Missing instruments in acoustic recordings

[kendphono]

Generally, there is a lot of discussion on various machines on this forum. I too, am extremely interested in the mechanical aspects of them. However, every once in awhile you read something about the early days of phonographs that tweaks your interest. I just finished a book by Clive Cussler called “The Thief”. Cussler is very good at researching his facts for his books. At one point in the book, there is a discussion about making acoustic recordings. I never paid much attention to the instruments used in early acoustic recordings and never sought to determine which ones were there and which ones were not. I guess I just assumed whatever instrument that was needed for the piece was there. The following quote from the book makes me think that I have not been a very critical listener.

“When making acoustic recordings of music, we have to replace the violins with horns and clarinets and reinforce the string base with a brass saxophone and the drums with banjos. One of my goals is to replace the acoustic mechanical systems invented by Edison. Edison Machines can't record strings and drums and can't record piano, which is really just a bunch of strings and drums. It comes out flat and tinny.”

It seems that the advent of the Stroh Violin was to overcome one of these weaknesses.

What do you think about what is said in the quote?

Ken Danckaert

[estott]

Somewhat correct. Solo violins could be recorded close to the horn. Edison (and any other company) could record pianos & did so constantly, but the results tended to be a bit tinny & bass response wasn't good. Snare drums recorded just fine but a problem with bass drums is that a good hard blow could make the recording stylus jump. Bass viols recorded very faintly or not at all, so low reeds were indeed used to replace them and reinforce the cello line.

By the mid 1920's things were much improved, only the lack of response to low frequencies remained. Here is something interesting- the 1925 recording of the "New World" symphony- what you hear is basically an acoustic setup, but in front of a microphone- on my copy you can hear the low reeds doubling the strings. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mR3sepIRo5I[/youtube]

[Henry]

If you're referring to the clarinet playing in its low register (chalumeau register), between about 1:15 and 1:40 during the English horn solo, that is in the original score as Dvorak wrote it; it's not an alteration of the original scoring. However, at the poco meno mosso where the double basses have a long pizzicato passage, they are doubled by the tuba (not in score), and at the corresponding place a few measures later (marked meno) the tremolo 'cello line is doubled in the bassoon, again not in the score; in fact, I don't hear the tremolo 'cellos at all! Other than those places (!), the recording agrees with the score as I have followed along with it for as much of the recorded movement as was posted, which only takes us to m. 89 (out of the 127-measure total).

In the acoustic era it was certainly common enough to double the bass line with a tuba, and the first violin line with clarinets, in order to strengthen the extreme ends of the ranges where frequency response fell off. Much of the tone color of the instrumental and vocal upper registers gets "flattened out" or "tinny" because the upper partials of the harmonic series, which give depth and brilliance to the tone, are weakened or cut off by the frequency response limitations of the technology.

[estott]

If you're referring to the clarinet playing in its low register (chalumeau register), between about 1:15 and 1:40 during the English horn solo, that is in the original score as Dvorak wrote it; it's not an alteration of the original scoring. However, at the poco meno mosso where the double basses have a long pizzicato passage, they are doubled by the tuba (not in score), and at the corresponding place a few measures later (marked meno) the tremolo 'cello line is doubled in the bassoon, again not in the score; in fact, I don't hear the tremolo 'cellos at all! Other than those places (!), the recording agrees with the score as I have followed along with it for as much of the recorded movement as was posted, which only takes us to m. 89 (out of the 127-measure total).

In the acoustic era it was certainly common enough to double the bass line with a tuba, and the first violin line with clarinets, in order to strengthen the extreme ends of the ranges where frequency response fell off. Much of the tone color of the instrumental and vocal upper registers gets "flattened out" or "tinny" because the upper partials of the harmonic series, which give depth and brilliance to the tone, are weakened or cut off by the frequency response limitations of the technology.

Sorry- I do tend to get Low Reeds and Low Brasses somewhat muddled together - but you do get my drift.

What I like about this 1925 recording is that it was made in a fairly dead studio so there is great clarity- I love the first movement diminuendo to the muffled cymbal crash. On the later 20's electric set they're in a larger room "Probably Liederkranz Hall) and there's a lot of room tone - nice in its way but it blurrs the colors a little.

[De Soto Frank]

I think it is also worth noting that "concert bands" and "brass bands" / "military bands" were a lot more popular during the infancy of the phonograph, and band transcriptions of orchestral works were quite common ( though many classical snobs turn their noses skyward at the idea today... ).

In such cases, all the strings were replaced / doubled by woodwinds & low reeds.


Solo fiddles could record okay by the acoustic process, having the horn right up to the fiddle, but section-strings would not record well in an ensemble setting. Hence woodwind doubling or outright substitution.

The Stroh "horn violin" recorded better, but sounded an awful lot like a soprano saxophone in tone-color.

When I read the quote in the original post, "reinforce the string base with a brass saxophone", I am hoping the author meant to write "bass (or "base" ) saxophone". In my experience, there is no other kind of saxophone than a "brass" one.

[Wolfe]

Dis here is a Stroh violin - doesn't sound too bad, except lacking the resonance of the real thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y82pYGUSMI8

Snare drums, bass drums and cymbals (and later) trap sets are all found on acoustic records, but pretty sparingly.

[De Soto Frank]

Hmmm... Let's hear Caprice Viennoise...

[estott]

Fine example of the Stroh Violin: [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0kEXKhDVpI[/youtube]

[Wolfe]

For sure that's a Stroh violin? A soloist didn't necessarily have to use one.

This is the only film I know of that records an actual (original) acoustic recording session - which may help the thread starter with his query. Charlie Chaplin conducting Abe Lyman's orchestra (at 2:20) -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pq0ZgdVpaCo

The violin guys in the film are using a regular instruments (in this case.) Note the sax guys moving their positions relative to the horn.

[Henry]

.The Stroh "horn violin" recorded better, but sounded an awful lot like a soprano saxophone in tone-color.

When I read the quote in the original post, "reinforce the string base with a brass saxophone", I am hoping the author meant to write "bass (or "base" ) saxophone". In my experience, there is no other kind of saxophone than a "brass" one.

OK, I can't hold back any longer---time to revive the old joke:

Q: What's the difference between a saxophone and a chain saw?

A: You can tune a chain saw.