Re: [ARSCLIST] Can 78s sound better than LPs?

[Tom Fine <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Marcos:

You can hear from some of the jazz reissues made from metal parts (see Doug Pomeroy's remaster of 
the Benny Goodman stuff for Bluebird, for example) that the vintage electronics-to-wax systems were 
capable of very good sound. But not as good as a decent tape rig circa 1949 or so. As always, it was 
up to the engineer. Some of those 1930's and 1940's guys were super-pro at getting a detailed and 
intimate sound with severe limitations of the media. But, by the LP era, mics were better, mic 
preamps were better, the transformers in the equipment could pass more of the human hearing spectrum 
and even the very first US made professional tape recorders were capable of better dynamic and 
frequency range (first = first with AC bias and reliable-quality magnetic tape).

That said, Art Shifrin, another grooved-disk expert I very much trust and respect, played for me 
some Noel Coward 78's made in, I believe, the very end of the acoustic-recording era. They sounded 
like one was in the room. How? Hard to fathom. Also, some recorded-off-the-network-line 
transcription disks I have or have dubs of sound like they're coming right over the air from the 
studio. To AM, of course, so not full treble spectrum, but close enough to be very pleasant 
listening.

I think it was a greater feat of great engineering to squeeze fantastic sound out of ANY grooved 
medium, particularly 78's, than to put out a clearly-audible recording using modern means. Alas, the 
skill set has slipped so badly that many modern recordings are horrible. Think of a band, producer 
and engineer working with the requirement of live takes, a set time limit imposed by the disk 
medium, very primative recording equipment (maybe 3 or 4 ribbon mics, a mixer with no EQ and limited 
patching) and the known fact that the result will lose 2 or 3 generations of quality by the time it 
gets into the consumer's hand. That's the 78 era. Now think of all the luxury of non-linear time, 
overdubs, computer-screen editing and tools like pitch correction and it's very depressing how bad 
the end product is in most cases today. And I'm not even talking about the basic lack of musical 
talent.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marcos Sueiro Bal" <mls2137@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 9:05 AM
Subject: [ARSCLIST] Can 78s sound better than LPs?


> I have noticed that when recommending sound cards for podcasting 78s, some
> on the list have not chosen top-of-the-line models with the assumption that
> the sound quality of 78s is inherently inferior to that, of, say, LPs. That
> seems generally to be the case, but I do remember once hearing a pristine 78
> RPM acetate of a live jazz recording that blew me away --the sound was big
> and detailed, clean, and also quite louder than the average LP.
>
> My question is: is the 78 "system" inherently an inferior product? I do not
> know enough about it, but it seems to me that it is moving faster and the
> grooves are wider, so, potentially at least, it could sound better than 33s
> (stereo notwithstanding). Or could it?
>
> Marcos