Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#121
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
I think this gets to the crux of Arny's belittling of the LP. No, this is about people who belittle the CD and ignore the gross sonic flaws of the LP. Since he is so "on the record" as saying that early CD's and players sounded just fine, to admit that so many people in the audio hobby found them wanting, and still have the disks to prove it (I have a few myself) is to either (a) admit that his hearing standards and discrimination (at least in that day) were sub-par compared to the majority of audio hobbyists, or (b) admit at the very least that he let his love of technology blind him to the shortfall of the early disks and players. A few badly made discs (of which I have some of my own) says nothing signfiicant about the medium or its technical implementation at any time. It just shows what some of us already know, which is that people make mistakes. |
#122
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 5, 8:52 am, ScottW2 wrote:
The best of each format is very good, so IMO the format war is somewhat meaningless. People who enjoy both formats simply have more choice of superior quality music and recordings than those who don't. ScottW Words of wisdom. Any music lover that is genuinely interested in sound quality is shooting themself in the foot if they are not exploring the possibilities available in both formats. |
#123
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: Actually, a well-made Dolby B/C tape made with a good HQ deck on the best tape would trounce the LP for dynamic range, even so if one were to loose his mind and ignore the incessant tics and pops that only vinylphiles seem to be able to fail to find irritating. I think that you've touched on something here that contributed mightily to the initial success of the CD: the lack of "tics and pops". I think that it's pretty safe to say that most people didn't treat their LPs as well as did/do "audiophiles", and more LPs were probably played on terrible TT/arm/cartridge combos that were something like this: http://tinyurl.com/r2p8dj than on anything that could bring the listener what we think of as a "high end" experience. "Ticks and pops" aren't a major concern to me, unless they are very loud, as in an abused LP. An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, anymore than the sound of someone's shoe scuffing the floor a few seats away from me doesn't ruin the concert. What distracts me FAR more is the sound of a flute on a recording that sounds like a flute never sounds in real life. Whatever gets me closer to the sound of that flute is what is important to me. Sometimes that's a LP, other times that's a CD. Because of that, I've been called a "vinyl bigot". Whatever. The music is what is important, and people should listen to whatever brings them closer to that. It seems pretty simple. |
#124
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 5, 8:50*am, wrote:
2. *We're talking about people for whom "quality mattered", I'm sorry but this premise, besides being highly highly speculative, is also self defeating. It infers that "classical music lovers" not only all cared but were forming unbiased preferences for CD while "audiophiles" who decried CD sound were somehow less discerning despite their higher level of concern for sound quality and somehow more affected by bias? Balony. It also ignores the fact that most audiophiles of that time were primarily classical music lovers. If anything it would be the audiophiles that were more discerning and less likely to be biased by all the hype of perfect sound that came with the introduction of CDs. I mean really, if classical music lovers in general were so discerning how did they suffer the general state of recording back in the early eighties? Most classical music sounded like crap back then regardless of format. If you are going to argue from authority you need a much better authority than that. The audiophile/classical music lover back then certainly new better and treasured the vastly superior recordings from earlier eras. recordings that were largely butchered on CD before the mid 90s. |
#125
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"ScottW2" wrote in message
IMO, you can't treat music as one homogenous market. I think, at a minimmum, there are at least 2 distinct markets. Both of which wasted no time switching over to listening exclusively to CDs, except for tiny, noisy minorities. In the 80's, the typical popular music (the vast volume of sales) was of extremely poor quality vinyl, noisy in it's first play which no amount of record cleaning could recover. The classical music was often exactly the same for US purchasers. In the 60s and 70s many US audiophiles started looking for european pressings and paying premium prices for the. I had the good fortune to spend a year in Europe as a guest of Uncle Sam, where the PX and audio club system provided vast libraries of classical and pop LPs, all european pressings. I brought zero LPs with me to Europe, but I returned with 100s. So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. |
#126
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
I dunno. My recollection was that classical fans flocked to CD almost immediately, and they tended to care more about sound quality than most. I wouldn't hold that up as proof of anything, but it suggests that your opinion of early CD quality was far from universally shared, even by people for whom quality mattered. You don't think being able to hear a symphony or concerto all the way through without changing sides had anything to do with it? I think that hearing music without tics and pops, inner groove distortion, rumble, flutter and wow was the dominant consideration for classical fans. Unlike pop music, classical music actually has dynamics including pianissimo passages where the inherent noise and distortion of vinyl was the worst. Very many classical pieces have their loudest passages at the end, and the added harshness of inner groove distortion just sucked the enjoyment out of the experience. In my case I had taped the entire Beethoven symphony series from virgin vinyl so I could listen to an entire symphony without getting up to change sides. Nevertheless, I was still stuck with all the rest of the problems of vinyl, although tape did take some of the harshness away. |
#127
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Sonnova" wrote in message
And my recollection was that most classical fans found early CD to be unmistakable. That would be because your friends felt that way. Certainly I and all of my audiophile friends found it so. Exactly. We seem to have an impasse of opinion here. There's no impasse - the vast majority of classical music fans have long ago switched to listening exclusively to CDs. Just a tiny noisy minority stuck it out. |
#128
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 6, 8:40*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"ScottW2" wrote in message The classical music was often exactly the same for US purchasers. In the 60s and 70s many US audiophiles started looking for european pressings and paying premium prices for the. I had the good fortune to spend a year in Europe as a guest of Uncle Sam, where the PX and audio club system provided vast libraries of classical and pop LPs, all european pressings. I brought zero LPs with me to Europe, but I returned with 100s. The well schooled audiophiles knew better than to make such broad assumptions. If one were buying classical music from the RCA or Mercury catalogue and knew what they were doing they were buying American. Of course in the 60s and 70s if one were looking for anything from the Decca or EMI labels they sought out Brittish pressings but not because of the vinyl. Those titles were quite simply mastered better back then at the Decca and EMI mastering facilities. As for pop LPs you just can't make any broad claims. There are far too many exceptions. In most cases the mastering was the dominant factor. There was plenty of quality vinyl being made in the U.S. in the 60s and 70s. So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. And you know they were better how? What bias controlled comparisons did you make? |
#129
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
Scott wrote:
On Jul 5, 8:50 am, wrote: 2. We're talking about people for whom "quality mattered", I'm sorry but this premise, besides being highly highly speculative, is also self defeating. What premise do you refer to? It infers that "classical music lovers" not only all cared but were forming unbiased preferences for CD while "audiophiles" who decried CD sound were somehow less discerning despite their higher level of concern for sound quality and somehow more affected by bias? Balony. It infers no such thing. There was no mention, nor implications, relative to bias either, so I don't know where you're coming from there. Please read the actual post before tilting at imaginary slights. Bob wrote: "My recollection was that classical fans flocked to CD almost immediately, and they tended to care more about sound quality than most." You seem be arguing both for and against this position. Harry responded with "You don't think being able to hear a symphony or concerto all the way through without changing sides had anything to do with it?" I did not provide a premise, I merely responded to Harry's premise that play length might have been more important than quality. I *pointed out* that the argument at hand centered around people to whom "quality mattered", as stipulated in Bob's comment to which Harry was responding. It also ignores the fact that most audiophiles of that time were primarily classical music lovers. Not my experience. Where is your support for that? And, of course, how is it relevant to *my* post to which you're taking exception? If anything it would be the audiophiles that were more discerning and less likely to be biased by all the hype of perfect sound that came with the introduction of CDs. I mean really, if classical music lovers in general were so discerning how did they suffer the general state of recording back in the early eighties? Most classical music sounded like crap back then regardless of format. If you are going to argue from authority you need a much better authority than that. What on Earth are you on about? What authority did I cite or assume? Did you read anything I actually wrote beside the one sentence you snipped? The audiophile/classical music lover back then certainly new better and treasured the vastly superior recordings from earlier eras. recordings that were largely butchered on CD before the mid 90s. OSAF, as well as being utterly irrelevant to the points I was addressing. Keith Hughes |
#130
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 03:42:17 -0700, Jenn wrote
(in article ): In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: Actually, a well-made Dolby B/C tape made with a good HQ deck on the best tape would trounce the LP for dynamic range, even so if one were to loose his mind and ignore the incessant tics and pops that only vinylphiles seem to be able to fail to find irritating. I think that you've touched on something here that contributed mightily to the initial success of the CD: the lack of "tics and pops". I think that it's pretty safe to say that most people didn't treat their LPs as well as did/do "audiophiles", and more LPs were probably played on terrible TT/arm/cartridge combos that were something like this: http://tinyurl.com/r2p8dj than on anything that could bring the listener what we think of as a "high end" experience. Sure. low playback noise was always a big selling point for CD, and rightfully so. As you say, most people didn't treat their LPs very well and played them on atrocious turntable equipment. Poor handling, storing records without their sleeves in wire "record racks" picking then up by the recorded area and getting finger oils all over them, playing them back on cheap record changers with two-pole induction motors, arms with no bearings tracking crystal or ceramic cartridges at 12-20 grams. No wonder the records got worn, had scratches in them and became dirty. CD meant that people could be fairly cavalier about handling the CDs and they still wouldn't get ticks and pops and fingerprints caused less problems (although scratches and heavy fingerprinting can still cause laser mistracking, even in CDs). There's no doubt that CD is a better product for the average joe. "Ticks and pops" aren't a major concern to me, unless they are very loud, as in an abused LP. Me either. I have 40-year old LPs that still sound as pristine as they did when I bought them. Occasional ticks and pops from detritus in the grooves don't bother me much. An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, anymore than the sound of someone's shoe scuffing the floor a few seats away from me doesn't ruin the concert. Exactly. What distracts me FAR more is the sound of a flute on a recording that sounds like a flute never sounds in real life. Whatever gets me closer to the sound of that flute is what is important to me. Sometimes that's a LP, other times that's a CD. Because of that, I've been called a "vinyl bigot". Whatever. The music is what is important, and people should listen to whatever brings them closer to that. It seems pretty simple. I couldn't agree more. I still get pleasure from LPs and I get pleasure from CDs and SACDs too. To me, the music is the most important aspect of the hi-fi hobby. I want the performances to sound as much like real, live music played in real space as its possible to get. Like I've been saying here for months, sometimes that illusion is successfully conveyed via CD, sometimes it's SACD, and sometimes it's LP. |
#131
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 03:42:31 -0700, Scott wrote
(in article ): On Jul 5, 8:50*am, wrote: 2. *We're talking about people for whom "quality mattered", I'm sorry but this premise, besides being highly highly speculative, is also self defeating. It infers that "classical music lovers" not only all cared but were forming unbiased preferences for CD while "audiophiles" who decried CD sound were somehow less discerning despite their higher level of concern for sound quality and somehow more affected by bias? Balony. It also ignores the fact that most audiophiles of that time were primarily classical music lovers. If anything it would be the audiophiles that were more discerning and less likely to be biased by all the hype of perfect sound that came with the introduction of CDs. I mean really, if classical music lovers in general were so discerning how did they suffer the general state of recording back in the early eighties? Most classical music sounded like crap back then regardless of format. If you are going to argue from authority you need a much better authority than that. The audiophile/classical music lover back then certainly new better and treasured the vastly superior recordings from earlier eras. recordings that were largely butchered on CD before the mid 90s. One thing that you have give to the coming of CD. It caused the (classical) recording industry to clean up its act. The shameful recording practices that classical producers and engineers started using in the late '60's and which continued into the '90's simply made CD sound much worse than did LP with the same practices. The CD laid bare, for the first time for many, the sins of multi-miking, multi-channel, pan-potting, "sweetening" and solo spotlighting. While most mass-market purchasers perhaps didn't notice these things in LPs, they certainly noticed them in CD. The result is that most modern classical CDs are much better recorded than were classical recording sessions a generation ago. People wonder why RCA Victor and Mercury Living Presence stereo recordings from the 1950's and early 1960's are still so highly prized (on vinyl and CD as well as SACD). It's because they were simply miked and actually sound like a real orchestra playing in a real space. Contrast these with any RCA red seal from the 1970's produced by the likes of that know-nothing charlatan, J. David Saks and his ilk. These later recordings don't just sound like cartoon renditions of a symphony orchestra, they ARE cartoon renditions of a symphony orchestra! |
#132
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 08:40:16 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ): "ScottW2" wrote in message IMO, you can't treat music as one homogenous market. I think, at a minimmum, there are at least 2 distinct markets. Both of which wasted no time switching over to listening exclusively to CDs, except for tiny, noisy minorities. In the 80's, the typical popular music (the vast volume of sales) was of extremely poor quality vinyl, noisy in it's first play which no amount of record cleaning could recover. The classical music was often exactly the same for US purchasers. In the 60s and 70s many US audiophiles started looking for european pressings and paying premium prices for the. I'm certainly one of those. in the early 70's when Angel records started pressing here in the USA, their quality was so poor (it wasn't Capitol's pressings that were substandard most of the time, it was the mastering tapes that EMI sent to Capitol to make the Angel pressings with that were the culprit) that I started looking for imported "His Master's Voice" pressings from England of the works . Often these were imported with stick-on labels covering the dog and grammophone logo that was EMI's copyrighted logo in England (and RCA's copyrighted logo here in the States) with a gold "Odeon" label. Invariably, the British pressings were higher quality. Also, I would try to buy English or German pressings of Vox - Turnabout recordings because the US pressing were junk. Noisy non-virgin vinyl, underfill, warped pressings, off center pressings, etc. The English and German Vox - Turnabouts were pressed by TELDEC and were uniformly excellent. I had the good fortune to spend a year in Europe as a guest of Uncle Sam, where the PX and audio club system provided vast libraries of classical and pop LPs, all european pressings. I brought zero LPs with me to Europe, but I returned with 100s. I don't blame you. I'd buy records every time I went to Europe too! My collection has British, French, Dutch, German, Spanish, and even Italian pressings in it. I also have some Iron-curtain pressings, but they are variable. I never got a bad Melodiya from the USSR, but did get some pretty bad Hungaratone and Polaphon pressings - Socialist labor and all that, you know (a cold -war Polish worker's adage was "The Russians pretend to pay us and we pretend to work"). So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. |
#133
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 6, 4:42*am, Jenn wrote:
In article , *"Arny Krueger" wrote: Actually, a well-made Dolby B/C tape made with a good HQ deck on the best tape would trounce the LP for dynamic range, even so if one were to loose his mind and ignore the incessant tics and pops that only vinylphiles seem to be able to fail to find irritating. I think that you've touched on something here that contributed mightily to the initial success of the CD: *the lack of "tics and pops". *I think that it's pretty safe to say that most people didn't treat their LPs as well as did/do "audiophiles", and more LPs were probably played on terrible TT/arm/cartridge combos that were something like this:http://tinyurl.com/r2p8dj than on anything that could bring the listener what we think of as a "high end" experience. Hey It has bids on it.You and I would chuck it in the nearest dumpster,but somebody bought it. Roger |
#134
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 5, 9:45*am, bob wrote:
On Jul 4, 10:45*am, "Harry Lavo" wrote: "bob" wrote in message I dunno. My recollection was that classical fans flocked to CD almost immediately, and they tended to care more about sound quality than most. I wouldn't hold that up as proof of anything, but it suggests that your opinion of early CD quality was far from universally shared, even by people for whom quality mattered. You don't think being able to hear a symphony or concerto all the way through without changing sides had anything to do with it? It didn't hurt. But the classical fans I knew did not seem to think they were sacrificing sound quality—quite the opposite. Be interesting to take a look at Gramophone from around 1985. See how much kvetching there was about sound quality among the classical cognoscenti. bob The mid to late 80s were an interesting time.This was right about the time hordes of classical music buyers were dumping their cheap rack systems for expensive first generation CD players that sounded like crap.The new classical titles that were issued on vinyl in 1987-91 sold so poorly,that they now command hundreds of dollars on eBay. This was also the time when a (very) small per centage of us who truly loved vinyl,were starting to pick up TAS and Stereophile,and starting to learn about and love classical music in a whole new way.As with "incredibly strange music",it was all about going to the Goodwill,Salvation Army,etc ,and buying up shaded dogs,bluebacks,etc. by the armload.And while you're there you start digging. "What's this? Why it's Ernest Ansermet and the Diaghilev Ballets Russes Orchestra on a 1916 Columbia 78."Before long you're getting rid of even more stuff to accomidate a whole new area of your collection. Hell,I even sold off all my jazz.Here it is twenty years later,I have long since completed my sets of Living Stereos, and Mercs,and have been trying to buy the more esoteric collector pieces of the electrical 78 and early Lp era.Perhaps 1/3 of my 30,000+ record collection is "good" classical.Now I go over to eBay,and early mono Londons,that you couldn't give away at one,time now sell for an average of fifty dollars each. If you belong to any of the online classical music discussion groups,you'll find a lot of the discussion is about buying downloads.Then you go over to Mikrokosmos,and 90% of the catalog is sold out the first day. Nowadays kids think vinyl is cool.It is only a matter of time before some of them discover Stokowski and Furtwangler. Roger |
#135
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Scott" wrote in message
So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. And you know they were better how? The differences were obvious. What bias controlled comparisons did you make? Unfair question as you know very well that I hadn't yet invented ABX at that point. |
#136
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 6, 5:42*am, Jenn wrote:
*An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, anymore than the sound of someone's shoe scuffing the floor a few seats away from me doesn't ruin the concert. * You can't really mean that. Extra-musical sounds heard during a live performance are purely random in nature. That pop or tick always occurs at the very same place. Should a significantly loud pop or tick occur when the music volume is low, it's plain unbearable and I'd probably never play that LP again (OK, maybe one more time). What distracts me FAR more is the sound of a flute on a recording that sounds like a flute never sounds in real life. It seems pretty simple. I've never heard a recording which sounds like real life; some closer, some further, but none like real life. AFAIAC nothing in life is simple. |
#137
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
In article ,
Norman Schwartz wrote: On Jul 6, 5:42*am, Jenn wrote: *An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, anymore than the sound of someone's shoe scuffing the floor a few seats away from me doesn't ruin the concert. * You can't really mean that. Extra-musical sounds heard during a live performance are purely random in nature. That pop or tick always occurs at the very same place. Unless it's caused by something that can be fixed via cleaning. Should a significantly loud pop or tick occur when the music volume is low, it's plain unbearable and I'd probably never play that LP again (OK, maybe one more time). That's what I meant by "abused". If it's something really loud, it would ruin it for me as well. What distracts me FAR more is the sound of a flute on a recording that sounds like a flute never sounds in real life. It seems pretty simple. I've never heard a recording which sounds like real life; some closer, some further, but none like real life. AFAIAC nothing in life is simple. Of course. But of all of the recordings of, in this example, flutes, there are some where one thinks, "OK, it doesn't sound like the Muramatsu that is being played, but it sounds like flutes in general sound." There are others that make you say, "That's so far from any flute that's ever been played (no air, no pipe, etc.) that it's distracting." |
#138
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009 02:43:51 -0700, Roger Kulp wrote
(in article ): On Jul 5, 9:45*am, bob wrote: On Jul 4, 10:45*am, "Harry Lavo" wrote: "bob" wrote in message I dunno. My recollection was that classical fans flocked to CD almost immediately, and they tended to care more about sound quality than most. I wouldn't hold that up as proof of anything, but it suggests that your opinion of early CD quality was far from universally shared, even by people for whom quality mattered. You don't think being able to hear a symphony or concerto all the way through without changing sides had anything to do with it? It didn't hurt. But the classical fans I knew did not seem to think they were sacrificing sound quality—quite the opposite. Be interesting to take a look at Gramophone from around 1985. See how much kvetching there was about sound quality among the classical cognoscenti. bob The mid to late 80s were an interesting time.This was right about the time hordes of classical music buyers were dumping their cheap rack systems for expensive first generation CD players that sounded like crap.The new classical titles that were issued on vinyl in 1987-91 sold so poorly,that they now command hundreds of dollars on eBay. This was also the time when a (very) small per centage of us who truly loved vinyl,were starting to pick up TAS and Stereophile,and starting to learn about and love classical music in a whole new way.As with "incredibly strange music",it was all about going to the Goodwill,Salvation Army,etc ,and buying up shaded dogs,bluebacks,etc. by the armload.And while you're there you start digging. "What's this? Why it's Ernest Ansermet and the Diaghilev Ballets Russes Orchestra on a 1916 Columbia 78."Before long you're getting rid of even more stuff to accomidate a whole new area of your collection. Hell,I even sold off all my jazz.Here it is twenty years later,I have long since completed my sets of Living Stereos, and Mercs,and have been trying to buy the more esoteric collector pieces of the electrical 78 and early Lp era.Perhaps 1/3 of my 30,000+ record collection is "good" classical.Now I go over to eBay,and early mono Londons,that you couldn't give away at one,time now sell for an average of fifty dollars each. If you belong to any of the online classical music discussion groups,you'll find a lot of the discussion is about buying downloads.Then you go over to Mikrokosmos,and 90% of the catalog is sold out the first day. Nowadays kids think vinyl is cool.It is only a matter of time before some of them discover Stokowski and Furtwangler. Roger I hope so. I don't have your faith in today's youngsters. I firmly believe that once my generation has gone to Valhalla, classical music will fade into total obscurity. You won't be able to buy new classical recordings because there won't be any symphony orchestras. 100 years from now, the average person will never have even heard of Beethoven, Bach, Mozart, but they might know who Michael Jackson was. Pretty grim prospect to see one's cultural heritage flushed down the crapper by successive generations who don't care about it. |
#139
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 7, 10:55*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message What bias controlled *comparisons did you make? Unfair question as you know very well that I hadn't yet invented ABX at that point. But ABX testing did exist prior to that point. It's a rather old and well established technique. Here are some references: W. Strange and T. Halwes, "Confidence ratings in speech perception research: Evaluation of an efficient technique for discrimination testing," Perception & Psychopohysics, vol 9 (2a), 1971 "The first discrimination studies (Liberman, et al, 1957) utilized and ABX test. Sequentially presented triads were constructed from each comparison pair such that the first and second sounds (A and B) were different and the third (X) was either identical to A or B. ..." Liberman, A. L., Harris, K. S., Hoffman, H. S. and Griffith, B. C., "The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries," J. Exp. Psych., 1957, 54: 358-368. Blesser, B. "Perception of spectrally rotated speech," PHD Thesis, MIT Dept. of Elect. Eng. June 1969 etc. There are to be found numerous other references to ABX testing methodology as a means of determining perceptual discrimination of minimally-different stimuli. SPecifically related to audio, sound and hearing reveals the methodology was in common use well over a half century ago. |
#140
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 7, 7:55*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. And you know they were better how? The differences were obvious. The same has been said by Peter Beltians of taking a photograph and putting it in your freezer. While I have no doubt that there were differences between different pressings of the same classical titles (I know this from my actual blind comparisons) I do doubt that your conclusions were unaffected by bias. What bias controlled *comparisons did you make? Unfair question as you know very well that I hadn't yet invented ABX at that point. It is a fair question and one that you dump on others here when they express the same sort of opinions that you have expressed. Clealry the answer is none. I actually have done them quite extensively and my conclusions are quite different than yours. It is often quite surprising which version of a given title turns out to be the prefered version under blind conditions. By the way, the early ABX machine wouldn't have been the least bit useful in such comparisons. Blind preference comparisons are a lot of work and take more time than simple ABX tests for audible differences. |
#141
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Jenn" wrote in message
An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, That's just it, the incidence of clicks on LPs is far from "occasional" But the tics and pops aren't the only distractions on LPs. I'd list more of them, but we all know what they are and we all know that they aren't just "occasional". anymore than the sound of someone's shoe scuffing the floor a few seats away from me doesn't ruin the concert. Happens how many times per concert? Not a comparison of apples and oranges! |
#142
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 8, 3:03*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, That's just it, the incidence of clicks on LPs is far from "occasional" But the tics and pops aren't the only distractions on LPs. I'd list more of them, but we all know what they are and we all know that they aren't just "occasional". anymore than the sound of someone's shoe scuffing the floor a few seats away from me doesn't ruin the concert. Happens how many times per concert? Not a comparison of apples and oranges! The most common culpret is the good old school cough. How many times during a concert? depends on the size of the crowd and the season. I'd say you are often looking at twenty to thirty coughs on average with a good sized crowd. never really counted though. |
#143
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Scott" wrote in message
On Jul 7, 7:55 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Scott" wrote in message So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. And you know they were better how? The differences were obvious. The same has been said by Peter Beltians of taking a photograph and putting it in your freezer. I seriously doubt that Peter Belt has used spectral analysis to support his claim. I have. |
#144
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Dick Pierce" wrote in
message On Jul 7, 10:55 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Scott" wrote in message What bias controlled comparisons did you make? Unfair question as you know very well that I hadn't yet invented ABX at that point. But ABX testing did exist prior to that point. It's a rather old and well established technique. Here are some references: W. Strange and T. Halwes, "Confidence ratings in speech perception research: Evaluation of an efficient technique for discrimination testing," Perception & Psychopohysics, vol 9 (2a), 1971 "The first discrimination studies (Liberman, et al, 1957) utilized and ABX test. Sequentially presented triads were constructed from each comparison pair such that the first and second sounds (A and B) were different and the third (X) was either identical to A or B. ..." Liberman, A. L., Harris, K. S., Hoffman, H. S. and Griffith, B. C., "The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries," J. Exp. Psych., 1957, 54: 358-368. Blesser, B. "Perception of spectrally rotated speech," PHD Thesis, MIT Dept. of Elect. Eng. June 1969 etc. There are to be found numerous other references to ABX testing methodology as a means of determining perceptual discrimination of minimally-different stimuli. SPecifically related to audio, sound and hearing reveals the methodology was in common use well over a half century ago. There is a type of comparison that is also called ABX and is used in studies of hearing to this day, that is actually a very different method. We have been fully aware of this since just after we invented the ABX technique that we published in the JAES. The AES publication board was familiar with the other form of ABX at the time, and the issue was discussed to the satisfaction of everyone involved. This issue has been discussed before on RAHE, so it is even old news here. The differences include the fact that the ABX technique that is documented in the 1978 JAES article by Clark is controlled by the listener and that the listener has unlimited access to the sounds being compared. This difference is fully justified by the nature of the tests that are being performed. |
#145
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 8, 6:03*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message anymore than the sound of someone's shoe scuffing the floor a few seats away from me doesn't ruin the concert. Happens how many times per concert? Once every couple of seconds. Shoes scuffling, coughing, program rustling, battery low warning on cell phone that otherwise had its ringer silenced, guy behind me humming (badly) to the music, the rumble of the Green Line train 100 feet behind and 25 feet below me, the woman next to me spending the last 20 minutes of the Bach St. Matthew passion trying to suppress the vomit because she downed 5 glasses of cheap white wine at intermission. Not a comparison of apples and oranges! Only substantive difference is that when you hear a tick on a record, you KNOW there's another one on it's way in 1.8 seconds. And another, and another and another. Just like the drunken both sitting next to me: every covered wummmppff! was sure to be followed by another. The only uncertainty was whether the LAST sound she made was the projectile vomit, the sound of her shoes running out of the hall, or the thud of her worthless being hitting the ground after I strangled her. But having about 8 recordings of the St. Matthew passion, half on CD and half on LP, which is the best? Without a doubt, the version I attended at Symphony Hall in Boston performed by Boston Baroque, including and despite the regrettable upchuck continuo. |
#146
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
... "Jenn" wrote in message An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, That's just it, the incidence of clicks on LPs is far from "occasional" Not on most of mine, which have been dusted and cleaned since I left college in 1961 (most purchased after that) and none of which have been left lying around out of their jackets, ever. And the ones that have been "Last"'d hold up especially well and even clicks and pops that are there are minimized in annoyance. snip |
#147
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, That's just it, the incidence of clicks on LPs is far from "occasional" I have many LPs where the incidence of clicks can be best described as "occasional". anymore than the sound of someone's shoe scuffing the floor a few seats away from me doesn't ruin the concert. Happens how many times per concert? Sounds made by audience members? Dozens, at least. |
#148
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 8, 10:20*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message On Jul 7, 7:55 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Scott" wrote in message So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. And you know they were better how? The differences were obvious. The same has been said by Peter Beltians of taking a photograph and putting it in your freezer. I seriously doubt that Peter Belt has used spectral analysis to support his claim. I have. Please show us the spectral analysis you did of the European classical LPs v. the American classical LPs and explain how that supports your otherwise obviously biased opinions on the subject. |
#149
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Scott" wrote in message
On Jul 8, 10:20 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Scott" wrote in message On Jul 7, 7:55 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Scott" wrote in message So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. And you know they were better how? The differences were obvious. The same has been said by Peter Beltians of taking a photograph and putting it in your freezer. I seriously doubt that Peter Belt has used spectral analysis to support his claim. I have. Please show us the spectral analysis you did of the European classical LPs v. the American classical LPs and explain how that supports your otherwise obviously biased opinions on the subject. Neither the LPs I compared nor any of the analysis that I did are currently in my posession. |
#150
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
Roger Kulp wrote:
On Jul 5, 9:45?am, bob wrote: On Jul 4, 10:45?am, "Harry Lavo" wrote: "bob" wrote in message I dunno. My recollection was that classical fans flocked to CD almost immediately, and they tended to care more about sound quality than most. I wouldn't hold that up as proof of anything, but it suggests that your opinion of early CD quality was far from universally shared, even by people for whom quality mattered. You don't think being able to hear a symphony or concerto all the way through without changing sides had anything to do with it? It didn't hurt. But the classical fans I knew did not seem to think they were sacrificing sound quality?quite the opposite. Be interesting to take a look at Gramophone from around 1985. See how much kvetching there was about sound quality among the classical cognoscenti. bob The mid to late 80s were an interesting time.This was right about the time hordes of classical music buyers were dumping their cheap rack systems for expensive first generation CD players that sounded like crap.The new classical titles that were issued on vinyl in 1987-91 sold so poorly,that they now command hundreds of dollars on eBay. That's funny, becuase jsut today we had a new thread here from someone who,was in the market to replace his 1985 Revox CDP (which I'm guessing was not an oversampling model) because it had finally given up its ghost. The 'crap' sound of early CDs...or is it early CDPs?...is another 'audiophile' meme. Hard data from listening tests is really rather scanty on the matter. It would be interesting to have, say, you, participate in a proper controlled comparison of a 1985-era CD and/or CDP versus a modern remaster (let's assume it's classical so hopefully it hasn't been futzed with TOO much) or even an LP version from that era; and compare a modern CDP to a 1985 CDP. Nowadays kids think vinyl is cool.It is only a matter of time before some of them discover Stokowski and Furtwangler. That's intersting, becase according to 'Perfecting Sound Forever', Stokowski was all about radically processing the recorded sound to make it 'better' than live. -- -S We have it in our power to begin the world over again - Thomas Paine |
#151
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Jul 9, 8:36*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message On Jul 8, 10:20 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Scott" wrote in message On Jul 7, 7:55 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Scott" wrote in message So one important point is that I did not upgrade from crappy US-pressed LPs to CDs I upgraded from a large collection of far better quality European pressings. And you know they were better how? The differences were obvious. The same has been said by Peter Beltians of taking a photograph and putting it in your freezer. I seriously doubt that Peter Belt has used spectral analysis to support his claim. I have. Please show us the spectral analysis you did of the European classical LPs v. the American classical LPs and explain how that supports your otherwise obviously biased opinions on the subject. Neither the LPs I compared nor any of the analysis that I did are currently in my posession What can you tell us from memory? What specific titles did you compare? What specific masterings and pressings were they? What were the subjective differences? What equipment did you use for the spectral analysis of the LPs? what was it you saw in that spectral analysis you felt corolated with what specific subjective observations? |
#152
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Sonnova" wrote in message I remember "Billboard" articles about how cassettes had eclipsed LP sales, so I doubt if we're wrong here. Absence of supporting evidence noted. However, your comment made two separable claims, and even if the numerical sales are correct, there's still room for falsification. Quick googlin indicates that cassette sales overtook LP sales in the US and UK in 1984. By 1988 CD sales had also overtaken LP. As the man used to say, 'you can look it up!' -- -S We have it in our power to begin the world over again - Thomas Paine |
#153
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
Jenn wrote:
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "high end" experience. "Ticks and pops" aren't a major concern to me, unless they are very loud, as in an abused LP. An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, actually, it could be pretty annoying, depending on where that click fell. -- -S We have it in our power to begin the world over again - Thomas Paine |
#154
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote: Jenn wrote: In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "high end" experience. "Ticks and pops" aren't a major concern to me, unless they are very loud, as in an abused LP. An occasional click on an otherwise fine LP simply doesn't ruin the overall experience, actually, it could be pretty annoying, depending on where that click fell. Of course. As in most things, home audio is always about "picking your poison", in my opinion. |
#155
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Thu, 9 Jul 2009 10:58:39 -0700, Steven Sullivan wrote
(in article ): Roger Kulp wrote: On Jul 5, 9:45?am, bob wrote: On Jul 4, 10:45?am, "Harry Lavo" wrote: "bob" wrote in message I dunno. My recollection was that classical fans flocked to CD almost immediately, and they tended to care more about sound quality than most. I wouldn't hold that up as proof of anything, but it suggests that your opinion of early CD quality was far from universally shared, even by people for whom quality mattered. You don't think being able to hear a symphony or concerto all the way through without changing sides had anything to do with it? It didn't hurt. But the classical fans I knew did not seem to think they were sacrificing sound quality?quite the opposite. Be interesting to take a look at Gramophone from around 1985. See how much kvetching there was about sound quality among the classical cognoscenti. bob The mid to late 80s were an interesting time.This was right about the time hordes of classical music buyers were dumping their cheap rack systems for expensive first generation CD players that sounded like crap.The new classical titles that were issued on vinyl in 1987-91 sold so poorly,that they now command hundreds of dollars on eBay. That's funny, becuase jsut today we had a new thread here from someone who,was in the market to replace his 1985 Revox CDP (which I'm guessing was not an oversampling model) because it had finally given up its ghost. The 'crap' sound of early CDs...or is it early CDPs?...is another 'audiophile' meme. Hard data from listening tests is really rather scanty on the matter. It would be interesting to have, say, you, participate in a proper controlled comparison of a 1985-era CD and/or CDP versus a modern remaster (let's assume it's classical so hopefully it hasn't been futzed with TOO much) or even an LP version from that era; and compare a modern CDP to a 1985 CDP. Nowadays kids think vinyl is cool.It is only a matter of time before some of them discover Stokowski and Furtwangler. That's intersting, becase according to 'Perfecting Sound Forever', Stokowski was all about radically processing the recorded sound to make it 'better' than live. Yeah, and Stokowski (real name Leo Stokes. Father was a coal miner from Wales) was a pretentious loon. He insisted that RCA Victor let him adjust the levels on his Philadelphia Orchestra recording sessions. Of course, RCA wasn't about to let him do that, so they gave him a VU meter with a knob attached to it. All the knob did was vary the level of the meter, nothing else. Stokowski would conduct and twiddle the knob to his heart's content. On playback. he would beam and say to the engineers: "See this is perfect, this is how it SHOULD be done. Why can't you overpaid recording engineers do that?" The "overpaid recording engineers" would smile at each other and wink. OTOH, Stokowski WAS responsible for talking Musicians Union maven James C, Patrillo out of doubling the recording fees for stereophonic recording sessions (two channels? Two recordings)! Another Stokowski story that I recall was that when he was the resident conductor of the Dallas Symphony in the late 1960's, he decided to marry the local Dallas Opera diva, a soprano with a very plain name Jane Smith or some such (I don't remember her name). Before he would marry her, he made her LEGALLY change her name to Countess Vlotovsky or some such pretentious nonsense. He as a character. His pretensions to technical audio knowledge are legendary, but he did promote technical innovation in both the production and playback of recorded music. The public trusted him as a famous "authority" and so he did a lot of good for the business and the hobby. He wasn't a bad conductor either - as long as he didn't try to "re-arrange" the works of the masters (which unfortunately, he did all too often). His recording of the Virgil Thompson Suites from "The River" and "The PLow That Broke The Plains" are THE best recordings of those works and the only recording of them formally acknowledged by the composer. |
#156
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Sonnova" wrote in message
Yeah, and Stokowski (real name Leo Stokes. Father was a coal miner from Wales) was a pretentious loon. Another Stokowski story that I recall was that when he was the resident conductor of the Dallas Symphony in the late 1960's, he decided to marry the local Dallas Opera diva, a soprano with a very plain name Jane Smith or some such (I don't remember her name). Before he would marry her, he made her LEGALLY change her name to Countess Vlotovsky or some such pretentious nonsense. Counterpoint: http://sthweb.bu.edu/index.php?optio...ski&Itemid=360 "After he had achieved international fame with the Philadelphia Orchestra, unsubstantiated rumours circulated that he was born "Leonard" or "Lionel Stokes" or that he had "anglicized" it to "Stokes"; this canard is readily disproved by reference not only to his birth certificate and those of his father, younger brother, and sister (which show Stokowski to have been the genuine Polish family name), but also by the Student Entry Registers of the Royal College of Music, Royal College of Organists, and The Queen's College, Oxford, along with other surviving documentation from his days at St. Marylebone Church, St. James's Church, and St. Bartholomew's in New York City.[13][not specific enough to verify] Upon his arrival in America, however, he briefly spelled his name as Stokovski to ensure that people could pronounce it correctly "Stokowski married three times. His first wife was the American concert pianist Olga Samaroff (born Lucie Hickenlooper), to whom he was married from 1911 until 1923 (one daughter: Sonia Stokowski, an actress). His second wife was Johnson & Johnson heiress Evangeline Love Brewster Johnson, an artist and aviator, to whom he was married from 1926 until 1937 (two daughters: Gloria Luba Stokowski and Andrea Sadja Stokowski). His third wife, from 1945 until 1955, was railroad heiress Gloria Vanderbilt (born 1924), an artist and fashion designer (two sons, Leopold Stanislaus Stokowski b. 1950 and Christopher Stokowski b. 1952). He also had a much-publicized affair with Greta Garbo during the 1930s. ... |
#157
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
In article ,
Sonnova wrote: That's intersting, becase according to 'Perfecting Sound Forever', Stokowski was all about radically processing the recorded sound to make it 'better' than live. Yeah, and Stokowski (real name Leo Stokes. Father was a coal miner from Wales) was a pretentious loon. He insisted that RCA Victor let him adjust the levels on his Philadelphia Orchestra recording sessions. Of course, RCA wasn't about to let him do that, so they gave him a VU meter with a knob attached to it. All the knob did was vary the level of the meter, nothing else. Stokowski would conduct and twiddle the knob to his heart's content. On playback. he would beam and say to the engineers: "See this is perfect, this is how it SHOULD be done. Why can't you overpaid recording engineers do that?" The "overpaid recording engineers" would smile at each other and wink. OTOH, Stokowski WAS responsible for talking Musicians Union maven James C, Patrillo out of doubling the recording fees for stereophonic recording sessions (two channels? Two recordings)! Another Stokowski story that I recall was that when he was the resident conductor of the Dallas Symphony in the late 1960's, he decided to marry the local Dallas Opera diva, a soprano with a very plain name Jane Smith or some such (I don't remember her name). Before he would marry her, he made her LEGALLY change her name to Countess Vlotovsky or some such pretentious nonsense. He as a character. His pretensions to technical audio knowledge are legendary, but he did promote technical innovation in both the production and playback of recorded music. The public trusted him as a famous "authority" and so he did a lot of good for the business and the hobby. He wasn't a bad conductor either - as long as he didn't try to "re-arrange" the works of the masters (which unfortunately, he did all too often). His recording of the Virgil Thompson Suites from "The River" and "The PLow That Broke The Plains" are THE best recordings of those works and the only recording of them formally acknowledged by the composer. From wiki: After Stokowski's death, Tom Burnam writes, the "concatenization of canards" that had arisen around him was revived‹that his name and accent were phony; that his musical education was deficient; that his musicians did not respect him; that he cared about nobody but himself. Burnam suggests that there was a dark, hidden reason for these rumors. Stokowski deplored the segregation of symphony orchestras in which women and minorities were excluded, and, so Burnam claims, the bigots got revenge by slandering Stokowski. -- http://www.stokowski.org/Leopold%20S...0Biography.htm This page includes an image of his birth certificate. Stokowski's first wife, Olga Samaroff, was born Lucy Mary Olga Agnes Hickenlooper but performed under her stage name for years before their marriage. Touching up scores was standard practice for the early twentieth century. Please provide an example of a "re-arrangement" that showed he was a "bad conductor." Stephen |
#158
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Jenn" wrote in message
Of course. As in most things, home audio is always about "picking your poison", in my opinion. There are two possible sources of "poison": The inherent properties of the medium, and the specific production steps. The CD medium has no inherent poison, as many DBTs have shown. The LP format is egregiously sonically flawed, and only usable if one intentionally ignores obvious audible problems. The production steps for either medium are mostly judgment calls, personal choices and personal preferences. They can be all over the map for both LPs and CDs. It is conceivable that a CD might contain no poison. It is inconceivable that a LP would be equally free of poison. |
#159
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
"Scott" wrote in message
Neither the LPs I compared nor any of the analysis that I did are currently in my possession What can you tell us from memory? Not much. What specific titles did you compare? What specific masterings and pressings were they? Too numerous to remember, but they included both classical and rock titles. What were the subjective differences? Less noise, better dynamics and detail. What equipment did you use for the spectral analysis of the LPs? Purpose-built filter banks meters,and oscilliscope. what was it you saw in that spectral analysis you felt corolated with what specific subjective observations? Generally less midrange and more treble. |
#160
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Moving-coil cartridges
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:15:10 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ): "Sonnova" wrote in message Yeah, and Stokowski (real name Leo Stokes. Father was a coal miner from Wales) was a pretentious loon. Another Stokowski story that I recall was that when he was the resident conductor of the Dallas Symphony in the late 1960's, he decided to marry the local Dallas Opera diva, a soprano with a very plain name Jane Smith or some such (I don't remember her name). Before he would marry her, he made her LEGALLY change her name to Countess Vlotovsky or some such pretentious nonsense. Counterpoint: http://sthweb.bu.edu/index.php?optio...icle= Leopold _Stokowski&Itemid=360 "After he had achieved international fame with the Philadelphia Orchestra, unsubstantiated rumours circulated that he was born "Leonard" or "Lionel Stokes" or that he had "anglicized" it to "Stokes"; this canard is readily disproved by reference not only to his birth certificate and those of his father, younger brother, and sister (which show Stokowski to have been the genuine Polish family name), but also by the Student Entry Registers of the Royal College of Music, Royal College of Organists, and The Queen's College, Oxford, along with other surviving documentation from his days at St. Marylebone Church, St. James's Church, and St. Bartholomew's in New York City.[13][not specific enough to verify] Upon his arrival in America, however, he briefly spelled his name as Stokovski to ensure that people could pronounce it correctly "Stokowski married three times. His first wife was the American concert pianist Olga Samaroff (born Lucie Hickenlooper), to whom he was married from 1911 until 1923 (one daughter: Sonia Stokowski, an actress). His second wife was Johnson & Johnson heiress Evangeline Love Brewster Johnson, an artist and aviator, to whom he was married from 1926 until 1937 (two daughters: Gloria Luba Stokowski and Andrea Sadja Stokowski). His third wife, from 1945 until 1955, was railroad heiress Gloria Vanderbilt (born 1924), an artist and fashion designer (two sons, Leopold Stanislaus Stokowski b. 1950 and Christopher Stokowski b. 1952). He also had a much-publicized affair with Greta Garbo during the 1930s. .. Looks like the "story" is true but the dates and circumstances are not. It looks as if it was his FIRST wife who changed her name from a plain one to a pretentious one (born Lucie Hickenlooper changed to Olga Samaroff ) and she was a pianist not a diva. And we still don't know whether she changed her name at Stokowski's request or for professional reasons - I suspect the latter. There is a lot of apocrypha out there. By the way, I got the "Leo Stokes" story and the "Diva" story from famed musicologist Nicolas Slonimsky, whom I met through a mutual friend. Looks like you can't even trust famed "authorities" to get everything right these days. OTOH, I do know that the two anecdotes about Stokowski and the VU meter and the one about him dissuading James Patrillo from doubling union recording fees for stereo recording sessions are true because the former comes from a book written in 1947 by RCA's A&R man in the 1930's and 1940's Charles O'Connell entitled: "The Other Side of The Record" . The latter was told to me personally by the late Bert Whyte, who was there, in Stokowski's apartment in the early 1950's, when, as a Magnecord tape recorder representative, he arranged a demonstration of Stereophonic sound for Stowkowski and Patrillo. Earlier in the day, Whyte had recorded, in stereo, the St Louis Symphony rehearsal with Stowkowski conducting and Stowkowski invited Whyte to bring his equipment by his apartment later and join he and Patrillo for dinner. After dinner, Whyte (who had lugged the huge two road-case tape recorder, a pair of MacIntosh tube amps and a pair of monitor speakers up three flights of stairs to Stokowski's rather large St. Louis apartment ) played back the stereo recordings of the symphony rehearsal for Stokowski and the Musicians Union founder and president Patrillo. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FA: Van den Hul MC2 Moving Coil Cartridge | Marketplace | |||
WTB:USED MOVING COIL PHONO CARTRIDGES< TONEARMS | Marketplace | |||
WTB:USED MOVING COIL CARTRIDGES< ASUSA PHONO PREAMP | Vacuum Tubes | |||
WTB:USED MOVING COIL CARTRIDGES, ASUSA PHONO PREAMP | Marketplace | |||
WTB:USED MOVING COIL CARTRIDGES, ASUSA PHONO PREAMP | Marketplace |