Tape query - early days

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Paul Stamler wrote:
> Hi folks:
>
> Does anyone here know when RCA Victor, and the other major labels,
converted
> their recording operations to tape?
>
> Here's how the question arose. I was cleaning up some Charlie Monroe
78s,
> recorded 1946-1952, which sounded kind of grubby (a lot more diameter
loss
> than usual), and I recalled reading that at some point RCA Victor,
and
> perhaps other companies, had quit doing their 78 recording direct to
the
> master discs, and were instead mastering on 33-1/3 disks
(coarse-groove),
> transferring the successful takes to 78 masters later. With loss of
quality,
> of course.
>
> Later, they switched to tape. But when? And did RCA, and the others,
switch
> their classical divisions to the new medium first, and only convert
the pop,
> country, etc. divisions later? Or did they do the whole kit and
caboodle at
> once?
>
> And was the story about recording on transcription disks rather than
> directly to 78 masters true, or firecrackers?
>
> Thanks for any help you can give.
>
> Peace,
> Paul

Interesting question.
Certainly after WW II.
AES has some references that should give anecdotal
evidence as to when it 'might' have occured:

http://www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/audi [...] eline.html

All three (33, 45, 78) were available at the
same time around 1950 if that means anything.
I'll dig through some old college textbooks that have
may have further detail, although not specific to RCA.

rd

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

When the Allies entered Berlin, their intelligence branches were already
aware of a novel, high-quality recording and replay system (time-shifting)
used in broadcast propaganda speeches by celebs (notorious ones) when the
speech-makers were known to be attending elsewhere, and they also knew it
was not on disc media because of long durations without sequential
change-overs.
Having entered their captured enemy's main broadcating studios, I understand
6 Telefunken paper-backed ferric oxide (or maybe it was steel wire) tape
recorders were discovered, 4 went over to USA and 2 were sent to GB, for
immediate analysis and commercial exploitation (spoils of War).
This was just before the start-up of Ampex and of Orr Industries (Bing
Crosby's venture) as hardware and media manufacturers. So the peace-time
tape mastering enterprise must have started in earnest by 1947-8.
EMI and Decca were adapting the new-found! technology and in the '50s, EMI
at Hayes brought out its TR1 tape recorder running at 30ips - with EMI Tape
magnetic tape supplied initially wound oxide out. Off the feed reel, a
half-twist had to be made for the oxide layer to ski past the heads, and
untwisted again onto the take-up reel..

I have never heard of "intermediate" mastering on 33.33 rpm discs for
retro-copying to shorter 78s.
Transcriptors could handle up to 16" diameter blanks.
To be cont'd....
Jim

"RD Jones" <annonn@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1108727961.951149.85740@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> Paul Stamler wrote:
>> Hi folks:
>>
>> Does anyone here know when RCA Victor, and the other major labels,
> converted
>> their recording operations to tape?
>>
>> Here's how the question arose. I was cleaning up some Charlie Monroe
> 78s,
>> recorded 1946-1952, which sounded kind of grubby (a lot more diameter
> loss
>> than usual), and I recalled reading that at some point RCA Victor,
> and
>> perhaps other companies, had quit doing their 78 recording direct to
> the
>> master discs, and were instead mastering on 33-1/3 disks
> (coarse-groove),
>> transferring the successful takes to 78 masters later. With loss of
> quality,
>> of course.
>>
>> Later, they switched to tape. But when? And did RCA, and the others,
> switch
>> their classical divisions to the new medium first, and only convert
> the pop,
>> country, etc. divisions later? Or did they do the whole kit and
> caboodle at
>> once?
>>
>> And was the story about recording on transcription disks rather than
>> directly to 78 masters true, or firecrackers?
>>
>> Thanks for any help you can give.
>>
>> Peace,
>> Paul
>
> Interesting question.
> Certainly after WW II.
> AES has some references that should give anecdotal
> evidence as to when it 'might' have occured:
>
> http://www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/audi [...] eline.html
>
> All three (33, 45, 78) were available at the
> same time around 1950 if that means anything.
> I'll dig through some old college textbooks that have
> may have further detail, although not specific to RCA.
>
> rd
>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Jim Gregory wrote:
> When the Allies entered Berlin, their intelligence branches were
already
> aware of a novel, high-quality recording and replay system
(time-shifting)
> used in broadcast propaganda speeches by celebs (notorious ones) when
the
> speech-makers were known to be attending elsewhere, and they also
knew it
> was not on disc media because of long durations without sequential
> change-overs.
> Having entered their captured enemy's main broadcating studios, I
understand
> 6 Telefunken paper-backed ferric oxide (or maybe it was steel wire)
tape
> recorders were discovered, 4 went over to USA and 2 were sent to GB,
for
> immediate analysis and commercial exploitation (spoils of War).

John Mullin sent back two machines in parts and spent three months
reassembling them.
The tape was acetate backed with ferric oxide pressed into it. Mullin
had about 200 rools of tape which he kept splicing back together
Mullin was the Bing Crosby connection. He edited the shows on tape and
then retransferred the edits to transcription 78's for broadcast. He
also claims to have been the originator of the "laugh track".

3M got into the tape manufacturing business because of its experience
with coating abrasives onto backing media.



> This was just before the start-up of Ampex and of Orr Industries
(Bing
> Crosby's venture) as hardware and media manufacturers. So the
peace-time
> tape mastering enterprise must have started in earnest by 1947-8.
> EMI and Decca were adapting the new-found! technology and in the
'50s, EMI
> at Hayes brought out its TR1 tape recorder running at 30ips - with
EMI Tape
> magnetic tape supplied initially wound oxide out. Off the feed reel,
a
> half-twist had to be made for the oxide layer to ski past the heads,
and
> untwisted again onto the take-up reel..
>
> I have never heard of "intermediate" mastering on 33.33 rpm discs for

> retro-copying to shorter 78s.
> Transcriptors could handle up to 16" diameter blanks.
> To be cont'd....
> Jim
>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<RickPV8945@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1108751160.025195.288140@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> Jim Gregory wrote:
> > When the Allies entered Berlin, their intelligence branches were
> already
> > aware of a novel, high-quality recording and replay system
> (time-shifting)
> > used in broadcast propaganda speeches by celebs (notorious ones) when
> the
> > speech-makers were known to be attending elsewhere, and they also
> knew it
> > was not on disc media because of long durations without sequential
> > change-overs.
> > Having entered their captured enemy's main broadcating studios, I
> understand
> > 6 Telefunken paper-backed ferric oxide (or maybe it was steel wire)
> tape
> > recorders were discovered, 4 went over to USA and 2 were sent to GB,
> for
> > immediate analysis and commercial exploitation (spoils of War).
>
> John Mullin sent back two machines in parts and spent three months
> reassembling them.
> The tape was acetate backed with ferric oxide pressed into it. Mullin
> had about 200 rools of tape which he kept splicing back together
> Mullin was the Bing Crosby connection. He edited the shows on tape and
> then retransferred the edits to transcription 78's for broadcast. He
> also claims to have been the originator of the "laugh track".
>
> 3M got into the tape manufacturing business because of its experience
> with coating abrasives onto backing media.

All useful and enjoyable information, but I'm still trying to find out how
quickly tape was adopted by the major recording companies.

Peace,
Paul

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Rick and Chris
You have added much useful gen to widen the little tech info I knew about
this new era,
especially on US introducing AC bias and 3M starting up its Tape division.
Apart from Vlademar Poulsen (a Dane), did the Magnetophon creator (or its
team-leader)
ever go down in history?

Can't, won't try now to expand on the earliest days of Magnetic Audio Media.

PS Telefunken also made many of the pre-war and war-time mics stuck under
those
German orators' mouths, but I don't know what genre of transducers; one
notices in relevant
footage these always had a semi-circular tradename logo fixed above the
capsule cage,
and not the name of the broadcast network as is commonplace, nay rife,
nowadays.
Jim

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 18 Feb 2005 10:26:00 -0800, "RickPV8945@aol.com"
<RickPV8945@aol.com> wrote:

>3M got into the tape manufacturing business because of its experience
>with coating abrasives onto backing media.

Here's a piece of trivia: Dr. Wetzel of 3M brought Mullin
a variety of tape formulations to try. The last to be tried,
because thought unpromising, was Tape Type 112 RR.

It proved to sound better than even the fifty reels of
German tape, which were now getting old. RR stood for
Red Raven, the trade name for the iron oxide used, which
was normally used to color barn paint.

Chris Hornbeck
"Loved him; hated her." -Danny Kaye on the Himalaya's

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
> My dad was interviewed by a local radio station in the mid-50s. They sent
> him a recording of the session. We were never able to play it, though,
> since the diameter was MUCH larger than would fit on a consumer phonograph
> of the day. We were told it was 16rpm.

Georgeh
A phonograph is a patented machine only associated with the Edison
*cylinder* system.
But I think the word caught on globally, misused, because it happened first.
The successful disc system, after Berliner, strictly speaking, is usually
called the gramophone!
The courtesy copy transcription you mentioned would need using a 4-speed 16"
(or bigger?)
turntable to retrieve its contents.
Jim

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I used to say that because Americans called their record-playing device a
phonograph, the award should be called a "Phony".

Now that most music is on CDs, perhaps it should be called a "Seedy."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I think "record-player" or "disc-player" is very apt.
I prefer either to "gramophone" because to me that word automatically
conjures a clockwork cranking handle and a groove-ploughing copper needle!
Yet Grammy awards seem to mean something.
[Hi fi purists did talk about their such-and-such turntables and (tone-)
arms.]
Jim

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Thanks ... I'll check it out.

"Brian Downey" <brian.downey@stratcomm.com> writes:

>There is a company that will transfer it for you to whatever format you have
>at home. I haven't used them but they have an extremely interesting website
>with all kinds of info and free advice.
>www.videointerchange.com
>Brian
>"georgeh" <georgeh@gjhsun.cl.msu.edu> wrote in message
>>
>> My dad was interviewed by a local radio station in the mid-50s. They sent
>> him a recording of the session. We were never able to play it, though,
>> since the diameter was MUCH larger than would fit on a consumer phonograph
>> of the day. We were told it was 16rpm.