Re: [ARSCLIST] Pristine Audio and the Milllennials . . .

[Howard Friedman <hsf318@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Steven, you wrote,

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Howard Friedman" <hsf318@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> I think the point I'd like to make is, unless a 78rpm disc has never been
transferred to either EP, LP, or CD, then I would certainly not want to destroy
whatever sound is on the groove walls with 30 gram weight running around for 3-4
minute.s  If it has been transferred to EP, LP, or CD, then by  all means listen
to the transfer.   I would bet my hat, stereo system and computer that Ward
Marston does not transcribe 78s by playing them on a vintage phonograph, uh,
excuse me, gramophone!
>
I'm assuming you didn't quite either "say what you meant"...or "mean what
you said"...?! The above says, "unless a 78...has never been transferred...
I would certainly not want to destroy..."?! Thus, you only want to destroy
it if(f) it has never been transferrred...?!

> If you really want to hear "what our ancestors heard," go bakc to the Pearl LP
and/or CD releases.  They are very proud of the fact they their transcriptions
are untouched by an equalization!  That is, if you actually prefer all that
surface noise!  The case in point here would be Pearl's 5 CD set of the complete
Tetrazzini recordings.  Such scratching!
>
Even then, the un-improved sound is NOT "what our ancestors heard"...?!
The originals were presumably played on a wide-sonic-range device and/or
system...and those were effectively unknown when our ancestors played
their 78rpm phonorecords...?! Oddly enough, the results of such
playing will usually include a LOT more "shellac noise" than do any
vintage players...primarily because modern playback systems include
much more high-frequency content, which on a typical 78 provides
only another octave of surface noise...!

Steven C. Barr

And we're really getting into semantics here.  Of course I would never intentionally destroy a 78 or any other audio format, unless of course, it was a real stinker that never should have been recorded in the first place (examples, please????)  Also to be considered is the fact that a pristine pressing of a 78 recording literally hot off the press, and made from an all-wax recording tablet, has virtually no surface noise, IF properly pressed in the first place.

As to the Tetrazzinis, the complete set is comprised of 96 recordings made between 1903 and 1922, including the four Zonophones which I cannot find in any listing.  But surely noone would have, COULD have, collected a complete set of 96 records that had never been played before.  And it is usually the "played before" factor that introduces more surface noise than was present in the first place!  And interestingly, Moses lists five Zonophones, while Pearl's "Complete recordings" provides only four.

Howard Friedman