Print

Print


Quite right, Steve!

The shellac disc has proved to be more stable than vinyl, at least to this
collector who revisits 78s with far more pleasure than vinyl. Plasticizers
from vinyl discs volatize as they age. I have had occasion to open a copy
of a disc sealed and stored for fifty years, open it and compare it with
another copy of the same disc previously opened but in mint condition from
the same stamper, etc. The first time I did it I was quite surprised how
noticeably quieter the had-been-sealed until now copy was. The phenomenon
had nothing to do with clicks or other small-event noises, merely the
residual disc noise itself. Pulling 78s from my collection from as far back
as 1904, I do not detect any increase in disc noise. In general, 78s
(assuming good condition, of course) are highly stable artifacts, which is
why I counsel desuetude as the ideal preservation strategy for them. I
saved otherwise perfect copies that had a hairline crack because I was
confident that some day the technique would exist to remove the ticks. And
so it came to be.

DDR

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:48 AM, Steven Smolian <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> 78s!
>
> Steve Smolian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Bishop
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 11:42 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The new normal - "hits" are hard to come by, the
> vinyl niche continues to thrive
>
> Most people don't even want downloads let alone CDs. So in that sense
> vinyl is as doomed as every other physical medium.
>
> But I disagree that vinyl is a dead medium at this time. The DJ scene is
> stronger than ever in every genre.
>
> Records produced 50 or 60 years ago can be pulled off the shelf, cleaned
> and played with almost no deterioration from age. What medium is more
> stable in average storage conditions?
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:28 AM, John Haley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > It's the old question--do you want fame or money?  Many "artists" of
> > today apparently keep their day jobs and go for fame by giving it
> > away, thinking fortune will follow.  Seems like it seldom does, and
> > this has very little to do with basic talent.  It's a recipe for a
> > lousy pop music world, which to my ancient ears is just what is
> happening.  Meanwhile any third-rate pop
> > artist from the past can sell out a hall today.   Thank goodness they are
> > there.
> >
> > As for vinyl, it's a blip and a fad.  If it gets people listening who
> > otherwise wouldn't be, then fine, I like it, but we who ought to know
> > better mustn't kid ourselves.  As a format, vinyl is a dead one, and
> > it deserves to be.  Of course I'm not tossing out my record
> > collection, but as a person who restores old records in modern
> > formats, I have no nostalgic, romantic illusions about vinyl's
> > supposed virtues.  If people are happy listening to it, then be happy
> > and go for it. But as "audio people" let's not go fooling ourselves.
> >
> > Best,
> > John Haley
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Interesting stats from Nielsen:
> > >
> > >
> > http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/22/10816404/2015-album-sales-trends-vin
> > yl-catalog-streaming
> > >
> > > Soundscan does not pick up the whole market, but the trends seem
> > credible.
> > > Interesting that Adele fans are also vinyl fans in such a pronounced
> > way. I
> > > wonder if the back-catalog trend was just a blip because so much of
> > > it is now in print either as downloads or physical media, just about
> > > every "golden age" audiophile favorite is not out in new-remaster
> > > vinyl, and
> > what
> > > CDs are left in the pipeline are heavily discounted. But, that said,
> > > the market to create great new music is not really there -- artists
> > > make more just touring and releasing a song here and there via
> > > download or video streams. So why get in a studio and create great
> > > art? There was also an interesting interview in the latest issue of
> > > TapeOp magazine with the Minneapolis hip-hop collective Doomtree.
> > > One thing they said that stuck
> > in
> > > my mind is that there is a penalty today for taking the time to
> > > write great, meaningful lyrics. The music-buying public wants catchy
> > > phrases
> > and
> > > well-worn stereotype statements set to music, they want simple
> > > ditties,
> > and
> > > simple sells.
> > >
> > > This report looks at unit sales for the first half of 2015:
> > >
> > >
> > http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/us-album-sales-fall-4-in-first-h
> > alf-of-2015-as-cd-rules-market-just/
> > > The problem that isn't documented in unit sales is that copyright
> > > owners, artists and everyone else with a stake in making quality
> > > music get
> > pennies
> > > on the dollar from these streaming services, and that's the main
> > > growth area as far as consumer uptake (yes, the vinyl niche is
> > > thriving, but
> > it's
> > > a tiny niche compared to overall music sales, and does not produce
> > > enough revenue to float any artist or major copyright owner). I
> > > think it was
> > very
> > > foolish for the record companies to surrender to streamers on the
> cheap.
> > > They should be charging royalties like radio, plus a download fee,
> > > and
> > the
> > > streamers should be forced into a model where everyone who streams
> > > pays a monthly fee. Most of the streaming is freebie streaming, and
> > > that just doesn't produce enough revenue. If I were an artists, I'd
> > > say you get nothing for free streaming, and if I'm a hit-making
> > > artist I'd say you
> > get
> > > nothing without paying me regular download fees.
> > >
> > > -- Tom Fine
> > >
> >
>



-- 
1006 Langer Way
Delray Beach, FL 33483
212.874.9626