Steppin' In Society and Meadow Lark (plus speed question)

[bart1927]

When I transfer recordings I like to play a little along on my keyboard, to check if the speed is right. If not, I speed it up, or slow it down. Unfortunately, I don't have perfect pitch, so I'm not always certain if the outcomes are correct.

So here I have two files for you that I felt needed speeding up. Steppin' In Society has been transferred at 80 rpm, Meadow Lark at 80.5 The vocal on Meadow Lark is credited to Irving Kaufman, on the label, but I think that's a mistake.

Anyhow, here are the two files. Let me know what you think. Too fast? Too slow? Or about right?

Meadow Lark (Imperial Dance Orchestra/Adrian Schubert) Imperial 1787. Recorded 08/27/1926
http://www.box.net/shared/bxifb245t446f7mu9h5s


Steppin' In Society (Manhattan Dance Makers) Regal G8470. Recorded 08/06/1925
http://www.box.net/shared/hj1gqkpp8eovvlvet0rd

[barnettrp21122]

These tunes seem to be pretty close as you've transferred them, IMO. I used a pitch pipe while listening. My own piano I wouldn't trust since it's been too long since it's been tuned! Thanks for taking the extra care with the pitch issues, and thanks too for using your linked server instead of Youtube!
Bob

[bart1927]

These tunes seem to be pretty close as you've transferred them, IMO. I used a pitch pipe while listening. My own piano I wouldn't trust since it's been too long since it's been tuned! Thanks for taking the extra care with the pitch issues, and thanks too for using your linked server instead of Youtube!
Bob

Thanks for confirming that both songs are on key. However, that still leaves the question if they are in the right key. I've sped them up from 78 to 80, but I could also slow them down to 76 (4 rpm's is approx. 1 semitone). Do you guys (and gals, perhaps) think that both tunes sound natural? Not too fast?

[syncopeter]

The Regal should be right at around 80 rpm. Pre-1928 British Columbia, of which Regal was a cheaper sublabel did most of its recording at 80 rpm. The Imperial sounds a bit sharp, so could actually be recorded at 76 rpm. Until well in the 1950s some companies still used weight driven cutting lathes and they could vary in speed considerably. Without trustworthy stroboscobes the technician had to count the number of revolutions per minute to determine the speed.
Only when sound movies came in and sound and movement had to be synchronised did they really start to pay attention to this phenomenon. Before that a rough estimate was sufficient.
So you will find that 78 on early records can mean anything from 71 to 80 or more. During the mid '20s Victor, Columbia and HMV had their speeds pretty standardised, I've never had to a adjust one single record for speed. Some minor companies still could be quite a bit out sometimes.
An interesting thing is that I had two takes of a pianiste on a British Columbia record. Same take number, same catalog number, but two completely different versions. One with, the other without vocal. One recorded at 78, the other at 80 rpm. You can clearly hear that it was recorded in the same studio, with the same microphone set-up, only with different speeds.

[bart1927]

The Regal should be right at around 80 rpm. Pre-1928 British Columbia, of which Regal was a cheaper sublabel did most of its recording at 80 rpm. The Imperial sounds a bit sharp, so could actually be recorded at 76 rpm. Until well in the 1950s some companies still used weight driven cutting lathes and they could vary in speed considerably. Without trustworthy stroboscobes the technician had to count the number of revolutions per minute to determine the speed.
Only when sound movies came in and sound and movement had to be synchronised did they really start to pay attention to this phenomenon. Before that a rough estimate was sufficient.
So you will find that 78 on early records can mean anything from 71 to 80 or more. During the mid '20s Victor, Columbia and HMV had their speeds pretty standardised, I've never had to a adjust one single record for speed. Some minor companies still could be quite a bit out sometimes.
An interesting thing is that I had two takes of a pianiste on a British Columbia record. Same take number, same catalog number, but two completely different versions. One with, the other without vocal. One recorded at 78, the other at 80 rpm. You can clearly hear that it was recorded in the same studio, with the same microphone set-up, only with different speeds.

Actually, even the big companies hadn't gotten their act together speedwise until the late twenties. Almost every Victor from 1925 and 1926 plays too fast at 78, in 1927 it was about 50/50, and from 1928 on most records were actually recorded at 78. I usually don't pay a lot of attention to the playback speed that's printed on the labels. Even in the early twenties Victor suggested that all their records should be played at 78 rpm.

I've slowed "Meadow Lark" down to 76. Does this sound better?

http://www.box.net/shared/4t54ac08p1s0of9cm68k

[FloridaClay]

The "Meadow Lark" sounds better to my ear at 76, but that is a purely subjective judgment.

Clay

[Edisone]

The "Meadow Lark" sounds better to my ear at 76, but that is a purely subjective judgment.

Clay

Not as subjective as you think - it IS Irving Kaufman singing, and he sounds much more like himself at this slower speed than the first example.

[bart1927]

I think you guys are right. At the lower speed the singer sounds indeed more like Irving Kaufman, and assuming that Edisone, the label and Brian Rust are right and it is indeed mr Kaufman, then there's no doubt about it, and 80 rpm is way too fast. The reason I thought 80 rpm was correct is because the original issue of this British Imperial record was, I believe a Banner, and I have several Banners that play around 79 or 80 rpm. The second reason was that when I sped it up, instead of slowing it down, it played in exactly the same key as the rendition of Meadow Lark by Isham Jones and His Orchestra (Brunswick 3335-B). At 76 rpm the song sounds pretty laid-back, but the singer sounds indeed much more natural.

[Swing Band Heaven]

Even as late as 1931 HMV was still issuing disks which were recorded a significant distance away from 78rpm. You would of thought that the company that made such a fuss about ensuring your machine was calibrated to exactly 78 would have got their house in order before that date. I am not sure if the speed variation thing went on beyond 1931 or not but it is the latest disk that I have where this is very noticible. The disk in question is the recording of "Home" by Ambrose and his Orchestra and it plays at a natural sounding pitch at about 73rpm. The full side is used so I wonder if they did it to make sure they could squeeze the entire length of the song onto the side.

S-B-H

[Valecnik]

Even as late as 1931 HMV was still issuing disks which were recorded a significant distance away from 78rpm. You would of thought that the company that made such a fuss about ensuring your machine was calibrated to exactly 78 would have got their house in order before that date. I am not sure if the speed variation thing went on beyond 1931 or not but it is the latest disk that I have where this is very noticible. The disk in question is the recording of "Home" by Ambrose and his Orchestra and it plays at a natural sounding pitch at about 73rpm. The full side is used so I wonder if they did it to make sure they could squeeze the entire length of the song onto the side.

S-B-H

I guess it's understandable that the companies didn't care too much about the recording speed given that most people were playing these things on acoustic "wind up" phonographs which, even if calibrated to 78 or 80rpm when they were new quickly went out by themselves or with the first twist of the speed control, (often with zero or inaccurate marking)by someone wishing to speed things up or slow them down a bit...