[78-L] Pagliacci set on British Columbia

Sun Dec 5 10:53:36 PST 2010

From: Royal Pemberton <ampex354 at gmail.com>
> I have some 1920s Aussie Columbias with American recordings from 1926 on
> them, and their labels all state 'Speed 80' even though they were recorded
> at or near 78(.26) AFAIK. Understandable for the two of them I have with UK
> electric recordings from 1926 when they still recorded at 80, but still....

The label speeds are usually as "accurate" as the notes in the catalogs
and sleeves that say to use 78 or 80.  The only Victor of note which has
a speed notation on the label is one of the quartet or sextet recordings
where the note says "Speed 82".  However it turns out that the speed is
actually 80!  High for a Victor but the actual speed is still 2 RPM
lower than the note, just like many Victor 78s are around 76.

By the way, the strobe disc speed for 78 in 50 Hertz power locations
such as Australia and Europe is 77.92.  It is 78.26 only here in the 60
Hertz area.

Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com 

On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Matthew Duncan
<recordgeek334578 at yahoo.com>wrote:

> The only 40s issues of earlier works by Columbia I have seen do have the
> 80rpm
> speed on them, so for example in 1948 if you bought a 12" classical disc
> pressed
> the year before (but contained a piece done in 1927 at the 80rpm speed) it
> would
> have 80rpm on the label.
>
> I'm guessing this would be the same for other examples, I see no reason why
> they
> would label others up at 78rpm and some at 80rpm.
>
> Matthew.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Philip Carli <Philip_Carli at pittsford.monroe.edu>
> To: 78-L Mail List <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Sent: Sun, 5 December, 2010 17:20:15
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Pagliacci set on British Columbia
>
> I had been thinking of "Even bravest heart" just this morning! Thanks for
> that
> Damian. And one or two other things; 1) whatever you think of Chorley, Fred
> E.
> Weatherly (I think he did the first _Pagliacci_ translation) or Basil Hood
> (who
> did _The Merry Widow_ English libretto heard 'round the world -- and it's
> closer
> to the original German than most), their translations were culturally
> closer in
> spirit to the original librettists than modern ones. 2) Is there anything
> really risible about hearing Vilhelm Hansen sing _Tosca_ in Danish? I've
> got
> that -- it's not Italian, but it's expressive singing, pretty potently
> played
> orchestrally, I enjoy it and I don't know Danish, so maybe language
> unfamilarity
> is a component. 3) David, there's a whole world of opera in English before
> Menotti that you might not find vocally sickening. Sometimes poetically and
> dramatically questionable (well, that goes with opera, right?), but
> musically
> fluent and enjoyable at the very least. And I remem
> ber you transferred one of the best for commercial release about fifteen
> years
> ago -- a piece often called an operetta, but never by its creators.
>
> And finally to get things back to the original inquiry, some of the Percy
> Pitt
> BBC Wireless Symphony Orchestra records, all recorded in the late 20s at 80
> rpm,
> stayed in the catalogue until the early 1940s relabelled "BBC Symphony
> Orchestra", but I don't know if any there was any label indication of the
> increased speed on the late issues.
>
> PC
> ________________________________________
> From: 78-l-bounces at klickitat.78online.com [
> 78-l-bounces at klickitat.78online.com]
> On Behalf Of Damian's 78s [damians78s at damians78s.co.uk]
> Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2010 11:40 AM
> To: 78-L Mail List
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Pagliacci set on British Columbia
>
> I'd tend to agree with Philip - having listened to a great many English
> language operatic recordings (and attended quite a few English language
> opera performances) does allow one to listen through the translated text.
> As
> well as English National Opera, there are still a number of smaller
> companies here in the UK that perform opera in English. These tend to be in
> more modern translations. However, the older (first) translations into
> English of many operas are very much of their time (and not necessarily
> good
> poetry). The same can, of course, hold true for the original libretti.
> Opera in English is still looked down on by many. But for me, for example,
> it niggles that when Valentin's aria from Gounod's Faust is sung as a
> concert piece, it tends to be in French. It was written, of course, for
> Charles Santley, to an English text by Chorley (Even bravest heart) who
> provided the standard English translation of the work.
>
> As regards Bransby Williams, he's very entertaining, particularly in his
> Dickensian characters. Keep an eye on my website for a number of his
> recordings (from 1908 to 1933) in a few weeks time.
>
> Damian Rogan
> www.damians78s.co.uk
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "David Lennick" <dlennick at sympatico.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2010 5:00 AM
> To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Pagliacci set on British Columbia
>
> > I think we're pretty much on target here, actually..and I also can't
> > understand
> > the reverence accorded Leonard Bernstein (I have strong opinions about
> > that
> > man, who I think should have been charged with murder as well as
> wholesale
> > thievery..would have made a great 3-part series on Law & Order, the
> > derivative
> > composer who tormented his wife). But the original question was about the
> > recording speed and the matrix numbers at the point where English
> Columbia
> > might have changed from 80 to 78. I tossed in a gratuitous opinion based
> > on my
> > opinion of this performance and old-time Opera In English, and to expand
> > it
> > beyond the original two words (as we seem to have done) would have
> changed
> > the
> > topic (as we seem to have done).
> >
> > I like Harold Williams, can live without Evan Williams, just happened to
> > hear
> > Bransby Williams (age 82).
> >
> > Cheers
> > David
> >
> > On 12/4/2010 11:49 PM, Philip Carli wrote:
> >> Dear David -- I've never found a flat two-word descriptive like "pretty
> >> awful" very informative or considered-sounding as an opinion. It just
> >> sounds like a toss-off. I thought opinions& criticism had got past
> such
> >> statements that tend to crush discussion; hence what appears to be my
> >> "jumping down throats" in my reply. It's not helpful, is it? The
> >> recording itself is not "pretty awful"; _you_ find it pretty awful, and
> >> that's more to the point. (I'd go through life happily never hearing
> >> another note of Mahler, or anything composed or conducted by Leonard
> >> Bernstein, but those are truly personal tastes and I'm willing to
> >> consider changing them some day.) Make it clearly a personal statement
> >> rather than a graven-in-stone dictum.
> >>
> >> And as to opera in English translation sounding ludicrous, it is a
> matter
> >> of culture, taste, and historical perspective. I have dozens of
> >> recordings of operatic arias and entire works in translations from their
> >> original languages; who's to say those are ludicrous (except, perhaps,
> in
> >> the case of the French _Le Favorite_ being turned into _La Favorita_,
> >> where the Italian version makes demonstrably dramaturgical nonsense of
> >> the original)? Who in modern poetic Italian would ever utter "Infelice!
> >> e tuo credevi"? And o.k., we usually hear "M'appari" rather than "Ach,
> >> so fromm". Which do we tee-hee? (And should we badger singers into the
> >> impenetrabilities of Czech to sing _Rusalka_ or _Prodana nevesta_
> >> "correctly" or give them serviceable German, as was the 19th century
> >> custom, or -- dare I say it? -- English versions to sing so we can hear
> >> them at all? I heard the American premiere of _Rusalka_ as a child in
> >> San Diego and again at the English National Opera 12 years ago -
> > - b
> >> oth in English.)
> >>
> >> If you're at all interested (and you can skip this if you like), the
> >> _Pagliacci_ set is, to my ear, rather well conducted; hardly sluggish;
> >> the orchestra is a good cross-section of better-class (but not
> >> absolute-top) 1920s London orchestral playing (which was often a real
> >> gamble, but more characterful than German and more precise than
> Italian),
> >> with some fire and style. (I actually tend to prefer not-quite-perfect
> >> playing to sterile perfection; more character and insight into what the
> >> musicians are doing.) Mullings is impassioned but perhaps hard to like,
> >> and that's really rather interesting as he was such a commanding figure
> >> at the time and maybe _we're_ missing something. Licette's light but
> >> pleasant, I can't fault Nash (he hasn't much to do) and Williams is
> solid
> >> and reliable, and sometimes really thrilling, but in the English style
> --
> >> which may be the unattractive thing with the set overall for many
> people.
> >> I got into a discussion on Evan Williams with an English c
> > oll
> >> eague (I being anti-Williams), and I went back to the records and
> >> realized I was coming at his style the wrong way. The translation is the
> >> original, and many companies (including the Carl Rosa) used it to
> >> popularize the piece. Give the floweriness the leeway of its period, as
> >> I daresay an Italian would argue for Leoncavallo's own text. The set is
> >> a document of an interesting time in British opera, when the Old Vic was
> >> also doing opera in English to working-class audiences (there's a nice
> H.
> >> V. Morton piece on that), the Carl Rosa was performing everywhere from
> >> Hell to Huddersfield, and English Columbia decided to expend substantial
> >> trouble in making the UK's first electrical complete opera sets for a
> >> yet-untested public.
> >>
> >> These are _my_ opinions, and they are only that. And I do jump!
> >>
> >> Philip
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: 78-l-bounces at klickitat.78online.com
> >> [78-l-bounces at klickitat.78online.com] On Behalf Of David Lennick
> >> [dlennick at sympatico.ca]
> >> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 10:20 PM
> >> To: 78-L Mail List
> >> Subject: Re: [78-L] Pagliacci set on British Columbia
> >>
> >> Sorry, Philip. I've heard the set and if you prefer idiosyncratic, fine.
> >> I
> >> transferred it and hoped I'd never have to listen to it again. As for
> the
> >> conductor, my error, it's Eugene Goossens Senior. I was looking at a
> >> photocopy
> >> of the album's liner and missed the "Snr". Why are you jumping down my
> >> throat
> >> over a legitimate opinion which have been echoed on this list? Good
> >> singers,
> >> bad concept. Opera in English was something considered a necessity at
> one
> >> point
> >> and may still have its defenders, but even you'd have to admit that it
> >> can
> >> sound pretty ludicrous.
> >>
> >> dl
> >>
> >> On 12/4/2010 9:54 PM, Philip Carli wrote:
> >>> What a cheap dismissive comment. I have this set and the recent
> >>> excellent CD transfer done in the UK and it's certainly idiosyncratic,
> >>> but not just unthinkingly "pretty awful". And which Goossens is it?
> >>> And which translation? And what's the history of the set? And why is it
> >>> important (yes, it is)? I throw these out because I get annoyed at flip
> >>> judgments.
> >>> ________________________________________
> >>> From: 78-l-bounces at klickitat.78online.com
> >>> [78-l-bounces at klickitat.78online.com] On Behalf Of David Lennick
> >>> [dlennick at sympatico.ca]
> >>> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 7:16 PM
> >>> To: 78-L Mail List
> >>> Subject: Re: [78-L] Pagliacci set on British Columbia
> >>>
> >>> I've had this set..I may still have it (don't see it on the shelf) but
> I
> >>> held
> >>> onto the information. Matrix numbers are between WA 4999 and 5062.
> >>> Features
> >>> Heddle Nash, Miriam Licette, Dennis Noble, Frank Mullings and Harold
> >>> Williams,
> >>> conducted by Eugene Goossens, and as I recall it's pretty awful.
> >>>
> >>> dl
> >>>
> >>> On 12/4/2010 6:25 PM, Royal Pemberton wrote:
> >>>> I wonder if they were any more or less consistent with that speed
> >>>> specification compared with other labels of the time? Somewhere in
> the
> >>>> archives of 78-L one can find the exact matrix number at which UK
> >>>> Columbia's
> >>>> standard speed became 78 (IIRC it was some time in 1927).
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 3:19 AM, Steven C.
> >>>> Barr<stevenc at interlinks.net>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> From: "Glenn Longwell"<glongwell at snet.net>
> >>>>>> I had someone write to me through my website asking if I was
> >>>>>> interested
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>> a 12 record set in a binder by the British National Opera Company
> >>>>>> performing Pagliacci. He's located in the UK so shipping would be a
> >>>>>> bit
> >>>>>> prohibitive to get it to me in the US. What struck me funny about
> the
> >>>>>> set
> >>>>>> when I looked at the pictures was the speed was listed as 80rpm. Is
> >>>>>> this
> >>>>>> indicative of a certain time period for British Columbias? I only
> >>>>>> have
> >>>>> one
> >>>>>> British Columbia of that label type in my collection and just looked
> >>>>>> at
> >>>>>> it. Never noticed but it also says 80rpm.
> >>>>> Anyone interested in this set?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> During the early-mid twenties, British Columbia cited their speed as
> >>>>> 80
> >>>>> rpm!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Steven C. Barr
> >>>>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 78-L mailing list
> >> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> >> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
> >>
> >> This email message and any attachments may contain confidential
> >> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited
> >> from using the information in any way, including but not limited to
> >> disclosure of, copying, forwarding or acting in reliance on the
> contents.
> >> If you have received this email by error, please immediately notify me
> by
> >> return email and delete it from your email system. Thank you.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 78-L mailing list
> >> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> >> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 78-L mailing list
> > 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> > http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>
> This email message and any attachments may contain confidential
> information. If
> you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from using the
> information in any way, including but not limited to disclosure of,
> copying,
> forwarding or acting in reliance on the contents. If you have received this
> email by error, please immediately notify me by return email and delete it
> from
> your email system. Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>
_______________________________________________
78-L mailing list
78-L at klickitat.78online.com
http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l