[78-L] Dumb Gennetts

[Matthew Duncan]

Thanks!  Will check out the online issues of Gramophone...I have referred to them before and found them very interesting.

I can understand that a lot of music, especially certain classical works would sound awesome on a decent gramophone but poor on a radiogram - not to mention the cost of a radiogram in the early 30s when they were new to the market!

Regards,
Matthew




________________________________
From: David Lennick <dlennick at sympatico.ca>
To: 78-L Mail List <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
Sent: Sat, 9 January, 2010 18:16:50
Subject: Re: [78-L] Dumb Gennetts

If you read some of the old issues of Gramophone (and they're online), you'll 
find a preference among some reviewers for the more "pure" sound of acoustical 
machines as opposed to the tubbiness or distortion from radiograms. Reviews of 
classical album sets even advise whether to play with steel or thorn needles, 
down to individual sides in some cases.

dl

Matthew Duncan wrote:
> I think that record buyers in Britian had acoustical players until the 40s on mass due to cost of more advanced equipment rather than a preference coupled with the fact that so many homes didn't have electricity until the WWII period at all or perhaps in only one part of any building.
> 
> I wouldn't know about the equivalent matters in the US surrounding this though.
> 
> I definitely agree with you surrounding the 'wear test' and 78s recorded 'too well'.
> 
> Matthew Duncan
> UK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: David Lennick <dlennick at sympatico.ca>
> To: 78-L Mail List <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Sent: Sat, 9 January, 2010 18:00:26
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Dumb Gennetts
> 
> I don't see how you could "dumb down" the sound without dubbing it or how 
> Varsity reissues could be better if dubbed from the issued versions, unless 
> someone was a genius at EQing.  It is true however that records recorded "too 
> well" would fail the wear test. I also understand that because so many 
> collectors in Britain preferred acoustical players, many recordings were 
> equalized to play well on those machines.
> 
> Then there are those Edith Piaf Polydors, which seem equalized to sound as if 
> they're being PLAYED on an acoustic machine.
> 
> dl
> 
> Malcolm Rockwell wrote:
>> Thanks, Al.
>> So Gennett "dumbed down" the stampers? If the Varsity pressings are 
>> better that would mean that the mother was untouched and new stampers 
>> were pulled from the "clean" mother. Still can't see how low-end 
>> response would be cut doing that.
>> Malcolm
>>
>> *******
>>
>> Al Haug wrote:
>>> Kennedy in 78Q number 8, page 47. Opinion on Varsity is my own.
>>>
>>> 2010/1/8 Malcolm Rockwell <malcolm at 78data.com>
>>>
>>>  
>>>> Who wrote it and what issue is it in?
>>>> Malcolm
>>>>
>>>> *******
>>>>
>>>> Al Haug wrote:
>>>>    
>>>>> An article in 78 Quarterly stated that Gennett regularly "dumbed down"
>>>>>      
>>>> their
>>>>    
>>>>> sound quality so the records would sound ok on the wind-up phonographs
>>>>>      
>>>> that
>>>>    
>>>>> their hillbilly and blues customers were likely to have, much to the
>>>>>      
>>>> chagrin
>>>>    
>>>>> of their engineers. Varsity reissues of this material often sounds
>>>>>      
>>>> better.
>>>>    
>>>>> 2010/1/8 Michael Biel <mbiel at mbiel.com>
>>>>>
_______________________________________________
78-L mailing list
78-L at klickitat.78online.com
http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l