Page 2 of 2

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:28 pm
by bart1927
Wolfe wrote:Girl Friend sounds good at 78.26

Ice Cream doesn't sound quite right at any of the speeds posted. I'd aim for about 79 on that one.

There's key and then there's tempo, both need to sound integral.
Hi Wolfe. Thanks for your input, it is much appreciated.

I adjusted the speed of Ice Cream to 79 rpm: https://app.box.com/s/9nenyq6tnuei8kn8d5r5 When I play along on my keyboard it sounds really bad, and at 80.5 or thereabouts it sounds better. At 80,5 rpm it's in C, when I slow it down one semitone (76 rpm) it lands in B. From what I've read on Norman Fields' website (see previous link to the Armstrong discussion), C is a very likely key for a dance band to play in, whereas B is highly unlikely.

I understand your comment about the tempo, and I agree that at 80.5 rpm it's really fast, but perhaps it was meant that way.

The problem I'm having with Is she my gf is that while Tom Stacks's vocal sounds the most natural at 78.26 (as far as Tom Stacks CAN sound natural), the arrangements really sounds out of tune when I play along on my keyboard. So I'm pretty sure that 78.26 rpm for this one is wrong. At 80rpm it seems to play in F, and that's not an uncommon key for dance bands. When I drop the speed to 75.5 it lands in E. I don't know how likely it is for a dance band to play in E, but since A and B are "forbidden" keys, because of the high number of sharps (3 resp. 5), I'm inclined to think that E (4 sharps) is out of the question too.

I should admit, however, that while I played the piano for 8 years I know more about the actual playing than about musical theory. I've learned most theory online, so some of it may very well be wrong.

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 7:09 pm
by pictureroll
Be aware that at the time, it is most possible that tuning was at A-435 instead of A-440.

Cheers,

Jerry

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:56 pm
by Henry
bart1927 wrote:
Henry wrote:
bart1927 wrote: ....I don't have perfect pitch, but I play a little piano....

Get a bigger piano? :)

This is Ice Cream at:

80.5 rpm https://app.box.com/s/41rfmti2lwjep695osel - C minor/major: right on. Choose this one.

This is Is She My Girl Friend at:

78.26 rpm https://app.box.com/s/m2evcph3l6lvcj5ep8fu - F major: right on. Choose this one.
Hi Henry,

Thanks for your input. With regards to the Ice Cream you could be right, but is there any reason you choose the 80.5 rpm version over the 76? Does it land in an unlikely key at 76, or is it just that it sounds a little too slow?

With regards to Is she my gf I checked the 78.26 rpm file, but I don't think it plays exactly in F-major, in fact it plays in a non-existing key. That's what made me thing the speed was off in the first place. The 80 rpm file, however, plays in F-major.
I checked the tonic pitches of all the examples with my Korg tone-generator tuner at standard tuning of A = 440 Hz, and those are the results I got. Both pieces play comfortably in those keys for all instruments, the transposing ones (trumpet, clarinet, sax) as well as the non-transposing ones (trombone, piano). If your keyboard (electronic, I assume) is using the A =440 pitch standard, this is what you should get, too. As to what speed the originals were recorded at, or at what pitch standard, naturally I can't say. There are too many unknown variables in these situations to ever be completely sure of the facts!

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:54 pm
by Edisone
.

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:15 pm
by Wolfe
Edisone wrote:
I can hear the difference in all 3 on the very first note. I'd notice even if not looking for it.
And your conclusions are?
bart1927 wrote:
I understand your comment about the tempo, and I agree that at 80.5 rpm it's really fast, but perhaps it was meant that way.

The problem I'm having with Is she my gf is that while Tom Stacks's vocal sounds the most natural at 78.26 (as far as Tom Stacks CAN sound natural), the arrangements really sounds out of tune when I play along on my keyboard. So I'm pretty sure that 78.26 rpm for this one is wrong. At 80rpm it seems to play in F, and that's not an uncommon key for dance bands. When I drop the speed to 75.5 it lands in E. I don't know how likely it is for a dance band to play in E, but since A and B are "forbidden" keys, because of the high number of sharps (3 resp. 5), I'm inclined to think that E (4 sharps) is out of the question too.

I should admit, however, that while I played the piano for 8 years I know more about the actual playing than about musical theory. I've learned most theory online, so some of it may very well be wrong.


It's appreciated to have a fellow such as yourself that is so deeply interested in these matters. :)

We'll help you out any way we can. Henry has been especially helpful, as have other contributors to the thread.

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:10 am
by bart1927
pictureroll wrote:Be aware that at the time, it is most possible that tuning was at A-435 instead of A-440.

Cheers,

Jerry
Hi Jerry, I know that, but I was told the difference is really small. I checked it with a Hz tone generator, and I could hear a difference when playing a 440 Hz tone and a 435 Hz tone in consecutive order. However, when I played the middle A on my keyboard and played the 435 Hz file at the same time, I couldn't really hear that one of them was off. Perhaps someone with perfect pitch can, but I can't.

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:56 pm
by Wolfe
Edisone wrote:Fiddled with Ice Cream a bit, comparing the cymbal with Lanin Imperial 1954 (transferred by the late Jeff Healey, who usually had an accurate pitch sense) ... using your 76 file as a base, slowing it to about 73 seems to best match the cymbal.

ps - I never assume 78.26 on records of this era, as I doubt any recording engineers were using strobes to set speeds. 60cps (and AC, for that matter) was far from universal for lighting, and they weren't even using mains equipment - they had weight-driven lathes & amps on storage batteries.
But they could (and did) use mechanical tachometers, eh? Though they probably didn't a lot of time.

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 3:40 pm
by Edisone
Never mind. I am apparently out of my depth, here.

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 5:57 pm
by bart1927
Edisone wrote:Fiddled with Ice Cream a bit, comparing the cymbal with Lanin Imperial 1954 (transferred by the late Jeff Healey, who usually had an accurate pitch sense) ... using your 76 file as a base, slowing it to about 73 seems to best match the cymbal.
How exacly do you use cymbals to pitch a records? I didn't know cymbals could play in a certain key. Anyway, I tried Ice Cream at 73 rpm, butI'm pretty sure it's way too slow... https://app.box.com/s/zpwqdbdxaa5f11tf5daa


Edisone wrote:They could've use mechanical tachs, but still would have no reason to use that .26 until it became a standard practice.

Anyway... .. Girlfriend @ 80 matches quite closely with Jeff Healey's transfer.
The reason I use 78.26 rpm as a starting point for all my transfers is a simple one: it's the default setting on my turntable. Also, you can never set your turntable to exactly 78 rpm, using a strobe disc. But if you're able to hear the difference between 78 and 78.26 rpm, you have very sensitive hearing.

You mention Jeff Healey's transfers of both these recordings: can these be found on a cd or lp?

Re: Imperial 1909 and Banner 6124. Correct speed?

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 6:37 pm
by Wolfe
Cymbals don't have fixed pitches. Unless you knew it was the same cymbal on the same session would be the only comparison. Even how hard the cymbal is struck or how well the overtones of one particular cymbal were captured by the recording machine on a given day could affect your perception.