[gregorio]

The other thing that many don't appreciate is that most of these older recordings (eg PF Animals) were recorded on analogue tape.

Just for the record, pretty much all older (from the 1950’s and later) recordings were recorded to analogue tape.

Direct to disk recording was the only way to record until a few years after WWII, when tape recording (which was developed by the Nazi’s) was appropriated by the allies and rapidly superseded direct to disk recording in the late 1940’s. In fact “Pop Music” evolved in the 1950’s specifically in response to the advantages offered by tape recording (editing, overdubbing and layering for example) that were not possible with direct to disk recording.

AFAIK, direct to disk recording re-emerged in the late ‘60’s and ‘70’s as an audiophile gimmick from a couple or so of small audiophile labels (Sheffield Labs for example) and were limited to acoustic music genres, some classical music and jazz recordings, although the vast majority even of these genres were recorded to tape. AFAIK, there were no direct to disk recordings of rock/pop after around the mid/late 1950’s, as almost none of it was even possible without tape. There might be an exception or two I’m not aware of, but it would be safe to assume that any older recordings of popular genres were recorded to tape.

G

 

[Davesrose]

Just for the record, pretty much all older (from the 1950’s and later) recordings were recorded to analogue tape.

Well, yeah....because magnetic tape only became mainstream by the 1960s for all industries. Assume the earliest mainstream recordings was wax cylinders for Edison phonographs. Then you still had mechanical recording until the 50s, which then started to have the wide spread magnetic recording mediums. When it comes to magnetic recording, it also wasn't always with tape. So earliest BBC shows were recorded for broad distribution with 16mm reels, and their analog video was recorded on metal spools (and with Techmoan videos, I know there were some early audio recording formats that also were metal). There are stories from the BBC that these systems could also prove dangerous. It's one thing that when we think about a tape player eating a tape with a cassette: it's another thing if it's a metal band that breaks and starts being unwieldy.

 

[gregorio]

Well, yeah....because magnetic tape only became mainstream by the 1960s for all industries.

I wasn’t talking about all industries, I/We were talking about the music recording industry.

When it comes to magnetic recording, it also wasn't always with tape.

As far as I’m aware, it was always with tape (in the music recording industry).

G

 

[Davesrose]

I wasn’t talking about all industries, I/We were talking about the music recording industry.

As far as I’m aware, it was always with tape (in the music recording industry).

G

Actually, in history, it is excepted that there was a time where there was recording with wire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire_recording Interesting, they say one recording from Woody Guthrie recording in 1949 won a 2008 Grammy for historical recording.

 

[gregorio]

Actually, in history, it is excepted that there was a time where there was recording with wire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire_recording

Not in the music recording industry it wasn’t. It was used in consumer products (such as dictaphones) and some other industries (such as early cockpit voice/radio recorders) but not in the music industry. Probably there were some experimental music recordings made with it and/or some consumer recordings of live professional performances but it was never adopted by the music industry as far as I’m aware.

G

 

[Davesrose]

Not in the music recording industry it wasn’t. It was used in consumer products (such as dictaphones) and some other industries (such as early cockpit voice/radio recorders) but not in the music industry. Probably there were some experimental music recordings made with it and/or some consumer recordings of live professional performances but it was never adopted by the music industry as far as I’m aware.

G

Wow, really Woody Guthrie wasn't part of the music industry in your estimation? . Even though that his wire recording won a grammy in 2008?

 

[gregorio]

Wow, really Woody Guthrie wasn't part of the music industry in your estimation?

Where did I state that?

Even though that his wire recording won a grammy in 2008?

Looking it up, it was NOT “his wire recording”, it was a bootleg wire recording made by a student (Paul Braverman) who wasn’t part of the music industry, just a member of the audience.

“This isn’t somebody who set out to record with the permission of the family or whoever was putting on the event,” Guthrie notes. “This is a guy maybe holding up a microphone in the back of the room.” - Arlo Guthrie Interview (Woody Guthrie’s son). …
“Basically, it’s an early bootleg, says Guthrie.” - And by definition, a bootleg is not part of the music industry!

This amateur bootleg then went through over a year of audio restoration and that’s what won the Grammy.

G

 

[Davesrose]

Where did I state that?

Your claim that was there was no real music produced on metal format (as we are questioning, wire). As the wikipedia page says, there was plenty of content produced from the 19th century until the 1950s. I picked the Woodie Guthrie album as an example...it's clear you first dismissed it when you were telling me that audio production never had anything to do with metal reels...until then you had to come up with more excuses of actual recognized musical artists being recorded on metal reels (and if we're going to get into productions of Woody Guthrie's albums in the 40s....please show me him using tape instead of metal reel).

 

[gregorio]

Your claim that was there was no real music produced on metal format (as we are questioning, wire).

No it wasn’t, this was my claim: “Probably there were some experimental music recordings made with it [wire recording] and/or some consumer recordings of live professional performances but it was never adopted by the music industry as far as I’m aware.”

My actual claim is also completely different to your false assertion/question that “Woody Guthrie wasn’t part of the music industry in my estimation?”!

As the wikipedia page says, there was plenty of content produced from the 19th century until the 1950s.

The Wikipedia page does not say there was plenty of music industry content produced. In fact it only mentions two individual examples, one of which you quoted:

I picked the Woodie Guthrie album as an example...

Which is not a music industry recording, it’s an audience bootleg recording that supports my claim of potential exceptions: “some consumer recordings of live professional performances”!

it's clear you first dismissed it when you were telling me that audio production never had anything to do with metal reels

But I did NOT tell you that audio production never had anything to do with metal reels. I stated the music recording industry never adopted wire recordings.

if we're going to get into productions of Woody Guthrie's albums in the 40s....please show me him using tape instead of metal reel

You’re joking right? I’ve already stated that magnetic tape recording was appropriated by the allies after WWII and that it didn’t become widely available in the music industry until the late 1940’s (around 1948 to be precise) and the last recording date listed on Wikipedia by Woody Guthrie was in 1947! There was obviously at least one Guthrie album compiled from sources other than from the music recording industry, the album you quoted sourced from a bootleg and some other albums may include tracks sourced from radio and other interviews/sources. The actual music industry recordings of Guthrie were done in the early 1940’s by RCA Victor (before tape recording was even available) and were “direct to disk”, no tape or metal reel!

It’s easy enough for anyone to read the last few posts for themselves as see precisely what I’ve stated/claimed, so I don’t understand what you hope to achieve by making-up these false claims and attributing them to me?

G

 

[bigshot]

From the late 30s through the 40s, a lot of records were recorded to 16 inch 33 1/3 disks. They would record multiple takes then dub the select takes from the 16 inch disk to 10 inch 78s- a little different than direct to disk. The 33 1/3 master was actually hifi.

 

[Davesrose]

It’s easy enough for anyone to read the last few posts for themselves as see precisely what I’ve stated/claimed, so I don’t understand what you hope to achieve by making-up these false claims and attributing them to me?

G

Yes, it is easy enough to see what you have claimed (even with your nack of randomized outlining to take things out of context). That and you speculating when Guthrie's albums may have been recorded on magnetic tape.

 

[castleofargh]

As you can see from the vinyl turning, this is an analog playback.


I might need this track as an official moderation tool.
"Baby, you understand me now!...."

 

[Davesrose]

As that moderation tool would

As you can see from the vinyl turning, this is an analog playback.


I might need this track as an official moderation tool.
"Baby, you understand me now!..."

That certainly would be a soulful moderation tool. Not sure how it would be taken by all to stop crosstalk.

 

[bigshot]

 

[Davesrose]

From the late 30s through the 40s, a lot of records were recorded to 16 inch 33 1/3 disks. They would record multiple takes then dub the select takes from the 16 inch disk to 10 inch 78s- a little different than direct to disk. The 33 1/3 master was actually hifi.

Just wondering from historical purposes: Columbia records created the 33 1//3 standard in the early 30s. Were these commercial records from the Columbia label? Until then 33 became a standard for playback, and mastering from all sorts of mediums.