 |
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 >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >