Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.

[phillip holmes <insuranceman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Some of this depended on length of the track.  If it was a short single, 
they'd cut louder.  Softer if longer.  You get the idea.   The mastering 
engineers were always encouraged to cut singles as loud as possible.  They 
were into the loudness wars back in the '60s (even further back?).  It's my 
understanding that all mono 45s and 33s were supposed to be 1mil (that was 
the RIAA standard, I believe).
The reason for the change to .7 mil on stereo was that the cutting stylus 
was going up and down AND side to side when cutting stereo (as opposed to 
just lateral for mono).  With really wild signals, you'd get all different 
groove diameters that could cut through to the adjacent groove, so they made 
the groove smaller to give more breathing room for the mastering engineer. 
If they were still cutting stereo records with a 1 mil tip, it'd make for 
short sides.  I remember when some of those greatest hits records came out 
in the '80s that fit 30 minutes per side.  It's amazing that they could cut 
a decent product with so little breathing room (lots of compression??).
Phillip
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Shoshani" <mshoshani@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 3:46 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.


> On Friday 16 June 2006 10.25, Lou Judson wrote:
>
> > Curiosity quibble - isn't the groove on a 45 midway between microgroove
> > and 78 size? Is there a specific name for it, or is it really
> > considered microgroove like Lps? I see a distinct difference,
> > visually... or is that just the larger excursion?
>
> I think it depends on the 45...for EPs they cut really fine, 
> low-modulation
> grooves, but I noticed when I was a kid in the 70s that more recent stereo
> 45s had grooves that were not as fine as LPs, but not nearly so coarse as
> mono 45 grooves from the 1950s.  Pick up a 1950s pressing of an average 
> R&B
> or rock'n'roll record and you'll see the grooves are larger than modern
> grooves, plus the pitch is wider and the modulation is almost as wide as 
> some
> 78s were.
>
> Michael Shoshani