[78-L] Columbia classics [FWD]

[martha]

 Thanks to bad management and stock manipulation (or "fraud", if you will) 
Columbia was just a shadow of its pre-1920 self.  Consider that they'd 
offered themselves to Edison, back around 1910, and that Easton had thrown 
himself off his commuter train in his shame over later poor performance. 
It's no wonder that post-1922 Victors outnumber Columbias at least 10 to 1 
in old collections, and that people like Paul Whiteman discovered too late 
that Columbia sales were abysmal.

 So, to finally make a point:  Columbia concentrated on making cheap 
dime-store labels after 1925, and barely had any money for fancy orchestral 
recordings - especially when they could draw from European masters.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Harkin" <harkinmike at yahoo.com>
To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:37 AM
Subject: Re: [78-L] Columbia classics [FWD]


Some years ago I did a 'body count' US vs UK Columbias amongst the first
200 or so classical album sets.  Very low, something like 5%.  Recall only a 
couple of Damrosch's and the "Karma" off the top of ny head.  Will redo it 
to refresh my memory.  BTW, the "Karma" doesn't sound too bad in the
Pristine reissue

Mike in Plovdiv

--- On Wed, 1/27/10, DAVID BURNHAM <burnhamd at rogers.com> wrote:

> From: DAVID BURNHAM <burnhamd at rogers.com>
> Subject: [78-L] Columbia classics
> To: 78-L at 78online.com
> Date: Wednesday, January 27, 2010, 12:19 AM
> Rant for the day!
>
> We've been talking about the advent of electrical
> recording, has anyone ever heard a decent electrically
> recorded orchestral performance on 78 done by Columbia in
> the USA? I can't even think of many Viva~Tonal Columbias
> of USA orchestras