[78-L] Groove spacing - groove width

[David Lennick]

Vertical cut transcriptions ran the exact same length as lateral cuts, up to 15 
minutes. Laterals DID accommodate longer running times in the 50s, especially 
on AFRS.

As for groove width, I'm not going to make any pronouncements....over the last 
3 years I've transferred thousands of 78s made between the 1910s and late 40s, 
I've had to use a variety of styli and could probably have used more. Sometimes 
a mint 78 would play with a different point on each side and a leased master 
would require a totally different stylus on Arto or Black Swan from its 
original pressing on another label (I know, these are both acoustical 
situations). Groove size changed with time but at the moment I can't think of 
any label that immediately differed between acoustical and electrical if it did 
its own recording. (That's the disclaimer..Paramount sometimes had Gennett cut 
records for them. And some Gennetts play as if they were recorded on a 
Speak-O-Phone system.

dl


On 11/19/2016 8:38 AM, Mark Bardenwerper wrote:
> On 11/19/2016 6:53 AM, Mark Bardenwerper wrote:
>> On 11/19/2016 4:53 AM, Kristjan Saag wrote:
>>> When recording went electric one of the consequences was the ability to
>>> avoid overcutting - it became easier to control loud signals. Thus
>>> groove spacing was affected: the number of grooves per inch or
>>> centimetre was increased, recording time per disc side could also be
>>> increased.
>>> But apart from groove spacing - is there any evidence that groove width
>>> was affected as well? As we know different record companies used
>>> different groove width both before and after the advent of electric
>>> recording, and it's also clear that groove width generally decreased
>>> with time. But I've seen no mention of a major change haven taken place
>>> due to electric recording.
>>> Does anyone know more about this?
>>> Kristjan
>>>
>>>
>> I think it is more likely that you will discover that the width of the
>> grooves did not change appreciably, but the ability to do some sort of
>> equalization allowed the grooves to be crowded in better. The slowest
>> change was on the playback end. This seemed to hold back progress more
>> than anything else, particularly in sight of the hardships created by
>> the depression.
>>
> Recording time was first seen as a significant factor in movie sound
> recording. Vitaphone began distributing 16 inch, 33 rpm records in 1929
> or 30, with standard groove width.
>
> There were several advantages to vertical cut. Spacing could be
> standardized and equalization was not as big a factor. Edisons were gear
> driven and it was the lack of portability and the stranding of the
> technology that ended Edison. Vertical records were still used in radio
> transcription for a long time, where playing time remained important.
> Smaller grooves came first to transcription, I think. The big change in
> groove width had to wait for the end of WW2 for the general public,
> though RCA introduced a short-lived special line of players and records
> in late '31.
>
> Someone will chime in with better details I am sure. How accurate is
> this info?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LP_record
>