[78-L] Length of jazz recordings

[David Lennick]

The 16-inch discs started as backups in 1939 but soon became the primary source 
for Columbia's masters. Decca began recording its originals on 16-inch when it 
took over World Program Service during the ban. Capitol probably did the same 
at the same time, since we know that the "wrong" take of Eager Beaver was on 
one 78 issue. Did the musicians even know they were being recorded in a 
different format?

And don't forget that Victor introduced a long playing record in 1931, and what 
did they record on it? Medleys.

dl

On 7/12/2013 3:45 PM, Milan Milovanovic wrote:
> Really interesting aspect of recording sessions!
>
> But, were all recordings from 1939 recorded only on 16" cutter, and later
> dub to 78 rpm master lacquer discs? I think I've read somewhere that there
> were simultaneous cutter machines running - and that 16" were backup only?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Julian Vein"<julianvein at blueyonder.co.uk>
> To: "78-L Mail List"<78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 6:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Length of jazz recordings
>
>
>> On another related subject. When 78s started to be dubbed off 16" discs,
>> surely that must've had some effect on musicians? With "pure" 78s, if
>> the musicians goofed they had to restart the recording process, and put
>> on a fresh wax to cut. Obviously this took a little time, and must've
>> created some edginess in the musicians. When they started using 16"
>> discs, some of the pressure would've been off. It would be similar to
>> recording on tape. If a musician played a clanger, they could just stop
>> and start again.
>>
>>
>> Again, did musicians ever comment on this aspect of recording?
>>
>>        Julian Vein
>> ____________________________________________