[78-L] dubs

[David Lennick]

I've wondered about that myself, but figured that stampers could also be prone 
to rough handling or storage. Sousa's "Stars and Stripes Forever" on
American Victor is a dub after a certain point (and a terrible one, oddly 
enough numbered take 1R) but I don't think the other side is dubbed. But the A 
side might also have been used for Victor's Pict-Ur-Music series, hence the 
quicker need for replacement masters.

dl

DAVID BURNHAM wrote:
> I just found a Hank Snow record where side A is a dub and side B is an original pressing.  I'm curious to know how one side's stamper gets worn out faster than the other side's if they both make the same number of records.  Assuming side A is the top half of the waffle iron type of record stamper, does it take more of a beating than the stationary side B stamper on the bottom?  If that were the case, I don't think it would take too long before they'd realize this and put the side A stamper on the bottom.  This is not a first for me, I've seen many records with the same situation.  I've never seen a copy of the 12 inch "Harry Lauder Medley" where A isn't a dub and B the original.  As we all know, a second generation 78 is a huge step down from the first.  This is why it doesn't matter much if someone advertises a 78 in mint condition - if it's a dub, you're better off with an original in just good condition.  
> 
> If it hasn't happened already, the technology will soon be in place where 78s can be scanned with a laser, (not played), and even from a worn disc, the result will be all of the original material without any distortion, evidence of wear or remnant of the surface whatsoever.  What you will hear will be the same as what was heard in the recording studio from the mikes.  This will be particularly interesting when they process first generation acoustic discs and we'll hear for the first time, a sound which wasn't even heard in the recording room at the time of recording.  But this process will only give such a result if it is dealing with the first generation, because on every subsequent generation, no matter how carefully it was mastered, the surface noise of the previous generations has all of the same characteristics as the original signal itself and can't be separated.
> 
> db
> ________________