Berliner rotational speed

[drh]

A friend recently purchased a Berliner disk, according to DAHR recorded in France in July 1899. Can anybody here shed light on what speed such records typically run (if there is any such figure)? No way of being sure, of course, but just something of the same sort as "Victor records from the 'teens usually run around 76 RPM" would be a big help.

[epigramophone]

I have read on Wikipedia that Berliner sold his 7 inch records with an advertised standard speed of "about 70rpm".
This statement may or may not be accurate, but as with any records your ears are the best judge.
The few Berliners in my collection play well at this speed.

[Charles Batchelor]

Typically 60-70 RPM is the nominal speed. Start there and work up or down. There really was no "standard" nor any disk lathe at that time that would consistently hew to that standard.

My experience with American Berliners is that there is NO correct speed because it was constantly changing during recording. (British lathes of the period were a little better.) Pitch differences of five or six semitones are not uncommon. When we preserve and restore these sides we use software and our ears to correct for the constant changes in pitch. You can hear the before and after for a few hundred Berliners at i78s.org. And Archeophone's "Etching the Voice: Emile Berliner and the first commercial Gramophone Discs, 1889-1895" tells how we made these corrections for the one hundred 5" discs on the CD set.

Finally, note that every playing on any period machine will irreparably diminish the recording. If you need proof, browse the Berliners at i78s.org and you'll hear sides that have virtually no recording left in the opening grooves. The old machines basically chiseled out the signal, and will continue to do so if you let them.

- David Giovannoni

[drh]

Not to worry; my friend has no acoustic machines of any sort (and hence is not a forum member). He plays everything on modern turntables with lightweight pickups and a range of custom styli.

Thanks to you both for the info!

[drh]

I forwarded the info to my friend, who wrote back to me the following:

Please thank the folks who answered for me. If you think you can
continue to presume upon their good nature, please ask them if they
think a smaller stylus than 1.5 mil conical would be an improvement.
This is *by far* the best of those I have, and a significant
improvement over even the 1.5 elliptical. It is also the smallest I
have.

If anybody has any words of wisdom to share, we'd both be grateful!