Re: [ARSCLIST] Acostic playback

[Mike Richter <mrichter@xxxxxxx>]

Steven Smolian wrote:
> Karl's point about playing acoustic records back through the acoustic machines on which they were intend to be heard is a good one.  However, there are two arguments that torpedo it.
>
> First is that what we hear is the sum of distortion introduced not only by the playback horn and chain (tapered arm, etc.) but also that of the one or ones used for recording as well as the characteristics of the recording device.  The latter is, mostly unknowable at this stage.  It's the old issue of problems being of a different magnitude where energy changes occur rather than where they are amplified.
>
> The other is that there was no mathematical understanding of the nature of horns until the theory of matched impedance was uncovered in 1923 and exploited in the design of the acoustical Orthophonic machines in 1924 (actual dates may vary by a year- I don't have my research data to hand.)  Before then, all was guesswork- an "art" which led to varying degrees of subjective sonic accuracy until then, none satisfactory, to these ears.
>
> Steve Smolian
Several years ago, I posted at my WWW site a demonstration of playback 
using modern equipment and using my Columbia Phonola console. The latter 
was done with a variety of needles (steel, plastic, thorn) and with the 
pickup microphone at two distances from the player. The others were of 
conventional recording from the original disc and from two transfers to LP.

There is little question that ideal playback on the console had markedly 
different qualities from those of any of the modern approaches. All that 
one can say with confidence is that the sound from the console at its 
best was an ideal the publisher expected from the best equipment at the 
time of release. There is no way to say which is most accurate relative 
to the recorded performance.

I think it unlikely that the publishers even considered accuracy an 
issue in acoustic recording. There would be little point to that 
considering the effects of the artificial recording environment; 
fidelity was not approachable, so was unlikely to be sought.

While listening through the console was a very satisfying experience, it 
had the drawbacks of damage to the disc and of sensitivity to room 
acoustic. There was a series of recordings on Nimbus under the title 
Prima Voce in which the recording was played on an excellent console in 
a large room to exploit room acoustics. A few discs showed superb 
results but most were muddied, some hopelessly.

If there's interest, I can re-post the page for those curious about the 
results. It provides yet another demonstration of the variations induced 
in transferring/digitizing historic materials. Much more of the result 
depends on the transfer engineer than one would hope.

Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/