The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

OrthoSean wrote:I had suspected as much. One more thing I can add to this, remember that most musicians such as this group were paid a "per session" fee. Basically they'd be booked for an hour or two in the studio where they could easily have done a few different tunes a couple of times for both formats, all for one "fee". Columbia did this with Little Wonder discs, a regular "take" or takes would be done for a 10 inch issue, then another for the 5 inch Little Wonder issue.

Glad you can rest easy now, Ralph!

Sean

Thanks, Sean!

One of my collector friend's favorite bitches is that when Edison brought out the 4m Amberol, many of the performances were tunes already on 2m--in which the group just kept throwing in repeats until the cylinder was at 4 minutes. Now I have enough of the 4m waxes to know that that's not a fair general statement--as many of the pieces on wax Amberol really do have "musical integrity" as 4m pieces. But no doubt there are glaring instances where there are too many repeated sections--and those have stuck in his craw.

This still leaves one of my questions, though. If Indestructible found it easy enough to record directly for one medium and then another, why didn't Edison do that as opposed to dubbing from disc to cylinder? I guess there is ultimately no answer besides money. When Edison went to dubbing in late 1914 he still was putting out a hefty rate of cylinder production and wanted to keep things clipping along, I guess. Bu 1919/20, when Indestructible was in its last gasp and only releasing a dozen cylinder titles a year, they did only those hits (like Dardanella) that they were sure would sell--and in those cases they were fine with doing the two separate media.

I think, it's a very probable explanation to have direct cylinder recordings but all made at the same day. Especially 4:17 give a quite clear hint that it was issued even on a 12" disc unless they would have slowed down the speed, which rarely happened by 1919.

With Edison, we have two main factors combining. One is, as you already mentioned, money, the other one is pure stubbornness of an old man.

Now, when we look back to the time the Blue Amberol was introduced, it almost happened at the same time as the Diamond Disc. As we all know, Edison was convinced of the cylinder format. However, he was not fond of the Blue Amberol because it would always remind him of the fact, that he was prohibited to use celluloid as a record material for years, due to the Lambert patents.

I am pretty certain, that this was one major reason for him to keep up the format in general but not the highest possible quality in favor of his new Diamond Disc format, which - in general - was only so obscure in its design to bypass Victor and Columbia patents. But that's a different story. The fire in 1914 was just a perfect excuse to go cheap with BA's.

There are some clues in Edison's notebooks about how little he thought about the BA cylinders. Especially in the 1910's, we would still personally rate the recordings to decide what to issue and what to reject. In some cases, we would actually make a note, that a certain take or performance was just good enough for a Blue Amberol, but not for Diamond Disc.

Btw. there are indeed some 'stretched' 4-minute selections. The best example I can think of is Charles d'Almaine playing the Shepherd's dance. The 2-minute versions (#7990 and #8070) so much more lively than the slowed-down snoozer on 4-minute Amberol #712 (on BA as #1860).

Btw. #2 If I recall it correctly, Sterling did produce pre-recorded 2-minute cylinders until 1923.

I notice that Albany inde. vary greatly in quality. I have some two minutes that are of great quality, My Old Dutch the consonants are nice and clear, and it has an almost Edison quality. I also have Song of the Brave March, and that is a very good recording lively clear and loud. The four minute ones though I have, don't have the clarity that the two minute ones have. I have "Over There" on a grey 4m, and the bass is good but the mids and highs are muddy and distorted, so is Keep the Home Fires Burning, a bassy quality. This may be due to the fact they wanted volume and a tone more like a lateral disc. When you want volume, you use a thin diaphragm such as a .006-.005 glass, and soft gaskets, no step in the middle, however you get a loud bassy cylinder, with muddy highs and mids. I would like to know if anything at all exists about there recording equipment. I want to know more!!!!!!!

That converges in general very much with my observation of these cylinders. I do also came across some quite lousy 2-minute indestructibles, which where apparently pressed from a well-worn mould, resulting in quiet and shallow grooves.

The bassy recording pitch could have been also a result of the fitting the later style reproducers, such as the spring-loaded ones as well as the Model O, which are much more capable of reproducing lower frequencies.

This is so cool having all these really well-informed folks weigh on on the Indestructibles, which don't usually get a lot of attention.

It just so happens that today I had time to stop at a local antique phonograph shop (metro Chicago) to grab a cylinder or two and happened to find another late 4m Indestructible: 3485, "Home Sweet Home" by the Viennese Instrumental Trio (released ca. 1919). I'm happy to report that it's a gem. Sounds like a couple violins with piano accompaniment--and the piano comes through nicely with much of its bass tones intact. Clearly directly recorded.

If I had replied last night to the comments immediately above I would have agreed with the general consensus that the 2m Indestructibles are superior to the 4m Indestructibles. But now I can join in another theme: that the quality of all the Indestructibles varied. 3485 is sure a nice cylinder.

I have "Whispering" played by Yerkes Orchestra on a late Federal 4 minute cylinder.It's quite loud and definitely NOT a dubbing.And,there's a lot of bass in the recording,too.edisonplayer