[78-L] Approximating 78s age by physical characteristics

Mon Mar 4 08:25:13 PST 2013

I'd say it is a very late Royal Blue.  Tyrone's site's listing for it
doesn't show the original recording dates, it shows both sides as having
the recording date 23 January 1936 (which should be corrected to represent
this as the dubbing date with the original dates shown from their UK
sources).  Also unusual is that on both sides of it I can see the dubbed
matrix numbers handwritten under the labels, matching the stamped matrix
numbers in the usual dead wax areas.

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:17 PM, David Lennick <dlennick at sympatico.ca> wrote:

> US dubs were sometimes made when a replacement was needed, or for other
> reasons. I know of two dubbed Beecham discs..In the Hall of the Mountain
> King,
> from the Peer Gynt Suite, where the last note was too much for some players
> (there are master pressings of it as well on Canadian and US Columbia) and
> Dance of the Sylphs, from Damnation of Faust, where the level was raised
> at the
> end because of Beecham's spoken "thank you" (master pressings exist of
> this one
> also).
>
> And I'm not really sure if the non-eccentric Columbias for the US market
> were
> dubbed or were cut simultaneously, since the take numbers are the same and
> I
> can't find any clues to indicate dubs.
>
> Re 3114-D, isn't that late for Royal Blue?
>
> dl
>
> On 3/4/2013 11:00 AM, Royal Pemberton wrote:
> > I have a 1940s US Columbia set of Beecham conducting Mozart's 'Jupiter'
> > symphony (recorded at Abbey Road circa January 1934), and side 1 is a US
> > dubbing.  The other sides are from modified UK matrices without lead in
> > grooves but with an added eccentric groove added inside where the
> original
> > concentric groove is.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 3:48 PM, David Lennick<dlennick at sympatico.ca>
>  wrote:
> >
> >> Indeed..no idea why they started dubbing popular material since the dubs
> >> are
> >> the shits more often than not. Centering records? Who needs to do that?
> At
> >> least the classical dubs were done by EMI, although it's weird when you
> >> find a
> >> later pressing of an album set where some sides are dubs and others are
> >> not.
> >>
> >> dl
> >>
> >> On 3/4/2013 10:43 AM, Royal Pemberton wrote:
> >>> And weirdly enough one Royal Blue I have, with Henry Hall on one side
> and
> >>> Lew Stone on the other (3114-D) uses US-dubbed matrices numbered in the
> >>> ARC/Columbia series with eccentrics; the Hall was dubbed from UK
> Columbia
> >>> matrix CA.15445-1 of 13 November 1935, the Stone from Regal Zonophone
> >>> matrix CAR.3680-1 of 21 October 1935.  Both presumably with eccentrics
> on
> >>> the originals.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 3:34 PM, David Lennick<dlennick at sympatico.ca>
> >>   wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> US Columbia also pressed from dubbed masters for a couple of years,
> >> even on
> >>>> classical recordings, to avoid that eccentric groove that all the EMI
> >>>> labels
> >>>> were using as of the merger.
> >>>>
> >>>> dl
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/4/2013 10:31 AM, Royal Pemberton wrote:
> >>>>> Curious about Victor saying publicly they're OK with other companies
> >>>> using
> >>>>> the eccentric stop groove in November 1934....I wonder if Columbia
> ran
> >>>> into
> >>>>> trouble with them earlier in the year?  As the few May 1934 Columbia
> >>>> sides
> >>>>> I have end with eccentrics and the August 1934 Columbia I have,
> 2942-D,
> >>>>> which has (AFAIK) the lowest numbers in the CO-prefixed ARC numerical
> >>>>> series (CO.15541 and 15542) has instead the older concentric stop
> >> groove.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Milan Milovanovic<
> >>>>> milanpmilovanovic4 at gmail.com>    wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Consider including raised blank outside area on some early
> pressings.
> >>>> Think
> >>>>>> they used it to block needle slippage from the beginning of record.
> >> The
> >>>>>> same
> >>>>>> method used for inside area with no locked and lead-out groove -
> >> raised
> >>>>>> portion of the record used as for later transferred into locked
> >> groove.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>> From: "David London"<jusmee123 at gmail.com>
> >>>>>> To: "78-L Mail List"<78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 12:28 AM
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [78-L] Approximating 78s age by physical
> characteristics
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 03/03/13 23:10, Mark Bardenwerper wrote:
> >>>>>>>> I can't add much to this, but it should be noted that many of the
> >>>>>>>> groove additions came with the invention of automatic changers.
> The
> >>>>>>>> change in labels had to do with the manufacturing process. The
> >>>>>>>> beginning of the electrical era had something to do with some of
> >> these
> >>>>>>>> changes. Before electrical recording, there were electrically
> driven
> >>>>>>>> platters. Someone more in the know might tell us if there was a
> >>>>>>>> workable changer in the acoustic era. It would have been a
> challenge
> >>>>>>>> due to the heftiness of the arm, but people could be pretty
> >>>> imaginative.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I was wondering also, if changers existed before lead-in grooves.
> It
> >>>>>>> seems a key addition to a record, else you risk the needle just
> >> sitting
> >>>>>>> floating on the leading edge of the record (or did they bias the
> arm
> >> to
> >>>>>>> always swing inward when there was no groove?).
> >>>>>>> ______________________________________________
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>