Date:         Tue, 16 May 2006 06:10:00 -0400
Reply-To:     Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: National Recording Preservation Board (NRPB) Study
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
              reply-type=response

No, I think he was saying your argument is ludicrous since the 45RPM LP is what he says is the best 
source. Therefore proving my point about late-era 78's, that in most cases they will be the 
worst-case/worst-quality example and therefore are needed only as an absolutely last resort.

In any case, I wasn't advocating dumpstering anything, just saying that the late-era 78 material 
would not be what I'd take to a desert island or care about very much unless, as I clearly stated 
has been the case a couple of times, that was the only extant source for something.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Richter" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 2:11 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] National Recording Preservation Board (NRPB) Study


> David Lennick wrote:
>> Mike Richter wrote:
>>
>>  Tom Fine wrote:
>>  > Well, one question immediately comes to mind. Who CARES about 78's
>>  > issued after the advent of tape (1947-48), unless the tape master has
>>  > been lost? Even if only a good-condition LP exists (post-1948), it is
>>  > almost guaranteed to sound better and have a wider frequency/dynamic
>>  > range than the 78. So I ask again, who cares about what's gotta be the
>>  > vast majority of late-era 78's? I mean, they might make a nice novelty,
>>  > but they have little or no historical value since they're a
>>  > worst-case/obsolete-technology version of something.
>
>> Matter of fact, this argument is ludicrous. The only good-sounding original issue of "South 
>> Pacific" was the 45-RPM set. The 78s are overmodulated, the first LP pressings sound like short 
>> wave, the subsequent ones keep adding layers of echo, the CD issues were a disaster, proving that 
>> Sony may own the rights and the original master but doesn't know its acetates from a hole in the 
>> ground about what to do with them. Anyone want to challenge me on this, meet me out back.
>
> I think David means that Tom Fine's position is ludicrous - since David and I are in agreement. 
> <G>
>
> There is no reason to assume that the source materials still exist. I know of at least one case in 
> which there are no masters for a series of substantial opera recordings and that the publisher 
> does not even have clean copies of many of the LPs. (I've not yet determined whether they are 
> without any copy of some titles.)
>
> The record companies (and film companies) have a shameful record of failing to keep master 
> materials. Those that have been retained may not have been stored adequately. I have often been 
> called on to supply transfers from my own copies for performers who have been told that the 
> publisher has nothing from which to provide a copy.
>
> So it may well be that the reason recent issues of "South Pacific" have had poor sound is that the 
> publishers no longer have copies of the 45s or of the tape from which they were made.
>
> Mike
> -- 
> [log in to unmask]
> http://www.mrichter.com/