Print

Print


By ear trying to hear 1 beat in 10 seconds is not equivalent to actual accuracy as provided by an FFT measurement. Personally I have excellent pitch deviation recognition- there was a recent test at the last AES and I scored perfectly down to relative deviations of 0.5hz at 440. 
I still use the FFT. 


Please pardon the mispellings and occassional insane word substitution I'm on an iPhone

> On Apr 25, 2017, at 09:03, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Please pardon the mispellings and occassional insane word substitution I'm on an iPhone
> 
>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 08:35, John Haley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>> << but knowing when the recorded sound of the sung voices and instruments
>> are jiving with how they work naturally -- since, after all, these were
>> humans interacting with their instruments (one also has to know about the
>> instruments of the time, of course). >>
>> 
>> I agree, totally.  For example, on a solo violin recording, you can
>> sometimes identify an open string.  
> 
> If it's an open string it's likely reliable as a pitch reference, more so than guessing the key. Much more reliable than the "sound of a voice". The open A on a violin is gonna be right because if it's out of tune the session stops. 
>> That t least gets you in the right
>> key.  Identifying the key something is performed in is a different exercise
>> than getting the pitch right.  But often that is obvious from the sound of
>> a voice, for a song.
>> 
>> Best,
>> John
>> 
>> ​
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Bailey, Mark <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> While I appreciate all the research and discussion, the essential method
>>> is
>>> still your ears.  <<
>>> 
>>> 
>>> For us that's absolutely true as well -- the ears are the starting point,
>>> but also need to have the final say. We use the keyboard for a starting
>>> reference pitch, if needed, especially after elongated periods of working
>>> with many different recordings, but never to follow along etc. And, of
>>> course, it's not just about hearing pitch, but knowing when the recorded
>>> sound of the sung voices and instruments are jiving with how they work
>>> naturally -- since, after all, these were humans interacting with their
>>> instruments (one also has to know about the instruments of the time, of
>>> course).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Izotope RX5 is now on our purchasing list!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Mark Bailey, head
>>> Historical Sound Recordings
>>> Irving S. Gilmore Music Library
>>> Yale University
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <
>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of John Haley <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:43 AM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How many half-tones from 78 rpm to 80 rpm
>>> 
>>> Sliding pitch is very easily fixed now on Izotope RX5.  It's a snap.
>>> 
>>> While I appreciate all the research and discussion, the essential method is
>>> still your ears.  I have no difficulty distinguishing pitch errors as small
>>> as half a percent (.5) and have done my own presets on Izotope down to that
>>> amount, and even .2 (point two) where more fine tuning is needed.  If you
>>> can play along with something on the electronic keyboard, even with one
>>> finger, the direction that the pitch needs to be adjusted becomes really
>>> obvious.  It becomes quite objective, not subjective.  I think being able
>>> to do this easily is just a matter of listening and practice.
>>> 
>>> The gadgets and guidelines should all be used as an aid, not as the final
>>> word.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> John
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Bailey, Mark <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Dear All,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I also want to offer my thanks, mostly as an observer, for this important
>>>> and interesting conversation. Just yesterday in the Yale Historical Sound
>>>> Recordings studio I was having to adjust the speed of two Vladimir de
>>>> Pachmann 12" 78s -- one higher and the other lower (two different
>>> recording
>>>> companies). And there are times, working with early 7" or 10" recordings
>>> of
>>>> singers, that playing something at 78rpms is almost overwhelmingly the
>>>> exception, rather than the rule.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> In the Yale HSR studio we use several factors to determine pitch, which
>>> in
>>>> some cases -- as has been acknowledged in this thread -- involves degrees
>>>> of instinct and guesswork. Since I'm also a professional conductor and
>>>> performer, I rely heavily on my own ears and knowledge of performance
>>>> practice, but also with the help of an in-studio keyboard that is usually
>>>> fixed at A=440, but can be adjusted to any pitch level as needed (and
>>> also
>>>> has the option of several temperaments, which comes in handy for
>>>> baroque-period instrument listening instruction). It is incredibly
>>> helpful
>>>> to remember, of course, as others will point out, that A=440 wasn't
>>>> standard everywhere at the turn of the century (even though many who do
>>>> digital transfers default to it) -- Nellie Melba being a case and point
>>> --
>>>> and also, at least when it comes to singers, a fair number would
>>> transpose
>>>> up or down a step or even a half step depending on the aria and vocal
>>>> circumstances.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> As best we can in the Yale studio, we also try to take these factors into
>>>> account. As for recordings that change pitch during the course of a side,
>>>> some of the newer technical information offered here has also been quite
>>>> interesting.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> All best wishes
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Mark Bailey, head
>>>> Historical Sound Recordings
>>>> Irving S. Gilmore Music Library
>>>> Yale University
>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <
>>>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Corey Bailey <
>>>> [log in to unmask]>
>>>> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 8:45 PM
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How many half-tones from 78 rpm to 80 rpm
>>>> 
>>>> The original question was posted from someone in the US. So yes, all of
>>>> the (very interesting) answers were based on "US-centered" speeds.
>>>> 
>>>> Corey
>>>> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
>>>> www.baileyzone.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/
>>> url?u=http-3A__www.baileyzone.net&d=DwIFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=
>>> 951BIhm_S_xT_hJlCWG6le5HUwYfuQaYiiNjkZyEHaM&m=
>>> vP2W26Fj23vKsKhQZCL0qR5WIXeDt1d2XF2d7jzBjIE&s=
>>> r2Y1XaMZ7wh7D4l42kn0vBk76kjsHwlvR9-srBBi8B8&e= >
>>>> Family Audio Preservation - Audio Engineering<https://
>>> urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.baileyzone.
>>> net_&d=DwIFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=951BIhm_S_xT_
>>> hJlCWG6le5HUwYfuQaYiiNjkZyEHaM&m=vP2W26Fj23vKsKhQZCL0qR5WIXeDt1
>>> d2XF2d7jzBjIE&s=GI_WC7uZP1L3NVqef9xI3kf4g9AjimgaxkCuIMpqfB8&e= >
>>>> www.baileyzone.net<http://www.baileyzone.net>
>>>> The purpose of this site is to raise awareness about the need to archive
>>>> audio and video recordings which contain your family history. Of prime
>>>> importance is ...
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 4/24/2017 3:42 PM, George Brock-Nannestad wrote:
>>>>> From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> 
>>>>> all very US-centered, isn't it? The 78.26 comes from a certain number
>>> of
>>>> poles
>>>>> in a synchronous motor combined with simple ratios in the gearbox that
>>>> changes
>>>>> the rpm from the motor to the target rpm for the turntable. But it is
>>>> only this
>>>>> figure at 60 Hz mains frequency. If you had a slow-speed synchronous
>>>> motor run
>>>>> off 60 Hz the closest to 78.00 is 78.26 rpm. If you use a stroboscope
>>>> for 60 Hz
>>>>> under a 120 Hz light (goes for fluorescent or low-power incandescent
>>>> lamps off
>>>>> the mains), you can only get a stationary ring at 78.26.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In the not insignificant parts of the world where they use 50 Hz as the
>>>> mains
>>>>> frequency, the corresponding figure would be 77.92 rpm. You need a
>>>> different
>>>>> stroboscope for this and also the slow-speed synchronous motor would
>>>> have a
>>>>> different number of poles. Aida Favia-Artsay knew, and her Caruso
>>>> stroboscopes
>>>>> came in both varieties.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The Victor Talking Machine Company is on record in the acoustic period
>>> as
>>>>> specifying 76 rpm for recording and 78 rpm for reproduction of the
>>>> recording
>>>>> obtained. Some of their customers obviously did not have absolute
>>> pitch.
>>>> In the
>>>>> acoustic period of the Gramophone Company, the speed was checked every
>>>> morning
>>>>> by means of a piece of cigarette paper under the wax while cutting and
>>>> counting
>>>>> the revolutions for a minute. They preferred 78 rpm!
>>>>> 
>>>>> In the United Kingdom, the Old Philharmonic Pitch (which corresponded
>>> to
>>>> an a4
>>>>> of 452 Hz (give or take a few) survived in the military bands until ca.
>>>> 1926,
>>>>> when they also changed to the New Philharmonic Pitch at 439 Hz. If you
>>>> hear
>>>>> Nellie Melba sing accompanied by the Band of the Coldstream Guards in
>>>> 1905 with
>>>>> the key indicated, you can pitch it absolutely correctly when you play
>>>> it: they
>>>>> used the Old Philharmonic Pitch. Columbia recorded a lot of military
>>>> bands, and
>>>>> they abandoned the 80 rpm speed for 78 rpm at around the same time the
>>>> bands
>>>>> changed tuning. The interesting thing is that the fraction 78/80 is
>>> very
>>>> nearly
>>>>> the same as the fraction 439/452, in other words if you played a
>>>> Columbia band
>>>>> record in 1932 you would not know whether it was an early recording
>>>> slowed down
>>>>> to 78 or whether it was actually a new recording with the new pitch and
>>>> the new
>>>>> speed. This is what I habitually in my workshops call "the dialectic
>>>> triangle:
>>>>> speed, key, and standard pitch".
>>>>> 
>>>>> I rarely comment these days, but this issue is very important.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> George
>>>>> 
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 78.26 did not become a standard speed until electric motors were used
>>> in
>>>>>> cutter and playback turntables. In the acoustic era, 78 usually meant
>>>> 78.00.
>>>>>> But, if you´re using a modern turntable like, say, a Technics SP-15,
>>> 78
>>>>>> actually is 78.26, and the percentage of change must be calculated
>>> from
>>>>>> that.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ____________________________
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gary Galo
>>>>>> Audio Engineer Emeritus
>>>>>> The Crane School of Music
>>>>>> SUNY at Potsdam, NY 13676
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Great art presupposes the alert mind of the educated listener."
>>>>>> Arnold Schoenberg
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "A true artist doesn't want to be admired, he wants to be believed."
>>>>>> Igor Markevitch
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: DAVID BURNHAM [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 6:05 PM
>>>>>> To: Gary A. Galo
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How many half-tones from 78 rpm to 80 rpm
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That's fine, but the standard speed for 78s IS 78.26; I don't know if
>>>> 80RPM
>>>>>> records included a fraction.  LPs, of course are always based on 33
>>> 1/3
>>>> RPM,
>>>>>> so there would be no reason to relate anything to 33.00 RPM.  I'm sure
>>>> the
>>>>>> original question was searching for a corrective adjustment to adapt
>>>> from
>>>>>> standard 78 to Columbia's 80 RPM, but that's only a guess.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> db
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Monday, April 24, 2017 5:56 PM, Gary A. Galo
>>>>>> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I specifically said 78.00 in my reply. I assumed that if you meant
>>>> 78.26, you
>>>>>> would have said so.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
>>>> On Behalf
>>>>>> Of DAVID BURNHAM
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 4:44 PM
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How many half-tones from 78 rpm to 80 rpm
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Are you basing that on 78.00 RPM or 78.26 RPM?
>>>>>> Not challenging you just a question.
>>>>>> db
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>    On Monday, April 24, 2017 4:18 PM, Gary A. Galo
>>>>>> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A quarter tone is 3%, a half tone is 6%, and a whole tone is 12%. So,
>>>> the
>>>>>> difference between 78.00 and 80 is just a hair under a quarter tone. A
>>>> quarter
>>>>>> tone would be 80.34; a half tone is 82.68..
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ____________________________
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gary Galo
>>>>>> Audio Engineer Emeritus
>>>>>> The Crane School of Music
>>>>>> SUNY at Potsdam, NY 13676
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Great art presupposes the alert mind of the educated listener."
>>>>>> Arnold Schoenberg
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "A true artist doesn't want to be admired, he wants to be believed."
>>>>>> Igor Markevitch
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
>>>> On Behalf
>>>>>> Of James Roth
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 3:31 PM
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] How many half-tones from 78 rpm to 80 rpm
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hello everybody,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Can anyone tell me how many half-tones up from 78 rpm to 80 rpm?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> Ben Roth
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>