I was curious about the imbalances because the Caruso recording is so different on electrical vs acoustical playback. One is dull, the other is lively. Is it just a different frequency response?
Probably most of it is due to frequency response. Acoustic phonographs have a big boost in the mids, right around the pocket where the male tenor voice range sits. There's a good reason that most of the famous singers on record back then were tenors... Caruso, John McCormack, Billy Murray, etc. That range also enhances the consonant sounds, making the diction sound clearer. Electrical transcription is stone flat, and if you try to EQ the voice naturally, it feels like something is missing. But if you EQ trying to incorporate that midrange bump, it usually sounds better.
But I think there's something else involved too... dynamics. If you listen to the part where Caruso's voice swells, the acoustic phonograph puts out a much louder peak level than electrical transcription. It's almost as if the diaphragm and horn are doing a bit of peak expansion. The Victor Number Two soundbox, which was used on all of the Victor machines at that time, is extremely loud and packs a real punch. When I was recording that Caruso record, it was so loud my ears were distorting. I was surprised when I listened to the recording at a lower volume level, because I thought the distortion was in the record, but the microphones dealt with the high volume better than my ears did. I'm sure if I stood a few feet from Caruso my ears would have rung too!
There are certain advantages that acoustic playback have over electric... The dynamics seem to be 1:1. There is no volume control, so if the singer sings soft, it's soft; and if he sings really loud, it's really loud. The horn also tends to project the sound out into the room. If you sit a little off axis to the horn, there is an uncanny aural image of the singer a few feet in front of the machine. It's kind of like a dimensional projection of the singer standing in front of the horn when he was recording. I've shown this to friends and it makes the hair stand up on the back of their necks. It only works from certain angles though. If you get up and move to another place in the room, the illusion vanishes.
One last difference between acoustic and electrical is room ambience. Because the recording horn could only hear sounds that were within ten feet of it, that meant that there is never any hall ambience on acoustic recordings. They are totally dry, as if they were recorded in a booth. Sometimes people doing electrical transcriptions add fake reverb to them to take that curse off. But the Victor Phonograph Manual had an ingenious suggestion on how to fix that. They suggested that the phonograph be positioned in the corner of a large room with high ceilings. This way, the walls of the room would couple with the horn and effectively extend its length- lowering the lowest bass notes and adding a completely natural room ambience. Since it's identical to the room ambience a person speaking in the room would have, it adds a level of realism and it never sounds tacked on like a digital reverb.
Tomorrow I take delivery of my Brunswick Cortez. It is a beautiful machine with a 27 inch spruce horn. (My VV-X has a 12 inch pot metal horn.) I'm going to do some recordings and videos and see what I can come up with. I have a feeling that the Brunswick will add a range that is even better than my little Victrolla. I'll post a few of my experiments next week.
But I do want to share more of my electrical transfers with you. This one is my pride and joy. The first act of Wagner's Die Walkure conducted by Bruno Walter with the Vienna Philharmonic in 1935. Siegmund is Lauritz Melchior, Sieglinde is Lotte Lehmann and Hunding is Emmanual List. This is one of the classics of the gramophone, and I was extremely lucky to locate a pristine Z shellac copy. There are dozens of CDs of this, but none of them sound as good as my transfer.
http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/walkureact1walter1935.mp3
But I think there's something else involved too... dynamics. If you listen to the part where Caruso's voice swells, the acoustic phonograph puts out a much louder peak level than electrical transcription. It's almost as if the diaphragm and horn are doing a bit of peak expansion. The Victor Number Two soundbox, which was used on all of the Victor machines at that time, is extremely loud and packs a real punch. When I was recording that Caruso record, it was so loud my ears were distorting. I was surprised when I listened to the recording at a lower volume level, because I thought the distortion was in the record, but the microphones dealt with the high volume better than my ears did. I'm sure if I stood a few feet from Caruso my ears would have rung too!
There are certain advantages that acoustic playback have over electric... The dynamics seem to be 1:1. There is no volume control, so if the singer sings soft, it's soft; and if he sings really loud, it's really loud. The horn also tends to project the sound out into the room. If you sit a little off axis to the horn, there is an uncanny aural image of the singer a few feet in front of the machine. It's kind of like a dimensional projection of the singer standing in front of the horn when he was recording. I've shown this to friends and it makes the hair stand up on the back of their necks. It only works from certain angles though. If you get up and move to another place in the room, the illusion vanishes.
One last difference between acoustic and electrical is room ambience. Because the recording horn could only hear sounds that were within ten feet of it, that meant that there is never any hall ambience on acoustic recordings. They are totally dry, as if they were recorded in a booth. Sometimes people doing electrical transcriptions add fake reverb to them to take that curse off. But the Victor Phonograph Manual had an ingenious suggestion on how to fix that. They suggested that the phonograph be positioned in the corner of a large room with high ceilings. This way, the walls of the room would couple with the horn and effectively extend its length- lowering the lowest bass notes and adding a completely natural room ambience. Since it's identical to the room ambience a person speaking in the room would have, it adds a level of realism and it never sounds tacked on like a digital reverb.
Tomorrow I take delivery of my Brunswick Cortez. It is a beautiful machine with a 27 inch spruce horn. (My VV-X has a 12 inch pot metal horn.) I'm going to do some recordings and videos and see what I can come up with. I have a feeling that the Brunswick will add a range that is even better than my little Victrolla. I'll post a few of my experiments next week.
But I do want to share more of my electrical transfers with you. This one is my pride and joy. The first act of Wagner's Die Walkure conducted by Bruno Walter with the Vienna Philharmonic in 1935. Siegmund is Lauritz Melchior, Sieglinde is Lotte Lehmann and Hunding is Emmanual List. This is one of the classics of the gramophone, and I was extremely lucky to locate a pristine Z shellac copy. There are dozens of CDs of this, but none of them sound as good as my transfer.
http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/walkureact1walter1935.mp3
That's a remarkable recording and performance. Thanks!
If I'm in L.A. anytime soon, I want to come visit. 🙂 Looking forward to seeing and hearing the Bruswick when you post it.
The midrange peak that favors tenors is something I'm familiar with and think works well in acoustic machines. And I've heard that projection trick out of Edison machines. Did it become a disadvantage with electrical recordings?
The dry acoustics are funny. I have a Denon CD from the 1980s that is an anechoic recording of an orchestra. Many people think it's "vintage." Sounds a bit like it.
If I'm in L.A. anytime soon, I want to come visit. 🙂 Looking forward to seeing and hearing the Bruswick when you post it.
The midrange peak that favors tenors is something I'm familiar with and think works well in acoustic machines. And I've heard that projection trick out of Edison machines. Did it become a disadvantage with electrical recordings?
The dry acoustics are funny. I have a Denon CD from the 1980s that is an anechoic recording of an orchestra. Many people think it's "vintage." Sounds a bit like it.
Here is my Brunswick Cortez in action...
Raymond Scott: The Penguin http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/thepenguin.mp3
Raymond Scott: Dinner Music For A Pack Of Hungry Cannibals http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/dinnermusic.mp3
Ted Lewis "St Louis Blues" http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/stlouisblues.mp3
Ted Lewis "My Mama's In Town" http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/mamasintown.mp3
Raymond Scott: The Penguin http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/thepenguin.mp3
Raymond Scott: Dinner Music For A Pack Of Hungry Cannibals http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/dinnermusic.mp3
Ted Lewis "St Louis Blues" http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/stlouisblues.mp3
Ted Lewis "My Mama's In Town" http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/mamasintown.mp3
Some photos of my new Cortez...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
Thanks for the pix and the files. That Cotez is in lovely shape. It's more forward sounding in the midrange than I would have thought with that big horn. How does is compare by ear to your other sets?
The Raymond Scott cuts must have been the ones that Don Byron transcribed for his "Bug Music" CD. They are very close.
The Raymond Scott cuts must have been the ones that Don Byron transcribed for his "Bug Music" CD. They are very close.
It's a good all in one machine because it does well with both acoustic and electrical recordings. Victor Orthophonics are great with electricals, but they tend to swallow up acoustics... a lot like the modern turntable does. The Cortez is loud and clear with a balanced response and much better projection than an Ortho.
There was only one recording made of these songs. I think Scott's Quintette was only in existence for two years. He got the job as bandleader for Your Hit Parade and had to give up recording. All of the Quintette stuff was charted and rehearsed meticulously. It was like machine music.
There was only one recording made of these songs. I think Scott's Quintette was only in existence for two years. He got the job as bandleader for Your Hit Parade and had to give up recording. All of the Quintette stuff was charted and rehearsed meticulously. It was like machine music.
Here is an unusual transfer of a set of 78s from 1948... This is Mendelssohn's 5th Symphony (Reformation) played by Charles Munch and L'orchestra de la Society du Conservatoire de Paris. The unusual thing about it is that it was one of the earliest full frequency range recordings... yes, hifi on 78s!
http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/mendelssohnreformation1948.mp3
http://www.vintageip.com/xfers/mendelssohnreformation1948.mp3
Nice listening indeed. I am wondering what kind of stylus you are using in your Cortez.
Is it gem, is it steel? What is the pressure? It would seem that using the tech of the period might cause excessive wear on the wonderful and irreplaceable recordings you have.
Is it gem, is it steel? What is the pressure? It would seem that using the tech of the period might cause excessive wear on the wonderful and irreplaceable recordings you have.
It uses steel needles. I keep three types in the needle cups... soft tone, medium tone and spearpoint sirens (either medium or loud depending on the direction you turn it). As long as your machine is in proper alignment and you change the needle with each play, records will last pretty much forever. The idea is that the needles wear out so the records won't. The records are actually harder and more abrasive than the needles are.
These records were designed to be played on machines like this.
These records were designed to be played on machines like this.
No, I once got a batch of records that had been damaged by fiber needles. The fiber had built up on the bottom of the groove and had turned into mulch growing mold. (The records must have been in a humid place.) When I washed the records and ran a steel needle through them, all this gunk came out. It took 3 or 4 playings to get them entirely clean of the stuff. Unfortunately, the mold had started to eat into the shellac at the bottom of the grooves and there were little pits that sounded like crackle. Steel needles are more convenient, and if you change them every play, they won't wear records.
Anyone getting to NJ should see the collection of recording/reproducing machines from the early 1900's at the Edison National Museum in West Orange NJ.
Thank you for this, bigshot😀 I also believe fibre or thorn needles don't dissipate frictional heat during playback the way steel needles do and possibly even may partly 'melt' shellac grooves.
I have two acoustic pickups here (one a beautiful old Pathe) but have never used them.
Lovely, interesting thread. Please continue. I have a few hundred 78rpm shellac records and regularly play them on my 301's.
bulgin
That's a fantastic transfer for 1925, bigshot!
It's well know that thorn needles heat the groove which then forms microscopic cracks as it cools causing high levels of crackle.
It's well know that thorn needles heat the groove which then forms microscopic cracks as it cools causing high levels of crackle.
Nearly finished what I think is a somewhat stunning restoration of Bruno Walter conducting the Vienna Philharmonic in 1938. Will post when finished 🙂 ...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.