Discussion:
My Native Heath part 4 - authentic?
Add Reply
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2021-08-29 15:39:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I've just come across* a recording conducted by Arthur Wood himself,
which must be about as authentic as you can get?



*"Found" would be more accurate. There's been a clip of this recording
on YT for some time, but played on a(n albeit fine) horn gramophone;
this is a proper electronic transcription, and probably as good as it
gets - from a 78, though according to the other clip 195x, so would have
been electronically recorded.

Actually, from what I remember thereof, it might be the recording the
Beeb used originally - Mike? (It's not completely mono [not a straight
line on X-Y], but I suspect that's restoration artefacts.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Bother," said Pooh, as he tasted the bacon in his sandwich.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2021-08-29 16:03:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Aug 2021 at 16:39:11, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I've just come across* a recording conducted by Arthur Wood himself,
which must be about as authentic as you can get?
http://youtu.be/7WKgSrUHc80
*"Found" would be more accurate. There's been a clip of this recording
on YT for some time, but played on a(n albeit fine) horn gramophone;
this is a proper electronic transcription, and probably as good as it
gets - from a 78, though according to the other clip 195x, so would
have been electronically recorded.
Sorry: the other clip
is
1925 by the Court Symphony orchestra; the above one's by the Regent
Concert Orchestra, and isn't dated (I don't know where I got the 195x
date from). What confused me is that both are from 78s, and both
conducted by Arthur Wood.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Actually, from what I remember thereof, it might be the recording the
Beeb used originally - Mike? (It's not completely mono [not a straight
line on X-Y], but I suspect that's restoration artefacts.)
(The ...c80 one I meant, sounds like the BBC one IIRR.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

... basically it's another language and unless you've studied it, it's
difficult to grasp. I know people get outraged at me saying it, but it's only
my opinion. I'm not telling people who adore Shakespeare to stop adoring it
this minute. - Jane Horrocks, in Radio Times 30 July - 5 August 2011
Mike McMillan
2021-08-29 16:34:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I've just come across* a recording conducted by Arthur Wood himself,
which must be about as authentic as you can get?
http://youtu.be/7WKgSrUHc80
*"Found" would be more accurate. There's been a clip of this recording
on YT for some time, but played on a(n albeit fine) horn gramophone;
this is a proper electronic transcription, and probably as good as it
gets - from a 78, though according to the other clip 195x, so would have
been electronically recorded.
Actually, from what I remember thereof, it might be the recording the
Beeb used originally - Mike? (It's not completely mono [not a straight
line on X-Y], but I suspect that's restoration artefacts.)
Jpeg, please bear in mind that my hearing may be losing its’ edge a little
now (‘I’m 74 next month you know’) but, I don’t think this version was ever
used for transmission, sounds a little light on instrumentation and the
tempo is slightly faster than I remember it, there are a few dodgy
‘intonatory’ moments on the fiddles and I think when transferred* to the
digital domain, a little artificial reverb may have been added ( just
listen to the final notes as they die away ). Mono it is and as you say
hearty facts are responsible for this non-linear X-Y display.

*The very clean start without any apparent surface noise suggests a very
tight fade-in at this point which is best achieved on a digital
workstation. (I have edited both this way to remove all traces of pre-track
noise with a fast fade-up and also by allowing a little ‘surface noise
previous to the very first note using a slower fade-up to ‘set the scene’
so to speak). When I was editing some Glenn Miller tracks some years ago,
my client requested that we use the latter method as the surface / system
noise from the original recordings was evident the rest of the time. On
that occasion, my main task was to de-click and de-pop the tracks - but
only when of very short duration as we did not wish to make appreciable
tempo changes.

Toodle Click-Pop.
--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan
Mike McMillan
2021-08-29 16:36:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike McMillan
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I've just come across* a recording conducted by Arthur Wood himself,
which must be about as authentic as you can get?
http://youtu.be/7WKgSrUHc80
*"Found" would be more accurate. There's been a clip of this recording
on YT for some time, but played on a(n albeit fine) horn gramophone;
this is a proper electronic transcription, and probably as good as it
gets - from a 78, though according to the other clip 195x, so would have
been electronically recorded.
Actually, from what I remember thereof, it might be the recording the
Beeb used originally - Mike? (It's not completely mono [not a straight
line on X-Y], but I suspect that's restoration artefacts.)
Jpeg, please bear in mind that my hearing may be losing its’ edge a little
now (‘I’m 74 next month you know’) but, I don’t think this version was ever
used for transmission, sounds a little light on instrumentation and the
tempo is slightly faster than I remember it, there are a few dodgy
‘intonatory’ moments on the fiddles and I think when transferred* to the
digital domain, a little artificial reverb may have been added ( just
listen to the final notes as they die away ). Mono it is and as you say
hearty facts are responsible for this non-linear X-Y display.
*The very clean start without any apparent surface noise suggests a very
tight fade-in at this point which is best achieved on a digital
workstation. (I have edited both this way to remove all traces of pre-track
noise with a fast fade-up and also by allowing a little ‘surface noise
previous to the very first note using a slower fade-up to ‘set the scene’
so to speak). When I was editing some Glenn Miller tracks some years ago,
my client requested that we use the latter method as the surface / system
noise from the original recordings was evident the rest of the time. On
that occasion, my main task was to de-click and de-pop the tracks - but
only when of very short duration as we did not wish to make appreciable
tempo changes.
Toodle Click-Pop.
One other thing, I notice one or two unintentional sounds (acoustic thumps)
which may have been the conductor hitting / knocking the podium / rostrum.
--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2021-08-30 01:12:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Aug 2021 at 16:34:13, Mike McMillan
[]
Post by Mike McMillan
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
http://youtu.be/7WKgSrUHc80
[]
Post by Mike McMillan
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Actually, from what I remember thereof, it might be the recording the
Beeb used originally - Mike? (It's not completely mono [not a straight
line on X-Y], but I suspect that's restoration artefacts.)
Jpeg, please bear in mind that my hearing may be losing its’ edge a little
now (‘I’m 74 next month you know’) but, I don’t think this version was ever
used for transmission, sounds a little light on instrumentation and the
tempo is slightly faster than I remember it, there are a few dodgy
‘intonatory’ moments on the fiddles and I think when transferred* to the
I think it was probably the frequency range that made me think that at
first - rather an odd one; a sharpish cutoff just below 6 kHz, but not
complete: there's low-level something up to about 15.
Post by Mike McMillan
digital domain, a little artificial reverb may have been added ( just
listen to the final notes as they die away ). Mono it is and as you say
Listening again now, it's more the pronounced wow at the end that I
notice!
Post by Mike McMillan
hearty facts are responsible for this non-linear X-Y display.
Yes, and I think sloppily done: it doesn't seem to be an attempt at fake
stereo (which can be quite good these days), so I can only assume it's
just the random differences between the channels due to uneven wear (and
perhaps tracking errors), which I'd have thought would have been turned
to mono by any competent restorer.
Post by Mike McMillan
*The very clean start without any apparent surface noise suggests a very
tight fade-in at this point which is best achieved on a digital
workstation. (I have edited both this way to remove all traces of pre-track
noise with a fast fade-up and also by allowing a little ‘surface noise
previous to the very first note using a slower fade-up to ‘set the scene’
so to speak). When I was editing some Glenn Miller tracks some years ago,
my client requested that we use the latter method as the surface / system
noise from the original recordings was evident the rest of the time. On
I can see the sense in that.
Post by Mike McMillan
that occasion, my main task was to de-click and de-pop the tracks - but
only when of very short duration as we did not wish to make appreciable
tempo changes.
Yes; the only time I've seriously done that, I just snipped them out and
closed the gap, rather than trying to synthesize/guess. (Side 2 was so
badly scratched I spent more time just trying to capture all the grooves
at all - then cutting and pasting to get them back in the right order
[sunshine] - than pop and click removal.)
Post by Mike McMillan
Toodle Click-Pop.
(-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

A professor is one who talks in someone else's sleep.
Loading...