No subject

06 W, we made a change in shape somewhat, making the standard size groove .=
002 D [and] .007 W."

And Ron Roscoe wrote:

> Also, if some sort of low frequency attenuation wasn't used, then the
> amplitudes of low frequencies would have required their attenuation to ke=
ep
> the groove spacing down.  I believe that they saw their options in 1925 a=
s
> either 1. attenuate the bass or 2. provide a constantly wide groove that
> would have accommodated the lowest frequency on the new Orthophonic recor=
ds
> [50 Hz].  The constant wide groove would have required a 12" diameter dis=
c
> to hold what was previously held on a 10" acoustic disc.
> So the attenuation won out.
>=20
> I personally have been very amazed that no corresponding bass boost on
> playback was ever provided in the earliest electrical playback equipment
> such as the Victrola 10-51 electrically amplified record changer.
>=20
> Does anyone know when complimentary bass boost in playback began to appea=
r??

Bass boost on electrical recording was added from the outset =97 the earlie=
st Western Electric recordings use a 200- or 250-Hz bass turnover frequency=
. This was changed fairly quickly =97 a matter of a few months at worst =97=
 to 500 Hz. I just looked at the Victrola 10-51 schematic, and you're right=
 =97 just a transformer-coupled audio amp with no apparent bass boost. I ha=
ven't seen enough specific schematics to answer your question.

Take care,


=97
J. E. Knox "The Victor Freak"


--=20
*Celebrating 30 years of service.*