The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

epigramophone wrote:I think Wolfe's intention when starting this topic was to mention singers who recorded both acoustically and electrically, which Caruso did not.

Caruso is of course in a class of his own, and we can only imagine what he would have sounded like with the benefit of later recording techniques.

If that were his intention, then it was known only to him, as it is nowhere expressed or implied. Perhaps Wolfe could speak for himself on this point.

Wolfe wrote: Assuming you can make a judgement from having heard them electrically, or even in person!

This part of my post, I had hoped got the intention across.

Henry wrote:
If that were his intention, then it was known only to him, as it is nowhere expressed or implied. Perhaps Wolfe could speak for himself on this point.

Then, I lost the plot myself, when I mentioned Eddie Morton. Heck, I was hoping someone will come along who actually heard Will Oakland or somebody like that, people who were alive and still singing into the 1950s.

Some artists who recorded acoustically, as good as they may sound, you didn't really get the whole picture. Billy Murray, who made great records, and was certainly very successful, you find that some bottom or 'body' to his voice still went missing on acoustic records, it's not quite the same.

Edward M favor certainly was a master of the recording horn, having started from the earliest days of the Phonograph, He sang with volume and clarity. It is said that he would cup is hands by his hears and test by moving his head slightly listening for the sweet spot of the recording horn.

Wolfe wrote:...Some artists who recorded acoustically, as good as they may sound, you didn't really get the whole picture. Billy Murray, who made great records, and was certainly very successful, you find that some bottom or 'body' to his voice still went missing on acoustic records, it's not quite the same.

Same at the other end of the sonic spectrum for sopranos, which is why almost all of them sound so colorless on acoustics. The one exception: Galli-Curci! and she did record electrically also, but long after her prime.

epigramophone wrote:I think Wolfe's intention when starting this topic was to mention singers who recorded both acoustically and electrically, which Caruso did not.

Caruso is of course in a class of his own, and we can only imagine what he would have sounded like with the benefit of later recording techniques.

Caruso is unsurpassed in the acoustic era. His voice recordings truly revolutionized the industry and changed the phonograph from a curiosity into an instrument to convey the aesthetic and power of great music. Ruffo, Gadski, Tetrazzini, Farrar, Calve, Destinn, Melba and many others would follow and were great artists, but there's only one Caruso. I am still amazed at the sheer power and beauty of many of his recordings. And it's said that these only convey a glimpse of his true voice.

I wish Caruso would have been an Edison artist, I believe the Gramophone and Victor recordings offer a shadow of what he sounded like. In an interview with Gladys Rice, She said that at Edison, the artist could sing in a normal voice, while recording for Victor, her husband drove the engineer into a frenzy and he was told he was a spinning the needle, and they needed to use the Caruso method, and they stuffed cotton in the horn, to make the recorder less sensitive. I am soon posting a very clear Edward M favor Gold Molded cylinder soon, that shows an even tone and clarity.

edisonphonoworks wrote:I wish Caruso would have been an Edison artist, I believe the Gramophone and Victor recordings offer a shadow of what he sounded like. In an interview with Gladys Rice, She said that at Edison, the artist could sing in a normal voice, while recording for Victor, her husband drove the engineer into a frenzy and he was told he was a spinning the needle, and they needed to use the Caruso method, and they stuffed cotton in the horn, to make the recorder less sensitive. I am soon posting a very clear Edward M favor Gold Molded cylinder soon, that shows an even tone and clarity.

Your comment suggests that the Edison recording method was inherently superior and that the Victor recording engineers were unskilled using a seriously flawed recording technology. Both technologies had their limitations. Edison's method does surpass lateral cut acoustic discs in some respects. However, the process of acoustic disc recording made progressive improvements from 1902-1925. The quality of disc recordings steadily improved and there were some wonderful recordings made, especially by operatic artists IMHO. The quality of tone, clarity, and dynamics were truly splendid on some of these discs. To hear the quality of these discs, it's essential to hear a pristine copy or a high quality transcript.

Caruso had a powerful voice which was exceptionally well suited to being captured on early disc recordings. People were astounded at the fidelity and volume of these recordings. I think it's hard for us to fully appreciate the impact that his recordings had on the industry during the early years of recording. He was a thunderbolt that launched G&T and VTMC. His recordings may have been a "shadow" of his true voice, but the essence is there and the sheer beauty and power of his vocal recordings is still an awesome achievement.

Edison's recordings do have a nice clarity of tone, although many of the classical artists were not of the highest standard, at least in the realm of operatic recordings. Of course, exceptions do exist and a few top tier artists did record with Edison. It's unfortunate that Edison could not record many of the greatest vocal artists of the day because of their exclusive contracts with VTMC.

edisonphonoworks wrote:I wish Caruso would have been an Edison artist,

Caruso at Edison would have meant being denied all the records where he was paired with other top artists (Ruffo, Farrar, Destinn, etc.) Plus the sometimes weird orchestrations they used on those Edison records.

His voice may have been captured a bit better, without the compromised dynamics imposed by the lateral process, but thinking of one Edison opera recorder who also later made electrical records (Claudia Muzio) finds that the relatively dead sounding acoustic Edison records still lost a little something.

schallplatte wrote:

edisonphonoworks wrote:It's unfortunate that Edison could not record many of the greatest vocal artists of the day because of their exclusive contracts with VTMC.

Edison would not have paid the wage or royalties that Victor did for those famous artists. He extolled voice quality over name recognition. Perhaps he was just a cheapskate?

gregbogantz wrote:The Harry Lauder blue amberols are among the best vocal recordings made on cylinder. Most (if not all) were directly recorded on early catalog numbers, so they were not dubs. The voice is natural sounding and presents the best sibilants that I've ever heard from acoustic recordings.

I've been playing his blue label Victor of Ta Ta, My Bonnie Maggie Darling. Sibilance galore for an acoustic record.

Always been a pretty tepid on Harry Lauder, but gradually I'm becoming more of a fan. I have some Red Seal Victors with Lauder, in addition to normal purple and blue.