what are you listening to?

Vintage 700b said:
That's a classic Mark! Especially to those of us who grew up with Alfred Hitchcock.
Your record sounds super, it's in great shape for a popular (i.e. often played) record
from 1935.
Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it was played much. There were a few real nasty pops, Audacity to the rescue! Mixdown to mono also cancelled some scratchiness.
 
MarkWComer said:
It still has a fair amount of bass, I can’t imagine it being too far off.
Click to expand...
I will guess it likely has too much bass boost because they had more groove width in those old 78 pressings. There is no such thing as electronic equalization in those old steel needle, mechanical playback machines.
 
Gepetto said:
I will guess it likely has too much bass boost because they had more groove width in those old 78 pressings. There is no such thing as electronic equalization in those old steel needle, mechanical playback machines.
Click to expand...
By 1935 there was an exodus from acoustic phonos, and the shellac formulation had less abrasives. Still used steel needles, but with crystal transducers instead of mica diaphragms. Far less tracking pressure, but still barbaric by today’s standards. A record was a record- and that’s it!

Audacity used to have EQ curves built in- and thanks for that rabbit hole! I remember seeing curves for Columbia, Victor, and even acoustic, there was even an “inverse RIAA” curve. They’re gone now. For shits ‘n’ giggles, I went back to the iMac and opened the file hoping to nullify RIAA and apply the Victor EQ, but the curves aren’t there anymore.

I’d need a db/octave graph to recreate the Victor curve, but that’s a hole I don’t feel like crawling into right now.

Yes- the fixed pitch grooves are quite dynamic! Electronic tube amplification in recording began about 15 years before home phonos had tube amps, whether EQ was applied is a mystery to me.

Correct me if I’m wrong in any of this- INCREASE MY KNOWLEDGE!

EDIT: IIRC, the “V.E.” in the runout of Victor records denotes electronic recording.
 
MarkWComer said:
By 1935 there was an exodus from acoustic phonos, and the shellac formulation had less abrasives. Still used steel needles, but with crystal transducers instead of mica diaphragms. Far less tracking pressure, but still barbaric by today’s standards. A record was a record- and that’s it!

Audacity used to have EQ curves built in- and thanks for that rabbit hole! I remember seeing curves for Columbia, Victor, and even acoustic, there was even an “inverse RIAA” curve. They’re gone now. For shits ‘n’ giggles, I went back to the iMac and opened the file hoping to nullify RIAA and apply the Victor EQ, but the curves aren’t there anymore.

I’d need a db/octave graph to recreate the Victor curve, but that’s a hole I don’t feel like crawling into right now.

Yes- the fixed pitch grooves are quite dynamic! Electronic tube amplification in recording began about 15 years before home phonos had tube amps, whether EQ was applied is a mystery to me.

Correct me if I’m wrong in any of this- INCREASE MY KNOWLEDGE!

EDIT: IIRC, the “V.E.” in the runout of Victor records denotes electronic recording.
Click to expand...

You have opened up a good conversation Mark. What did happen before standardization...? The VHS vs Betamax wars for the groove.
 
Gepetto said:
You have opened up a good conversation Mark. What did happen before standardization...? The VHS vs Betamax wars for the groove.
Click to expand...
Columbia, Victor, and Brunswick all calibrated their recording characteristics to their own phonos, but with indifference to acoustic phonos because they all sounded like shit no matter what they did. Other manufacturers (Perfect, Okeh, etc.) were loose in their standards, but eventually adopted the guidelines of the companies who bought them out. The differences weren’t all that great, but did serve to show a need for a standard- that’s when RIAA pounded the gavel, playback EQ standards were then adopted by the various manufacturers.

The records were playable on any (lateral tracking) phono, the differences weren’t always noticeable, but there nonetheless. There was still a preponderance of acoustic phonos out in the wild- nobody knew the difference…
 
Last edited:
Vintage 700b said:
Listening through the WOPL’d 700b Time Machine !!!


Gerry Mulligan Quartet
Pacific Jazz Label - 10”vinyl - 1952 First Release
Recorded August 1952, October 15-16, 1952
Gerry Mulligan – Baritone Sax
Chet Baker – Trumpet
Bob Whitlock – Bass
Chico Hamilton – Drums
View attachment 70565View attachment 70566
Click to expand...

A td-124 with a SME 3009, Hot damn!
 
With 78 rpm surface speed, I think there are fewer frequency issues. The limitations are/were in the hardware (and it was HARDware.

Just see the improvement 45 rpm makes over 33.3… 78 is to 45 as 45 is to 33.3…

Imagine how good virgin vinyl could sound at 78 rpm with the latest technology and decades of experience…
 
J!m said:
With 78 rpm surface speed, I think there are fewer frequency issues. The limitations are/were in the hardware (and it was HARDware.

Just see the improvement 45 rpm makes over 33.3… 78 is to 45 as 45 is to 33.3…

Imagine how good virgin vinyl could sound at 78 rpm with the latest technology and decades of experience…
Click to expand...
Funny that you should mention the difference in formats…
Video to come…

Consider the difference between 7 1/2ips, 3 3/4ips, and 1 7/8ips on an open reel deck…
 
Last edited:
Younger Brother--"Last Days of Gravity"
On the F's...got some CT-125'S on order for the K's...
Hell, all I need now is some G,H,I,J's..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top