The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Interesting article on Edison's Diamond-Disc Tone-Tests.


http://blogs.loc.gov/now-see-hear/2015/ ... it-edison/


A friend sent me the link after this ran in the Scranton Times-Triubune last Sunday (10/16):

“100 years ago, Helen Clark, well-known contralto, announced she would perform at Casino Hall on Adams Avenue to demonstrate the new Edison Tone-Test on Oct. 19. The demonstration had been arranged by Thomas Edison.”


Casino Hall still exists, operating today as the "Leonard Theatre".

Thanks for sharing. I find this article very informative. In my humble opinion, I truly believe that the Edison Diamond Disc machines and records were superior to other makes. Of course this depends on the quality and condition of the record, with the noisy etched WW I records being an exception. I think the major drawback with Edison as has been discussed many times before is the limited selection of records and many artists being lesser known than Victor.

Victor had many of the top notch artists such as McCormick, Caruso, Helen Kane, Whiteman etc., that is where Victor had the edge.

I think the way Edison staged these tone-tests was also critical.

Having the artist sing along with the machine, then drop-out, is a lot different than having two independent "performances" back to back.


It has been my experience that Diamond Discs ( paper-label, as well as etched ) tend to have a great deal of (characteristic) surface-noise (hiss), compared to Victor records, assuming both discs are in good to excellent condition. My experiences involve several different DD players and reproducers.

At any rate, I would like to be able to think that I would know the difference...

Thank you, thank you for the link to this story. I had long wondered how people of the day could fall for such a show; these were our parents/grandparents and intelligent people, not fools, and not generally ones to spend money foolishly. The author hit it on the head, I think----this auditory experience says more about us than it does them. We really do live in an electronically amplified world today, seemingly everywhere. What we don't always realize today is how this colors our perceptions of the musicians and sounds that we hear.
I was lucky enough to hear a small instrumental quintet play in an old wooden church some years ago. They were talented, to be sure, but I remarked later on that no matter how much one spent on a new sound system, there was no auditory experience like a true acoustic musical performance.
But then again, even in the smaller towns, the people of 1915 knew how a skilled singer or instrumentalist sounded. There was a dynamic range of loud and soft passages, not always so pronounced on an Edison disc. There is that matter of the hiss of the needle on the record, and I doubt Anna Case hissed as she sang. Just as sometimes people see things as they'd like them to be, so too it could have been with these Tone Tests---backed with the status of the Edison name and the star power of the singers involved, it was probably a darned good show for the time and people heard it as they wanted it to be.

I remember these memorex commercials. I know me and my friends had no problem telling the difference, but it left an indelible impression.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhfugTnXJV4[/youtube]

I think there are some "keys" in the linked story that explain the positive results Edison got.

Firstly, the record was specially made with places where the live artist could sing solo, with the record continued to play, thus the surface noise of the disc remained constant, and therefore could be taken out of the equation.

Secondly, he used only artists that could sing or play at a level that could mimic the recording, and he only used a limited number of instruments that recorded very well with the Edison system.

Phototone wrote:I think there are some "keys" in the linked story that explain the positive results Edison got.

Firstly, the record was specially made with places where the live artist could sing solo, with the record continued to play, thus the surface noise of the disc remained constant, and therefore could be taken out of the equation.

Secondly, he used only artists that could sing or play at a level that could mimic the recording, and he only used a limited number of instruments that recorded very well with the Edison system.

Bingo! You beat me to it. The elements of recorded sound were constant in the ears of the listeners. Good audio staging. It's like magic is to one's eyes.

James.

Snake oil ! Hurry-hurry ! Step right up, folks !

Roaring20s wrote:

Phototone wrote:I think there are some "keys" in the linked story that explain the positive results Edison got.

Firstly, the record was specially made with places where the live artist could sing solo, with the record continued to play, thus the surface noise of the disc remained constant, and therefore could be taken out of the equation.

Secondly, he used only artists that could sing or play at a level that could mimic the recording, and he only used a limited number of instruments that recorded very well with the Edison system.

Bingo! You beat me to it. The elements of recorded sound were constant in the ears of the listeners. Good audio staging. It's like magic is to one's eyes.

James.

It's funny, but the more I listen to digital music I find myself having to re- train my ears and brain to "understand" analog music, e.g., records... mostly 78s.

Either that or I am just going gloopy.

I do think that us today listening to all the altered music,(anything going through microphones, tubes, transistors, condenser microphones, is altered.) Has spoiled our perception of real instruments. When you go to a concert, everyone has to have a microphone, and then people mutter when the sound system gives out. At this time, no amplification, live music was live. If you notice, when you sing with a stereo, you don't quite ever blend in, even when you use a good microphone for Karaoke with the sound (I use an RCA 44bx)but you never truly blend in and sound "human" this way. I do find that the Edison Diamond Disc machine, or cylinders, you can sing with them, and your voice blends and harmonizes better with them than an electronic modern recording, try it sometime. It won't work with a Victor or Columbia though. You can't even record a Diamond disc, or transcribe it properly with even the best modern equipment . If you try to play the record electronically (with stylus and cartridge) the noise is too much, either hiss or rumble, so you have to filter some part of the spectrum. IF you use a microphone, the SPL of the Diamond Disc machine will distort the electronics even a $3,199.95 Neumann U-87 and Neve 8078 Console, won't capture an Edison Diamond Disc machine. Also remember those machines were new at the time, and so were the records.