1932, Dance Selections, Fred Waring Orch. Hi Def, transcription

[merrihew]

This is, indeed, the best sounding transcription disc I've ever heard - certainly better than mine, some of which look unplayed. The other comments make sense. However, I have a 1932 comparison review of a Stokowski symphony issued in both formats and they claimed that the 78 version sounded a bit better (presumably new copies were used).

[syncopeter]

These directly recorded transcription records and some of the Victor 24000 series are some of the best images of what was made in the early 1930s. The sound quality is nothing less than amazing and you are sure that no limiters or other rubbish equipment is used. It is just pure unadulterated music. Great internal balance, wonderful clarity, just pure bliss. Too bad that the average record player couldn't cope with it and that companies had to get back to lowfi again.

[nancy94618]

prozoot, your selections give so much pleasure, I'd like to bake you pie.

[suaveoo]

"You'll Get By" has great fidelity - For years I've had a 78rpm pressing of this Waring performance on the T-series "for theatre use" (which is the identical performance: non-vocal, solos are the same, etc.) but it's obviously DUBBED. Now after hearing this I see that it's dubbed from the 33 1/3 rpm pressing! Thanks so much for this posting.

[mlaprarie]

@suaveoo, it's possible that your 78 disc was cut simultaneously with the 33 1/3 program transcription. Victor experimented during this time with mic/mixing techniques, often cutting 2 or more simultaneous, yet differently mixed, discs. Sometimes they mastered the different discs and used them both for stampers. Later, a few sharp-eared collectors noticed sonic differences in discs of identical performances, and when they synched them together on L-R channels they re-created true stereo!

[harlanlattimore]

I used to think that the only equipment available to play these was not attainable by the average consumer from '31-'33, but, somewhere along the way, I was told that there was indeed an affordable (as if anything was truly affordable then) version. Not exactly the best time to be trying things out, like the Columbia Double Tracks, EP 78's etc.

[JCJasion]

Recorded with very advanced Western Electric microphones said to be able to pick up from 50 - 15000 hz., just about the human hearing range. Why did RCA drop this? The tone arms tracked 5 POUNDS and the higher fidelity78's and 33's quickly became a mass of scratches after 5-6 plays. Also it was Depression I and very few people could afford the 33 rpm players.

[Prozoot]

Actually, RCA's 1932 Hi-Fi sound is attributed to the newly developed RCA Photophone PB-17 and PB-31 ribbon microphones from 1931. By 1932, the new RCA 44-A production ribbon mic was universally acclaimed and used by most of the majors. This transforming ribbon and magnet technology producing extended frequencies and new realism can also be heard on many Brunswicks from this period. RCA quickly dominated the microphone market that had been owned by W.E.

[RatPfink66]

It's still possible, isn't it?, that the Photophones put out more fidelity than the shellac medium could handle.

After mid-1933, I hear less high range and clarity in Victor pressings. The EQ curve may have changed. The shellac mix may also have been made grittier - perhaps for economy, perhaps to help the needle stay sharp.

"Industrial Archeology: It's Nobody's Business!"

[Prozoot]

Yes, I think that was exactly the issue -- those 1932 Hi-Fi groove walls were so detailed and fragile that they broke up with only one play. They just couldn't handle the heavy tone arms and nasty steel needles. The record and player technologies were not in sync -- owing to the depression and poor sales. By mid '33, RCA changed the EQ , dulling the sound and creating a beefier groove wall -- and a happier customer!

[MrXnews]

@Prozoot Well, fortunately for us, surviving examples in good condition can be played back on modern equipment, whether it be stylus, fiber-optic, or photography (transferring by turning the groove "picture" into a waveform).

[harlanlattimore]

What is this issue? I have the PT with vocals (VI L-16015). Are these theatre records? Rust lists mx73863 & 73865 in this category

[chezruss]

Thanks. Much appreciated your sharing these delights with us, and also for ensuring their posterity.

[Masquerade03]

Superb! Much more interesting than Waring's vocal renditions. Thanks.

[gregoryagogo]

I love these instrumental versions of these songs!

[RatPfink66]

Nitpick: These are really "Non-Vocals" - instrumental redos of vocal selections. "Instrumentals" never had a vocal to begin with. ;-)

[gregoryagogo]

Yes... and they did a lovely job substituting "vocal-like" sounds from those muted horns here, in "Fit as a Fiddle": 4:00 . They imitate the vocal version of this song to a tee!  I prefer instrumental / non-vocals. I often creatively pull the vocals out of songs...

[jlassie]

3:38 - SLAP BASS, Audible slap bass! Hallelujah!!!!

[jlassie]

You can hear the drummer softly tapping his brushes on the cymbals behind the piano solo!! On a record from 1932!!!

[bill3murr]

i am lucky enough to have this as well....your sound is so very good...thanks for your wonderful post.

[roybo1930]

Prozoot! This Is Beautiful! I Can`t Believe Your Awsome Record Collection, You are truly blessed.