I have a fondness for some of these old recordings and do frequent the stores of people who restore them. Some, even after throwing everything that cedar can do still end up in glorious no-fi but I still prefer them to some of the hyper-polished perfect performances that have been common since the 70s.
AKA academic and sterile. Musical taxidermy. The tempo of this performance is surprising, maybe the quickest I've heard.
certainly quite rapid, but if that is what the composer wanted. I remember first time I heard Widor playing his toccata in a recording thinking how slow it seemed, but that was before it clicked that most organists are showing off how fast they can play rather than understanding how to make the music breathe in a space with an 8 second echo.
Very sludgy in places, can you recognize the cymbals & gong in Mars for instance? The Lower bass seems somewhat missing. Overall bit of a struggle to listen to, but you do get to see the composer's intention and Mars in particular needs that insistent fast beat, its the piece that sells the whole suite which is why its first not third as astronomy would expect.
No dust cover? Seriously?
No dust cover? Seriously?
It's a 99 year old recording in the first year of electrical recordings. All things considered pretty good. Of course if you find it a struggle, then historic recordings are not for you, which is fine. The reason it's so great to be a music lover in our modern age is that you have so much choice.
Not sure I understand the comment on the dust cover though.
Not sure I understand the comment on the dust cover though.
The video is of an LP rotating on a turntable without a dust cover. Not recommended.
not recommended by whom? That is a transcription turntable and they didn't come with any sort of cover. My turntable has a dust cover and the user manual specifically tells you to keep it up whilst playing. The dust cover exists to keep dust off when not in use, not whilst playing records.
I enjoyed it.
Does paint a good picture, almost soundtrack like performances.
For some reason it brought to mind the 1964 film adaptation of First Men in the Moon. Nathan Juran as director.
Slightly modified HG Wells story. Rather strange and interesting Victorian style Moon lander.
Great Music, If you told me it was a 60's Sci Fi Soundtrack, probably believe it.
Does paint a good picture, almost soundtrack like performances.
For some reason it brought to mind the 1964 film adaptation of First Men in the Moon. Nathan Juran as director.
Slightly modified HG Wells story. Rather strange and interesting Victorian style Moon lander.
Great Music, If you told me it was a 60's Sci Fi Soundtrack, probably believe it.
Forgetting the lofi quality for a while I thought the record had a certain 'old sound' charm to it, maybe the music style added to the magic as well, and so while surfing around the net while listening suddenly 42 minutes had passed by, but in the long run for me it's preferably a one off exercise.
I assume this transfer wasn't remastered in any way(?), would be curious what one could make out of this recording remastering it, and add to that the advent of AI sound tech, like the relatively newly remastered Beatles Now and Then - YT released some year ago.
ps. Having the dust cover down does not work on my Rega Planar 3 vinyl spinner because of the resonances born inside affecting the sound, playing loud it would run intermittently into oscillation, although one could mitigate that with added distances preventing the cover from shutting tight.
I assume this transfer wasn't remastered in any way(?), would be curious what one could make out of this recording remastering it, and add to that the advent of AI sound tech, like the relatively newly remastered Beatles Now and Then - YT released some year ago.
ps. Having the dust cover down does not work on my Rega Planar 3 vinyl spinner because of the resonances born inside affecting the sound, playing loud it would run intermittently into oscillation, although one could mitigate that with added distances preventing the cover from shutting tight.
If you want to hear a heroic restoration of the 1922 accoustic recording of Mars it is here https://www.pristineclassical.com/collections/composer-holst/products/pasc131 . This will not be for everyone as it is so different from modern ideas of fideliy.
Too true, Bill ... but tragic how so many people seem not to comprehend this simple fact. 😱
Yup, hilarious. And so is the pretentious 301/SPU in the clip - as if those would make any difference at all to the atrocious quality.
Personal opinion: the 301/401, beside their undeniable appeal for some music genres, are really poor suited for classical. The grease bearing even less so. Not sure if it is the bearing tolerance and friction or the high level of motor vibrations, but the high frequency resolution just isn't there. No experience with newly manufactured bearing upgrades, these could make a difference.
Many people who post vinyl rips on your tube add some video of the record playing, Why single this person out?
To return to topic, Holst recorded it twice with The London Symphony. Once in 1924 and once in 1926.
If you search Discogs you will find Pearl GEMMCD 9417 for the 1924 recording
and EMI 754.837-2, Koch 37018-2 and Dante LYS 030/1 for the 1926 recording.
All according to this site wich has many more 'Planets' to explore.
If you search Discogs you will find Pearl GEMMCD 9417 for the 1924 recording
and EMI 754.837-2, Koch 37018-2 and Dante LYS 030/1 for the 1926 recording.
All according to this site wich has many more 'Planets' to explore.
Nice, I love chasing down different presses.
With some of my 78's and no tape masters. They often re recorded the performance when the press master got old.
So often the exact same catalog number and same year pressing might have slightly different performance.
I had a few examples with old Duke Ellington 78's
Some trumpet solo's were ever so slightly different.
My favorite was damaged and I bought 4 different copies of the same catalog number.
None of them had the slightly ever so slightly better solo that I lost
With some of my 78's and no tape masters. They often re recorded the performance when the press master got old.
So often the exact same catalog number and same year pressing might have slightly different performance.
I had a few examples with old Duke Ellington 78's
Some trumpet solo's were ever so slightly different.
My favorite was damaged and I bought 4 different copies of the same catalog number.
None of them had the slightly ever so slightly better solo that I lost
Last edited:
Odd. Dust covers are often smokey acrylic to reduce sunlight intensity - one of the factors in warping discs, so that's another reason to always use it.
Static is generated when playing, that attracts the dust actively to the disc surface - also when playing is when a turntable is most vulnerable to accidents as the arm is free and stylus engaged. Playing loud may release dust from the ceiling too(!), and in a party situation lack of dust-cover = drink spilled on the playing disc and bent cantilever!
Someone mentioned resonance in dust covers - yes I suppose it is an issue, someone may have invented a well-damped dust cover?