Has the mendacious propaganda been knocked out yet?

[PeterF]

Mr Edison’s personal assessment of orthophonic recordings and machines…

[gunnarthefeisty]

although the statements about the mic are fully false, I must say I agree with the "muffle and soften" argument he uses. A nice exponential horn is much more clear.

[AZ*]

Let's not forget that Mr. Edison's hearing was not very good which is why he claimed he could hear overtones that other people could not.

There is a HUGE difference between the Orthophonic recordings of 1925 and those of 1927-28. Listen to Stokie's recordings of Dvorak's New World Symphony from 1925 & 1927. The 1925 recording still has brass instruments substituting for low strings. While the 1927 recording is better, Victor recorded it again in the early 1930's since recording technology was changing rapidly.

Edison was a great man, but he was not God.

[gunnarthefeisty]

Let's not forget that Mr. Edison's hearing was not very good which is why he claimed he could hear overtones that other people could not.

There is a HUGE difference between the Orthophonic recordings of 1925 and those of 1927-28. Listen to Stokie's recordings of Dvorak's New World Symphony from 1925 & 1927. The 1925 recording still has brass instruments substituting for low strings. While the 1927 recording is better, Victor recorded it again in the early 1930's since recording technology was changing rapidly.

Edison was a great man, but he was not God.

I think Victor recordings really hit their stride in '28 or so.

[PeterF]

Considering that the letter is dated only 8 days after the November 2 public debut of the orthophonic system (“Victor Day”), it would appear that old Tom was attempting some pre-emptive propaganda of his own. The letter appears to be a response to a worried Edison jobber.

I’ll be posting more of this material from my files as it pops up. I have a couple of reams of stuff that Ron Dethlefson and I copied during a visit to Orange in 1995.

[Inigo]

Yes, the 1925 records could not be a good example. Let him play a later 1929 Victor or Viva tonal Columbia by Paul Whiteman.,.. what would have said then?

[audiophile102]

This is a fascinating letter I'm grateful that you posted it. I'm not surprised that TE resisted any technology that didn't come from his laboratory. I will be looking forward to reading more from your collection.

[OrthoFan]

It's a shame that the records played were not identified. Solo voice or instrument recordings?

Interestingly, a few months ago, somebody doing some repairs in my apartment expressed a curiosity about my phonographs, so I demonstrated my VV-4-40 and gave a brief explanation of acoustic vs. electrical recordings. I played two copies of "Duna" by Reinald Werrenrath--the 1919 version and the 1926 electrical version. The repairman said the 1919 acoustic version sounded much better to him, in spite of the fact that the voice was muffled, and the instruments sounded dead. I asked him why, and he couldn't give a reason. To my ears, the 1926 version is far more powerful, and Werrenrath sounds like he is singing in a concert hall.

OrthoFan

[JerryVan]

It's a shame that the records played were not identified. Solo voice or instrument recordings?

Interestingly, a few months ago, somebody doing some repairs in my apartment expressed a curiosity about my phonographs, so I demonstrated my VV-4-40 and gave a brief explanation of acoustic vs. electrical recordings. I played two copies of "Duna" by Reinald Werrenrath--the 1919 version and the 1926 electrical version. The repairman said the 1919 acoustic version sounded much better to him, in spite of the fact that the voice was muffled, and the instruments sounded dead. I asked him why, and he couldn't give a reason. To my ears, the 1926 version is far more powerful, and Werrenrath sounds like he is singing in a concert hall.

OrthoFan

Was at a Stanton auction years ago. A local lady who stopped in at the auction, (in other words, not a collector), was listening to a cylinder music box that had at least half of the teeth missing from the comb. When the random plinking ended she said, "Oh, that was just beautiful!" Some people hear, but do not listen...

[drh]

It's a shame that the records played were not identified. Solo voice or instrument recordings?

Interestingly, a few months ago, somebody doing some repairs in my apartment expressed a curiosity about my phonographs, so I demonstrated my VV-4-40 and gave a brief explanation of acoustic vs. electrical recordings. I played two copies of "Duna" by Reinald Werrenrath--the 1919 version and the 1926 electrical version. The repairman said the 1919 acoustic version sounded much better to him, in spite of the fact that the voice was muffled, and the instruments sounded dead. I asked him why, and he couldn't give a reason. To my ears, the 1926 version is far more powerful, and Werrenrath sounds like he is singing in a concert hall.

OrthoFan

Was at a Stanton auction years ago. A local lady who stopped in at the auction, (in other words, not a collector), was listening to a cylinder music box that had at least half of the teeth missing from the comb. When the random plinking ended she said, "Oh, that was just beautiful!" Some people hear, but do not listen...

It's been years and years since I read Compton Mackenzie's memoirs, but if I remember correctly, he recounted that at the time when electrical recording was introduced, a vocal minority of record lovers didn't like it and preferred acoustic recording, or at least acoustic playback. Rather in the same way digital recording was not without its dissenters when new (and, in fact, nowadays has quite a lot of dissenters). My mother, certainly no hifi hobbyist, did not like the sound of CDs and expressed firm preference for that of LPs. Who would have thought that she was just a "golden eared audiophile" a few decades ahead of her time?