Re: [ARSCLIST] Dynamic-frequency Range

[Mike Richter <mrichter@xxxxxxx>]

Karl Miller wrote:
> I have been doing some reading and can't seem to find information on what
> dynamic range was available in the era of the acoustic and early
> electronic recordings.
>
> I can find references to the available frequency range...some sources list that
> by 1925 it was about 100-4,000 cps and in 1934 it was 30-8,000 cps. However, I can
> not find references to the frequency ranges afforded by acoustic recordings.
>
> Any information/sources would be most welcome.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Karl
I'm a bit confused: do you mean dynamic range, frequency range or both? 
They are related in that wider frequency range means higher noise level 
and therefore reduced dynamic range over the spectrum. Perhaps the 1-KHz 
dynamic range is what you mean.

Frequency range is also difficult to define unless either amplitude 
tolerance or playback equipment is considered. Your numbers for 1925 
seem about right for both the best acoustic and the new electric 
recordings, but few reproducers came close to 100 Hz on the low end and 
(not least because of the horn) most were far from flat above 1 KHz.

As implied by another response, you might do best to run your own tests 
using your own definitions for "range". Manufacturers' data - even if 
translatable into quantitative form - would hardly have been reliable.

Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/