1931 Program Transcription Popular Selections Paul Whiteman

[melvind]

This is my first attempt at transferring a 33 ⅓ Program Transcription record from 1931. I have a few of these and they are all really worn out and full of distortion. This one has some of that too, but it is not that bad. There is more fidelity on this record that I anticipated for an early 33 ⅓ attempt at a long play record. It cleaned up pretty well and was a fun project.

Read the YouTube notes for this video for more information about these records. There has been a lot of discussion about Program Transcriptions on the forum. Searching for those posts might also prove interesting.

(Double-click the video above or click this link to watch the video on YouTube in HD.)

https://youtu.be/pZvSC2gu898

[gramophone-georg]

Hi Dan:

These are actually really nice records IMO. I have a small collection of about 80 of these and they are quite a fascinating bit of phono/ record history. Are you playing yours with a 78 RPM stylus?

Also of note- there are two types- shellac and Victrolac which is similar to vinyl. Victor advised AGAINST using Tungs Tone needles on these but I think lots of owners didn't get that memo. Supposedly one needed "orange chromium" needles for these pressings but these needles seem to be made of "Unobtanium"... I have hunted for decades but never found any.

Your YouTube transfers are always enjoyable!

[melvind]

These are actually really nice records IMO. I have a small collection of about 80 of these and they are quite a fascinating bit of phono/ record history. Are you playing yours with a 78 RPM stylus?

Yes, I did use a 3 mil 78 RPM stylus. I tried it with a 2.5 mil stylus and it was terrible. This particular one is hard shellac and visually looks perfect. But, the noise and distortion prove it was played a number of times with worn or inappropriate needles.

I wonder if the common RCA Chromium needles are different from the gold ones. I see Chromium needles often, but also have never seen a Gold Chromium needle.

I'd love to hear some of yours sometime!

[gramophone-georg]

These are actually really nice records IMO. I have a small collection of about 80 of these and they are quite a fascinating bit of phono/ record history. Are you playing yours with a 78 RPM stylus?

Yes, I did use a 3 mil 78 RPM stylus. I tried it with a 2.5 mil stylus and it was terrible. This particular one is hard shellac and visually looks perfect. But, the noise and distortion prove it was played a number of times with worn or inappropriate needles.

I wonder if the common RCA Chromium needles are different from the gold ones. I see Chromium needles often, but also have never seen a Gold Chromium needle.

I'd love to hear some of yours sometime!

I've used the regular Chromiums on the shellac PTs with no issues but wouldn't try it on a Victrolac version. I may try some "Greythorn" needles I picked up off eBay that are NOS. As for hearing some of mine... hell, you're close enough to borrow some if you want to make transfers!

[marcapra]

I have a 1935 Victor record made for the new 1935 Dodge sales filmstrip. It is 33 rpm and seems to be made of flexible vinyl. I played on my Califone school record player with the LP stylus and the sound was terrible. When I flipped it over to 78, the sound was fine! Try playing these records with a 78 sapphire stylus on a Califone or similar record player.

[OrthoSean]

I have said this elsewhere and just last night was talking with someone who was having issues playing these back electrically. I also have a number of these and they can be a lot of fun. With these discs, there's no hard and fast playback rule for a stylus size. Some of the direct recorded ones, like the Grand Canyon Suite and the Marek Weber "Potpourris" need a smaller 2 or 2.5 mil stylus while others are better with either my 3.5 CONICAL or 4.0 elliptical. It pays to have a selection handy if you're wanting the best possible sound out of anything, really. When I was doing transfers for Living Era and ASV back in the 2000s before they went belly up and most people stopped buying CDs, I invested in a dozen or so different size custom styli and I've only ever had to replace a couple. They aren't cheap by any means, close to $200 each now, but I have no regrets and they're used daily, granted, most often I'm using the LP Gear 3.0 mil for most casual listening and saving the others for actual digitizing. Most collectors that visit are often extremely surprised at the sonic difference a slightly smaller or larger stylus can make on a 78 (or Victor PT) when I demonstarte.

Sean

[gramophone-georg]

I have said this elsewhere and just last night was talking with someone who was having issues playing these back electrically. I also have a number of these and they can be a lot of fun. With these discs, there's no hard and fast playback rule for a stylus size. Some of the direct recorded ones, like the Grand Canyon Suite and the Marek Weber "Potpourris" need a smaller 2 or 2.5 mil stylus while others are better with either my 3.5 CONICAL or 4.0 elliptical. It pays to have a selection handy if you're wanting the best possible sound out of anything, really. When I was doing transfers for Living Era and ASV back in the 2000s before they went belly up and most people stopped buying CDs, I invested in a dozen or so different size custom styli and I've only ever had to replace a couple. They aren't cheap by any means, close to $200 each now, but I have no regrets and they're used daily, granted, most often I'm using the LP Gear 3.0 mil for most casual listening and saving the others for actual digitizing. Most collectors that visit are often extremely surprised at the sonic difference a slightly smaller or larger stylus can make on a 78 (or Victor PT) when I demonstarte.

Sean

Yes, a 2,5 mil stylus can unlock a lot of great music that's below the 3,0 stylus wear area, and vice versa. For awhile way back when I was addicted to the "plays all 3 speeds!" styli for this reason. These days, I won't buy a record below "E" unless it's super rare.

[OrthoSean]

Yes, a 2,5 mil stylus can unlock a lot of great music that's below the 3,0 stylus wear area, and vice versa. For awhile way back when I was addicted to the "plays all 3 speeds!" styli for this reason. These days, I won't buy a record below "E" unless it's super rare.

Wear is certainly a big reason to have different sizes, but also you'll encounter some discs that just have a groove quite a lot wider than a 3 mil "standard" stylus can fit snugly into and you'll hear a rather audible swish. Some PTs definitely have a slightly smaller groove size, but one seems to be larger, the Whiteman Rhapsody In Blue and it's flip. I remember needing my 3.5 to eliminate that swish. Too bad that one is a somewhat hollow sounding dub, but what can you do LOL.

Last night I was spot checking my Larry Holdridge wins of which one box arrived yesterday and a Louise Homer test from 1906-7 or so needed a 4 mil to eliminate that swish. Once you get past that, some amazing sounds come off them. I don't always agree that Edisons were superior sonically. Fighting words to some, I know, but they've all got their moments / merits.

Sean

[Wolfe]

I don't always agree that Edisons were superior sonically.

Me neither.

This is my first attempt at transferring a 33 ⅓ Program Transcription record from 1931.

Thanks for the upload.

[melvind]

I have said this elsewhere and just last night was talking with someone who was having issues playing these back electrically. I also have a number of these and they can be a lot of fun. With these discs, there's no hard and fast playback rule for a stylus size. Some of the direct recorded ones, like the Grand Canyon Suite and the Marek Weber "Potpourris" need a smaller 2 or 2.5 mil stylus while others are better with either my 3.5 CONICAL or 4.0 elliptical. It pays to have a selection handy if you're wanting the best possible sound out of anything, really. When I was doing transfers for Living Era and ASV back in the 2000s before they went belly up and most people stopped buying CDs, I invested in a dozen or so different size custom styli and I've only ever had to replace a couple. They aren't cheap by any means, close to $200 each now, but I have no regrets and they're used daily, granted, most often I'm using the LP Gear 3.0 mil for most casual listening and saving the others for actual digitizing. Most collectors that visit are often extremely surprised at the sonic difference a slightly smaller or larger stylus can make on a 78 (or Victor PT) when I demonstarte.

Sean

I am envious of all of your styli in various sizes. I would like to have that too, but it seems kind of extreme for me as an amature hobbiest. But, perhaps now and then I could pick something up. Any suggestions where to look for the larger sizes? 3.5 mil and 4 mil. I use the LP Gear 3.0 for nearly everything 78 rpm. But, at times wish I had something larger.