[78-L] Covering terminology

[David Lennick]

Steven C. Barr wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Harold Aherne" <leotolstoy_75 at yahoo.com>
> <snip>
>> Does anyone know exactly when "78" came into use as a noun? I don't mean 
>> "78 rpm
>> record", as undoubtedly appeared already in 1949 or so, but just "78".
>>
> I'm going to guess here! The term wouldn't have been needed before 1949,
> since ALL records were 78rpm. 

To all intents and purposes..although 33s were sold by Victor between 1931 and 
1934 (the ill-fated "Program Transcriptions") and radio stations, movie 
theatres and production studios had to differentiate because they used the 
slower speed beginning with Vitaphone in 1926. And home recording machines in 
the 40s had 33RPM as well as 78, so the labels of blank discs often showed both 
speeds for you to check off. Film strips for industrial presentations and for 
schools also came with audio on 33RPM discs in many cases (usually leatherette).

> There was a short period around 1951-52
> when "singles" came in all three speeds...so a record buyer had to buy
> records which fit his/her/its player. "45's" were heavily promoted as such
> by RCA, and that in turn may have led to records being referred to by
> speed (the 7" LP singles can pretty well be ignored here, as they were
> by record buyers in that era...?!). As well, the hobby of "'old' record
> collecting" was beginning to gather a following; this may have created
> more interest in "78's?!"
> 
> Since 45's first outsold 78's around 1954, we can figure that the
> term "78" was in use by then...?! After all, "78" was a lot easier to
> say or write than "78 rpm phonograph record"...?!
> 
> Steven C. Barr 

And there was no World War One until there was World War Two.

dl