[78-L] A question about Decca speeds

[David Lennick]

LA Deccas are easy..the prefixes are either DLA or just L (after about 1947). 
More difficult to tell NY from Chicago except by knowing the matrix numbering 
systems.

dl

On 10/14/2011 7:07 PM, bradc944 at comcast.net wrote:
> Now just have to find how to tell the difference between NY&  LA Deccas :)
>
> Columbia EQ, especially HCO series matrices... Inigo is correct... those seem to use a totally different curve than other COlumbia red-labels of the era. Don't know if it was the studio, or the recording equipment, or just the head engineer's preference (or lack of Q-tips... for the wax buildup in his ears!) but I have to throw a whoe different EQ at those. I'll go through some of the other non CO-matrices to see if there's a difference there (thinking remote recordings, or ones done in like NAshville or out-of-NYC/LA).
>
> As far as Decca blue label curves... (and all re-EQ'ing) if it sounds like mud, doink with the curve. And not all electrical recordings are the same within labels... the curves from MultiMedia, WAMS, et al, are, in my not so humble opinion, GUIDELINES. With that being said, your ear is the best judge :)
>
> And it is GREAT to see you active on the list again Inigo. Even though I haven't been posting much, I have been lurking... hope that you're finding a lot of troves of good discs... :)
>
> Brad
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David Lennick<dlennick at sympatico.ca>
> To: 78-L Mail List<78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Sent: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 20:15:34 -0000 (UTC)
> Subject: Re: [78-L] A question about Decca speeds
>
> New York Deccas almost always need to be played about 2.4% up through 1948, but
> I've generally found that Los Angeles Deccas play pretty close to 78. Some mid
> 30s NY and Chicago Deccas need to go up close to 4%.
>
> As for EQ on Columbias, a lot of them after 1944 just sound DULLSVILLE, man.
> Remove some mid-range and you'll hear a lot more clarity. I'm convinced that
> Columbia and Victor equalized their records so that each would sound rotten on
> the machines made by the other company. All Columbias from early 1940 on (maybe
> slightly earlier) are dubs from 16-inch 33rpm originals. With all due respect
> to the authors of the book on EQ curves, which states that Columbia didn't
> alter its curve between 1939 and 1955, horsefedders..they altered the curve
> every time they cut a new master from an old source. I have a 2-disc set with 3
> different curves (Enesco's Rumanian Rhapsody #1, Stock/Chicago, each side cut
> at a different time in the 40s as stampers wore out).
>
> dl
>
> On 10/14/2011 4:08 PM, Iñigo Cubillo wrote:
>> I’ve also been surprised to discover that many blue Deccas (again the 2000-4000 range, I’m very fond of Bing) if DLA matrixes, seem to be recorded at 80-81rpm! Anyone knows if it’s true or it’s my poor brain?
>> _______________________________________________
>>
> On 10/14/2011 4:06 PM, Iñigo Cubillo wrote:
>> I’ve been lately worried with a question. How is the right EQ for US blue Deccas in the 2000-4000 range? I’ve read at some EQ charts (WAMS, Elliot and others) that a treble rollof of up to –12db shall be applied, but they sound great to my ears with a flat treble (RIAA eliminated).
>>
>> And also I played just yesternight the Sinatra red Co 36947 (full moon and empty arms (rachmaninoff's concerto), co 35441 2 (w) // you are too beautiful, hco 1522 1a (w)) and I was surprised by the strange EQ of the HCO side; much killed treble at flat position and thin bass. It is like a poor dubbing. Anyone knows the reason?
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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