The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

That is, knowing that the phonograph owners of the time (1910s/1920s) usually had a speed knob and often would just jack up the speed anyway? Have any of you seen any historical documentation/testimony about this? My hunch is that this was done. I would call this the "player piano" phenomenon. Listeners would, I would guess, be tempted to jack up the speed to hear an exciting, toe-tapping (if near-impossible) performance, rather than try to set their machines so as to faithfully recreate an actual studio tempo. I would think that the studio temptation would be great to drop the key a few half-steps, play more slowly and accurately--thus making elaborate solo passages more do-able--and then let the phonograph owner up the tempo after the discs were pressed/sold.

Tonight I set my Schubert Edisonic to 80 rpm, using a metronome, and then played some of my favorite records. I was surprised to hear how SLOW some of those actual studio performances were--especially B.A. Rolfe's "Down South" (Diamond Disc no. 52132).

I hesitate to start a new thread, but word-searching this site's index just wasn't landing me at relevant prior discussions. I've got my figurative cup of jo at hand and am looking to be enlightened, oh, ye worthies.

I've read that performers would sometimes play a long selection at a faster clip in order to fit the constraints of a twelve-inch disc. Whether the opposite was ever true, I don't know; it wouldn't seem to have the same kind of practical pay-off. I do know that when I adjust the very sensitive and variable-by-default pitch control on my Columbia "Favorite" to reflect what sounds most like real-time musicians, the setting can vary widely from record to record. Victor records can stray quite a bit from 78, while Columbia advertised that their records were always recorded at exactly 80.

I'm sometimes surprised when discs seem much slower than usual when played not at their nominal speed, but at the point where the performance sounds most natural to me. Makes me think I've been playing them too fast all along!

Columbia may have advertised that but it isn't true. Speed designations like ones on H.M.V. that also state play at 80 RPM, are usually just a lot of folderol.

I haven't ever heard of deliberately "under tempo" records, like "under cranked" silent movies. I've only heard of them speeding the tempo to fit in on the 10" or 12" side.

In classical music recordings, the usual practice to shorten duration was to omit repeats, not tamper with tempi. In the semi-classical and popular realms, an excellent example is the typical Sousa march, which, if you took every interior repeat and the da capo (return to beginning), would result in a length probably exceeding four minutes. While that's not an impossible stretch for a 10" 78, it wasn't done very often (the only exception I know of, there may be others, is "Sweet Sue, Just You" on 10" Col. 35667 from album C-29, Hot Jazz series with Bix Beiderbecke, which runs 4'22").

As I understand it, the original rerelease of Sweet Sue was truncated to bring it within the three minute range because, for the purpose of the album in which it was included, the Beiderbecke solo was the important part. There supposedly was a fuss raised by collectors and Columbia managed to get the whole 12" side onto a 10" side by lowering the volume level, especially the low frequencies and cutting at a higher groove pitch. It is a similar technique to that used when making 45 RPM EPs. Eps generally play quieter than their single selection counterparts for that same reason.
Victor did something similar and much more reprehensible when they cut Bunny Berrigan's "I Can't Get Started" from a 12" side to 10" for use on jukeboxes. In that case, they simply cut it off immediately after the vocal, thereby removing the fabulous trumpent solo that wraps up the side! Needless to say, the 10" Victor version is to be avoided at all costs.
Henry, thanks for explaining the term da capo, for not all of us are musically literate. For me, my formal musical education ended just a few months into fifth grade band, when I was compelled to admit that I hadn't a clue as to what was happening. I have learned a lot in over 40 years of jazz collecting, listening and reading but technical terminology still sails right over my head.

Jim

phonojim wrote:Henry, thanks for explaining the term da capo, for not all of us are musically literate.

I have been an amateur musician for 45+ years and it still bothers me that all those musical terms printed on a sheet of band or orchestral music is in Italian. I don't care how they did it 300 years ago!

Another gripe: those repeats and jumps on the printed page remind me of computer sub-routines. Sometimes I draw arrows on the pages as a quick visual guide where I should be jumping to next. It seems the music publisher wants to cram the most music on the fewest possible pages, rather than lay out a nice linear piece of music.

Opera arias are not uncommonly sped up to fit the side. Mainly to retain the text, I suppose.

Like this Victor side here: http://youtu.be/KMNUnuBOf4Y

That's mighty fast. Many, many others.

A theory I read a little while ago claimed that some jazz and hot dance numbers were performed at the correct tempo but RECORDED at a slower speed than normal, so that when the customer played the record at 78/80rpm they heard a lively performance.

If I ever remember where I read this I will comment in more detail. It does sound plausible, and would be easier to accomplish than getting the performers to adjust their tempo. Just slow the recording machine down!

If true, slowing the playback speed should by trial and error reproduce the performance at the correct tempo.

VintageTechnologies wrote:

phonojim wrote:Henry, thanks for explaining the term da capo, for not all of us are musically literate.

I have been an amateur musician for 45+ years and it still bothers me that all those musical terms printed on a sheet of band or orchestral music is in Italian. I don't care how they did it 300 years ago!

Another gripe: those repeats and jumps on the printed page remind me of computer sub-routines. Sometimes I draw arrows on the pages as a quick visual guide where I should be jumping to next. It seems the music publisher wants to cram the most music on the fewest possible pages, rather than lay out a nice linear piece of music.

Hmmm... check-out choral scores by American composer Randall Thompson - they're loaded down with more Italian than a Verdi opera!


For fun, check-out Australian composer Percy Grainger, and his concept of "blue-eyed English" terms, to replace Italian terms for guiding musicians in the proper performance of his music...

http://strangeflowers.wordpress.com/201 ... -glossary/

A quick example, not in the glossary link above, would be Grainger's "blue-eyed" term for the soprano saxophone: in Grainger's world, it became the "she-high-sax-reed". ( Perhaps old Percy owned vast shares in a hyphen company... )

I wish I could speak Italian; I can read it a little bit, because I studied Latin many years ago. Some of the musical terms we use also come in handy when visiting Italy, which I heartily recommend: the people are very friendly and outgoing (compared to some other Europeans whom I will not name here), the food is delicious, and the art is, well, out of this world. Viva Italia!

BTW, much of the music we classical musicians play is also old, as is the notation system. Matter of fact, I'm getting old, too, so don't knock it!