The Eroica Symphony

[Michael]

Originally posted by dice45:
[[/b]

Hello Michael, hello Joy, hello all,

Michael seems to know shellacs, he reports "while the quality is painful in the extreme by today's standards, an awful lot of the music gets through." I can assure you, if the disc is played with correct equipment and the right stylus, there comes more music through that through any other system. The pain in the extremes, can't follow that, there is not much at the extremes of the frequency range.
Bernhard [/B][/QUOTE]

Hi, Bernhard, thanks for all the information. When I mentioned that the sound was "painful in the extreme" I was referring to a recording made in 1913 - and I doubt if anything could be done to improve that sound! It was transferred to CD only because of its historical importance - the very first recording of a Beethoven symphony.
I have lots of experience of vinyl recordings but very little with shellac 78's (or 79's and 80's - as the speed could vary a lot). I do remember reading an article many years ago claiming that those old shellac discs could reproduce the human voice in a way that vinyl could not.
I don't want to enter a CD versus vinyl debate - but I did own a huge vinyl collection about thirteen years ago and while it gave me great pleasure, it also drove me nuts! EVERY RECORD had something wrong with it - noise or warps or off-centre holes - and I had reasonably good analogue equipment. But what drove me mad was the background noise - even on brand-new recordings. When you played the Beatles, it was fantastic - but just try the slow movement of the A minor quartet and there was a constant background of chips frying!
When CD came out, I patiently replaced my vinyl collection, and now have something approaching a thousand CD's - almost half of them consisting of Beethoven works. The point I am getting at is that, in the whole collection, I doubt if I came across three faulty CD's!
If LP's sounded more three-dimensional, I really couldn't hear it for the noise. And if CD's are a bit "bright" and lack a degree of ambience, I really couldn't care less. I am enjoying the music too much.
Of course there are a lot of poor CD recordings but a lot of that problem can be traced back to the recording studio. And, of course, very good analogue recordings can be badly transferred to CD. But I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with the digital medium - if it's handled correctly.

Michael

[Rod]

Originally posted by dice45:
Hello Rod,

I would appreciate a constructive spirit! As far as I can remember, I gave specific hints in addition to your hint in the style of "did you try this, too?". I did not try to put anything you hinted down.

You should not blame the vinyl disk for the goof of one producer or cutting engineer. And sometimes they really do goof.

Some other times they are forced to do so by the length of the material. If I want to listen to one of those fantastic early free jazz recordings by John Coltrane or Ornette Coleman, I have to turn the record as the piece goes over two full sides. Of course, today those recordings are available on CD. But those CD re-issues sound like crap. Such big crap that I prefer to listen to my vinyl 1st pressing.

I have a box set of the available Beethoven piano sonatas played by Solomon. Magic recordings IMO, BTW. But they are so stupidly distributed over the 12 sides that I have to change the record for three major sonatas, the opus 111 among them. But do you really believe I choose another pianist? For this reason? C'mon!

If I were to choose some records to take with me on a lonely island, this box set would be on the stack (and the 2nd SQ recordings of the Budapest SQ).

Bernhard.

I no longer consider performances on modern instruments simply because I have had the good judgement to identify that they are not suited to Beethoven's music, end of story. I am aware of the sonic benefits of vinyl, I 'hinted' at this earlier, but in terms of convenience they are very problematic, and they deteriorate very rapidly from my experience. You can get a good 3D image with CD if you place your speakers correctly. My references to less than satisfactory recording techniqes is based on experience! The older recordings are the worst culprits - vastly reduced recording levels for choral entries due to the limitiations of analogue technology, no attention whatsoever to producing a natural balance between soloist and orchestra. But the latter things still happen today though not quite so often. The pracitice of 'cutting' on vinyl was very common indeed, and is quite simply not acceptable. I have read many a review of a digital remaster on CD that the reviewer claims is better than the vinyl original sonically. No system is perfect, but another point is that you simply cannot buy many (especially new) recordings on vinyl 'these days'!! Another peculiarity of vinyl I have noticed is that the tracks at the beginning of the side seem to have a much louder recording level than those towards the centre of the disk. I have long suspected that repeats in Beethoven recordings were sometimes ommitted because of the limited recording time of vinyl disks, and not solely because of the foolish lack of judgement on the part of the conductor. For the record I have no interest in Jazz whatsoever. Sorry, no time for a more comprehensive response.

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[dice45]

Hello Rod,

Originally posted by Rod:
I no longer consider performances on modern instruments simply because I have had the good judgement to identify that they are not suited to Beethoven's music, end of story.

Let me tell you I envy you. I would be glad if there is one topic I think I know a little bit about I could dare to make such defintite, eternal end-of-story statements
as you obviously can.

I am aware of the sonic benefits of vinyl, I 'hinted' at this earlier, but in terms of convenience they are very problematic, and they deteriorate very rapidly from my experience. You can get a good 3D image with CD if you place your speakers correctly.

Yes. A 3D image of zero height and some reverberance artifacts maybe.
And, BTW, I always made people think I am crazy when they observe my radical speaker placement (hassled out by ear).

My references to less than satisfactory recording techniqes is based on experience! The older recordings are the worst culprits - vastly reduced recording levels for choral entries due to the limitiations of analogue technology, no attention whatsoever to producing a natural balance between soloist and orchestra. But the latter things still happen today though not quite so often. The pracitice of 'cutting' on vinyl was very common indeed, and is quite simply not acceptable.

I would totally agree that using a dynamic compressor or limiter is unacceptable.
I agree it happens. I agree that other goofs happen.

But no goof is a proof the medium, the system is crap.
For any such goof you bring I can bring a breathtakingly natural recording on vinyl.

I have read many a review of a digital remaster on CD that the reviewer claims is better than the vinyl original sonically.

Simple explanation for that: an experineced recording engineer always knows the flaws of the medium he is recording for. So he intuitively tries to precompensate those flaws, by choosing microphones or their exact place, adding helper microphones, whatever.
Some recordings were made for vinyl, they sound awful on CD. Those recordings made for CD usually sound awful if issued parallel on vinyl.

I prefer not to continue this silly discussion. This thread started on Beethoven's Eroica.
Maybe it finds back to this topic.

Bernhard

[dice45]

Hello Michael,

atleast I could contribute something and maybe the info helps.

You know, I did not come to this formur to crusade for my preferences, vinyl in this case, I just made the mistake to add some hints and to mention I am a vinyl person.

Originally posted by Michael:
Hi, Bernhard, thanks for all the information. When I mentioned that the sound was "painful in the extreme" I was referring to a recording made in 1913 - and I doubt if anything could be done to improve that sound! It was transferred to CD only because of its historical importance - the very first recording of a Beethoven symphony.
I have lots of experience of vinyl recordings but very little with shellac 78's (or 79's and 80's - as the speed could vary a lot). I do remember reading an article many years ago claiming that those old shellac discs could reproduce the human voice in a way that vinyl could not.

Oh yes!
Human voice on shellac can be magic!
Every Caruso recording of today came from a shellac.

But also the Rhapsody in Blue played by Oscar Levant sounds magic. Much but fortunately not all of this magic is gone on the vinyl re-issue. On the CD well, a faint hunch what this some day could have sounded like ....

I guess part of the magic is that one is listening to an un-degraded 1st pressing.

I don't want to enter a CD versus vinyl debate - but I did own a huge vinyl collection about thirteen years ago and while it gave me great pleasure, it also drove me nuts! EVERY RECORD had something wrong with it - noise or warps or off-centre holes - and I had reasonably good analogue equipment. But what drove me mad was the background noise - even on brand-new recordings. When you played the Beatles, it was fantastic - but just try the slow movement of the A minor quartet and there was a constant background of chips frying!
When CD came out, I patiently replaced my vinyl collection, and now have something approaching a thousand CD's - almost half of them consisting of Beethoven works.

My Beethoven collection is far from being as big as yours, I just have those works I really learned to love. Sometimes I try out other works I do not yet know but in most cases I leave them in the shop because the interpretations do not sound like Beethoven.

But in respect of symphonies, piano sonatas and string quartets I have nearly all recordings I ever desired. Well, some shellacs are missing.

Unfortunately my interests are not restricted to Beethoven and so I am always short of money for records *vbg*.

What a pity you did not keep your records!

I have learned to be happy with what comes from the record. Music always was so overwhelming, I did not care much about record flaws while listening to music.

I never considered record flaws to be a killer, I tried to create a work-around if possible. My creativity being centered in the technical field, I always had fun to do so. The tonearm I am designing currently is in fact a huge collection of record and cartridge flaw work-arounds.
The platter of my the big turntable I have in mind will have a vacuum system to suck the record tightly on the platter surface -- and then it is unimportant whether the record was warped before, then it is flat. -Yes, and a special record clamp with a centering mechanism for off-center holes is part of the design (unfortunately center hole excentricity can be different on both sided)

If you believe now I am a maniac in this respect, you'd be not that wrong *g* .

I meanwhile replaced my later pressings with 1st pressings and I am very happy with them. I prefer a slightly damaged 1st pressing to a flawless later pressing in most cases.
The music is so immediate on 1st pressings.

The point I am getting at is that, in the whole collection, I doubt if I came across three faulty CD's!

I get your point.
Funny: I had a lot of rejected CDs before I hunched it could be the player. Well, it was, a part of the drive was resonating like a tune fork if the CD had an excentric centerhole (yes, they have, tellya), you could hear the sound, it was around 400 Hz. This I would call a genuine design flaw!

I glued a piece of PCB over the part spotted to be the tune fork and the tone stopped and the CD player now would accept any of the rejected CDs. Just, now I have to beat the thing and threaten it with a screwdriver to give me my CDs back *vbg*.

If LP's sounded more three-dimensional, I really couldn't hear it for the noise. And if CD's are a bit "bright" and lack a degree of ambience, I really couldn't care less. I am enjoying the music too much.
Of course there are a lot of poor CD
recordings but a lot of that problem can be traced back to the recording studio. And, of course, very good analogue recordings can be badly transferred to CD. But I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with the digital medium - if it's handled correctly.
Michael

Oh yes, I think it is. But as with any medium, there is a lot of experience needed how to handle it properly and meanwhile the engineers have hassled out how to make it sound atleast pleasant.

CD is an intermediate state, the resolution in the time domain is too restricted. If you compare it to SACD or the like (which I doubt the industry wants, they rather want MP3), you would hear this, this would be nearly equivalent to vinyl.

But most people don't care. If you like it, then it is ok for you and this is all that counts.

Greets,
Bernhard

[Joy]

Originally posted by Michael:
Joy, I've tried to find out about Samuel Chotzinoff but my information is sketchy. He appears to have been a Russian-American pianist, and is mentioned in recording sessions that took place in 1911 to 1918. I think he gave a talk in the interval of a Toscanini broadcast and he appears to have written a work of fiction called "Eroica" which was published in 1930. (I wonder what that was about!)
I think your records may be by the New York Philharmonic - but I'm not really sure as Thomas Beecham is mentioned in one of the references to Samulel C. So the plot thickens!


Michael

Indeed the plot thickens. Thanks so much for all the detective work, Michael. That's very interesting about Samuel C. I had no idea. Yes, I, too, wonder what the fictional "Eroica" was all about too. Looks like another job for "Super Detective" to track this one down next.
Joy

[Joy]

Originally posted by dice45:

Originally posted by Michael:

Sorry for raising your hopes! Any vinyl or shellac experts out there?

Michael

Hello Michael, hello Joy, hello all,

Michael seems to know shellacs, he reports "while the quality is painful in the extreme by today's standards, an awful lot of the music gets through." I can assure you, if the disc is played with correct equipment and the right stylus, there comes more music through that through any other system. The pain in the extremes, can't follow that, there is not much at the extremes of the frequency range. Depending on the age, I would expect to get a range starting at 50 to 100 Hz and going up to 5 to 12 kHz. What you adress as pain may be record wear or distortion due to wrong stylus.

Shellac records have some midrange frequency qualities easily outperforming even vinyl. Such as the impression of ambience (virtually being there), body of the instruments, tone colour saturation, tone colour distinctability.

To those wondering how to spot a shellac disc: it looks like a vinyl disc, is much thicker, either completely made from shellac or having a core of cardboard or similar stuff. Outer diameter usually is 250 or 300 mm and the diameter groove diameter is 70 to 80 mm instead of 112 mm vor vinyl.

Shellac records are incredibly resistive to friction wear but do not stand any sort of impact as they are very brittle. Particularly a too low tracking force causes damage not keeping the stylus in permanent contact with the groove wall so the stylus hits the groove wall with an impact . Shellacs stand a tracking force of up to 250 grams.

Shellacs have a limit o 3:20 minutes per side. They have constant groove-to-groove distance; things like Füllschrift, RoyalSound, margin control increasing the total playtime by stuffing grooves together as tight as possible do not exist for shellacs.

Shellacs are played with a nominal speed of 78.26 rpm. But this value can vary from 60 to 120 rpm for certain issues.

Nearly all shellacs are direct-to-disc recordings; as with vinyl direct-to-disc recordings (maybe even more) the sound hits you as immediate as a car accident.

Nearly all vinyls are recorded to magnetic tape, then processed and processed and processed and processed and then cut into a lacquer disc. So they usually sound not as immediate as shellacs.

All mechanical records need playback equalization, also shellacs. But according to (partially) ignoring of this fact or wishful thinking at some record companies, playback equalization varies wildly, depending of record label and year.
Evident that the right equalization has to be used: it can be tried out easy which one if a preamp with different switchable EQs
is available.

Shellacs do not make "dummp" when hit like a vinyl disc, the make a "cleengg" sound. But be careful hitting them. They break very easy.

If you think now that standarization was out of fashion AFA shellacs were concerned, you are dead right.

Hoping this helps.
Bernhard

Hi, Bernhard. Thanks so much for all the information you've provided us. Now I know a lot more about the shellac vs. the vinyl debate. Very interesting. Thanks again.
Joy

[Rod]

Originally posted by dice45:
Hello Rod,

Simple explanation for that: an experineced recording engineer always knows the flaws of the medium he is recording for. So he intuitively tries to precompensate those flaws, by choosing microphones or their exact place, adding helper microphones, whatever.
Some recordings were made for vinyl, they sound awful on CD. Those recordings made for CD usually sound awful if issued parallel on vinyl.

I prefer not to continue this silly discussion. This thread started on Beethoven's Eroica.
Maybe it finds back to this topic.

Bernhard

You need not envy me, if you spent as much time assessing the instruments as you do recording technology you would come to the same conclusion yourself. I suggest you direct your attention in this direction. Ultimately the whole issue of recording media is a matter of compromise. All media have pros and cons, and the cd is the best compromise for most people, certainly for me. I know the topic is somewhat silly but you seemed pretty enthusiatic about it (considering you also started it). The original topic was not the Eroica, but rather a joke about the Eroica - I suggest it was me who directed the discussion along more interesting lines in the first place!

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Claudie MICAULT]

Well, going back to the original question (Eroica and a bank...) my man have got friday his new EUROCARD (German...) and there is on it an hologram of B. !!!
The Eroica side is that I don't use his card (till now...) for shopping, so I did not remark this before ! Knowing B. is there; I will maybe use it more (I have a good reason at least).

------------------
Claudie