The perils of recording some records over.

[larryh]

For starters I knew that the original videos I had put up weren't quite as exciting sounding as in the room. I found after way too many records that the setting on the camera wasn't the best frequency response. I have done quite a few over already. But here is the deal. Some of the older recordings sound almost better to me due perhaps to the restricted range. With the camera at full response some records I think are great, but others I am finding aren't taking well to the new setting. I redid the electrical record by Schmitz of the Nocturne in F Sharp Major by Chopin. The first attempt which is currently still up I did with the mute full open. I am using the Edisonic Head for these as well, that may not be helping on some records. The sound of the record is far more reverberant. In fact I had to close the mute completely to deaden that extra loud sort of hollow sound. I know I have read where the Edisonic Head wasn't always great with the earlier records, and all the first sessions were made with the standard head. Problem now is that all three of my standard heads the Bruce Diamonds finally worn out and now were having issues getting them again. I could pull the pin and use the standard head for the recordings but it seems to me that in most instances the latter design pulls more detail from the records. Perhaps I am too picky but it may be that some records simply sounded better with less frequency response? Does that make sense to any one that has recorded their machines here? I did a Vernon Dalhart record today and it was again too strident at the instrumental lead in. I cut the volume by nearly two thirds, it calmed the sound but damped it perhaps more than some would like. Just when I thought I had a project worth pursuing I find myself having to make a lot of decisions I didn't expect.

One after thought here as well. The first sets of records were all recorded from directly in front of the horn. This time I am slightly off the center. I am wondering if that maximum, (or sweet spot), of the sound is missing from these recordings could be lessening the "weight" of the records some. I thought with the amount of sound being produced and being able to pick it up better was creating a full scope of the sound, but perhaps not? I may have to try and see what difference I would get going back to the previous position.

[audiophile102]

Larry, it's really great that you take the time and effort to produce better audio for your videos. The last new ones I heard sounded outstanding. You might try software to tweak the frequency range to you liking. I know Adobe makes a great sound editor, but it comes with a steep learning curve. I'm not sure it will make a difference once it's uploaded to You Tube. Good luck with your project and have fun.

[larryh]

Still learning here. I find that some records are very clear using the Edisonic reproducer while some others seemed to have played with less distortion tendencies using the standard head. I am using what under most circumstances is the most responsive sounding diaphragm. In the standard head it seemed to be less prone to issues. I am going to try with the original material in the Edisonic Head and see if that lessens the issue. My room is very reverberant which isn't helping the matter. Some records again are better in that situation while others seem overly driven. Luckily the most played types of records, Dance or Jazz play fine in most instances. I did have a few of the very late ones that seemed to be way too loud in recording.

When I read in the Frow Edison book I recall it saying that the acoustic records had some issues with the Edisonic reproducers. Has anyone found what exactly it might have caused with the sound out put. In a large setting like a very large basement room the Chippendale uses the Edisonic Head and I don't seem to hear the same issues. It may be the output is diffused by all the room it has to develop. I have provided quite a few of the True Tone diaphragms for people who used them in Edisonic Heads. So far I haven't had any feedback that they weren't pleased with the sound.. Part of that might be that with most diaphragms from other sources the sound levels were not as well defined, thus a happier customer. Trying to get things absolutely perfect is not easy.

[larryh]

I made a new record of Pango Pango Maid. I used the older usually softer type True Tone. But it seems in the Edisonic Head at least to be considerably more solid sounding to my ears, not such high frequency peaks. The good part I guess is that in the Standard Head this diaphragm gives it a boost sometimes it needs. Part of trouble is so many people always considering that louder is better. Even Waltrip knew that if you get too loud your going to have problems. I am putting them both up on a different thread here under, Pango Pango Maid comparisons. Would like feed back as to which you prefer. It almost seems like what some commented on at one point might be true. Some records take well to one design while another might do better with different one. I have them both ready now to put in as soon as I can add the new thread under Music.

Larry

[larryh]

I am finding that the louder camera setting, or normal for most things, is producing a very loud sound on many records. Two things may be going on here, I am using the Edisonic Head which for all the previous recordings over the years I had used the Standard head. I keep hearing buzzing effect on many records, particularly above loud male vocals and some other types of music. I recall Steven telling me that the springs in the Edisonic head can cause an audible buzz at times. Has anyone else found this to be true. I has put some vaseline in the spring coil to try and keep it quiet but not sure if the sound if from the reproducer or the diaphragm. It plays quite clearly on most things but not always. I am going to pull the stylus bar since its the only one I have left and see what happens if I go back to the standard head using the same diaphragm. I'll let you know what I find.

Larry

[larryh]

Darn it I forgot the stylus bars on the Edisonic have that spring hook on them so I didn't try to move it. Instead I put in the earlier version of the diaphragm and while that did reduce the sound some I can still detect that slight buzz over the louder parts of the music. It may be that the record is slightly worn an damage may not show. That usually comes across as the similar buzz that I am trying to correct. And when the diaphragm of the loudest material is added to the Edisonic it may just be driving the problem louder? It sounded wonderful on the Kiss in the Dark I just recorded by Muzio and other records with plenty of difficult passages so it may be record driven? Won't know till Steven gets the new stylus from Bruce and I can use the Standard head again.

[larryh]

I have pretty much decided to stop recording over many of the records I have up. I still have about 10 here on the computer to load. After that I will stop for a while. I simply can't get the room to cooperate with the sound from the record player. I have tried both types of diaphragms, and to some degree it helped to return to the eariler True Tone version, but loud portions still echo in a way that isn't too bad in person but somehow is made worse by the microphone. The microphone isn't a poor one, its a decent performer on many types of instruments. I have gone back and listened to some of the earlier recordings and then the newer ones. Some have a distinct improvement in over all sound, others seem be better with the old set up which tends to make things less vibrant and in effect cleaner. Something I thought the new louder microphone setting would accomplish. In many ways it did, but others I find inaccurate as to the sound of the records.

I have a chippendale upright which is next door in the basement, I use to listen when walking there. If I could do a bit more work with some decoration of that area I might be able to record them where the sound has a lot of room to expand. That might be something to look into. I think I will make a test case as it sits there now one of the same records I find too vibrant in the present location. Need to get back to some of the reproducing piano videos as well as we had it finally operating as it should on low. Only thing there I wish I hadn't done was to have the technician soften the hammers some as it was also way too loud for the room. The result though till the hammers are hardened from use again is that it is a bit duller sounding than it was previously. Always something it seems.