Re: [ARSCLIST] Equalizers

[Steven Smolian <smolians@xxxxxxxxx>]

Not to mention issues, often ascribed to record equalizaion, but actually
introduced by the use of various microphones and the calabration of
individual ones within that group.

The example that comes to mind is the voice of Flagstad, recorded in the US,
where, when recorded in concert from a distince, has a unique light hue,
but, when recorded close-up, becomes a primary color.

Steve Smolian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Copeland, Peter" <Peter.Copeland@xxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Equalizers


> Dear All,
>     Sorry to be so late in joining this discussion. As the former
Technical
> Manager of the British Library Sound Archive, I have done quite a lot of
> work researching these matters, which include a number of different
> "standard" equalisation curves (US Columbia's "LP" curve, RCA Victor's for
> their rival 45s, the NAB curve, and others). The main problem from where I
> sit is to determine *which* curve(s) were in use at *which* times. Since I
> retired, I have been involved in listening tests, generally comparing a
> modern ("RIAA") reissue with the same performance recorded in its original
> format. As a general rule, I am attempting to define equalisation changes
by
> using using matrix-numbers, which were often (but not always) allocated by
> the mastering engineer himself.
>     Clearly this work will *never* be completed; but if anyone wishes to
see
> the latest version of the disc equalisation section of my Manual, and/or a
> couple of papers I have published on the subject, please write to me
offline
> at peter.copeland@xxxxxxxxxxx
>     Incidentally, I disagree with George Brock-Nannestad's assertion that
> cutterhead damping played a part. All such "standard" curves have a 3dB
> point right in the middle of the frequency range - always between 250Hz
and
> 3.18kHz - and this is perfectly clear, even on a small loudspeaker.
Indeed,
> I personally was "hit" by a change in the European Standards for 19cm/sec
> magnetic tape, which also applied to 16mm magnetic film soundtracks.
Various
> film directors suddenly grumbled that my films sounded "woolly" on
> transmission.
>     And another can-of-worms concerns what happened when LPs and 45s were
> taken from "metal parts" (usually originals which had been cut at 78).
These
> nearly always reproduce the original frequency spectrum precisely -
despite
> what the official *microgroove* equalisation may have been!
> Peter Copeland
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Cox [mailto:doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 18 July 2004 16:04
> To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Equalizers
>
> On 18/07/04, Steven C. Barr wrote:
>
> > Keep in mind that prior to some point in the 1930's, equalization was
> > "made up on the spot" by the recording engineer, and there was no
> > standardization of any type, even within labels. The later controls
> > on amplifiers and pre-amps refer to a fairly-standardized intra-label
> > curve (one per label). These controls appear on most "hi-fi" gear of
> > the fifties and early sixties, but apply only to records of their
> > era...equalization of earlier 78's has to be done "by ear" (unless
> > someone can decode the cryptic notes found in surviving recording
> > ledgers if any exist)...
>
> Also the manufacturing tolerances on resistors and capacitors in those
> days were very wide, so even if somebody designed a circuit to give some
> desired EQ, the results could be somewhat diferent.
>
> Regards
> --
> Don Cox
> doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> **************************************************************************
>
> Experience the British Library online at www.bl.uk
>
> Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book.
> www.bl.uk/adoptabook
>
> *************************************************************************
>
> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be
legally
> privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the
> postmaster@xxxxx : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or
> copied without the sender's consent.
>
> The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the
> author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The
> British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the
> author.
>
> *************************************************************************
>