Edison Diamond Disc Tuning Records

[fran604g]

I did check the actual frequency some years ago at 80 rpm and came clearly to 440 Hz by spectral and waveform analysis along with audible comparison to a digital 440 Hz sine wave.

But these tuning records are often also somewhat excentric and not as precise as they should be for this purpose. This would correspond perfectly to the improper tuning of period pich-pipes.

I just realized and old typo in that one thread as Chuck had remarked, so yes, 440 is perfectly correct.

Thanks for your perspective. Personally, I think that folks take the theoretical a bit too far, when the practical will suffice. Me; I tune cylinders so that the selection sounds good to my own ears...and with 78's they're all over the place. Digital servos came along too late...

Fran

[marcapra]

I don't have a tuning record and pipe, so the way I set the turntable rpms is by playing a vocal record of a voice I know well, such as Uncle Josh or the Happiness Boys. That works every time!

[coyote]

Also, "let us not forget" that, according to the Collector's Guide to Edison Records, very late Diamond Discs were slowed to 78.8 RPM to record the lateral "needle-cut" records simultaneously. According to Copeland/Sherman, this begins with matrix 19025. The starting catalog number would be 52520 with a few exceptions which were recorded prior to Feb 4, 1929.

[OrthoSean]

Also, "let us not forget" that, according to the Collector's Guide to Edison Records, very late Diamond Discs were slowed to 78.8 RPM to record the lateral "needle-cut" records simultaneously. According to Copeland/Sherman, this begins with matrix 19025. The starting catalog number would be 52520 with a few exceptions which were recorded prior to Feb 4, 1929.

Yes, but there are also many exceptions I've come across over the years. I don't think I've ever found a DD that was recorded faster than 80, but many certainly slower. One particular example is a Duke Yellman side (I can't recall which one) plays at about 73.5 to be anywhere near proper pitch, trusting not only my ear but also using a pitch pipe which is a necessity in my book. At 78 or 80, it sounds like that sped up music often used on the Benny Hill shows. There are many others as well, mostly some of the really early frosted label "transfer" pressings of orchestral and band selections. These seem to be more in pitch at 76-78 working with score pitch. Of course, there are always little anomalies like this with records, I find them to be fascinating.

Sean

[52089]

Also, "let us not forget" that, according to the Collector's Guide to Edison Records, very late Diamond Discs were slowed to 78.8 RPM to record the lateral "needle-cut" records simultaneously. According to Copeland/Sherman, this begins with matrix 19025. The starting catalog number would be 52520 with a few exceptions which were recorded prior to Feb 4, 1929.

I've read this, but it doesn't make sense. Unless the Diamond Disc and lateral record lathes were physically connected (exceptionally unlikely), why would they have to be at the same speed? In other words, if they were also recording cylinders at the same time, would you set the cylinder recorder to 78.8 too? Of course not...

[OrthoSean]

I never understood it either, but generally speaking matrix numbers over that 19000 number seems to be correct. 78 RPM seems to fit them all. The Billy Murray and Vaughn DeLeath electrics of this period are easy enough to tell. Not at all in pitch at 80. I seem to dimly recall somebody telling me (Ron himself?) that Edison upgraded lathes to electric and that's why it happened. We'll likely never really know, but I've got enough electrics to be able to say 80 is usually too fast.

Sean