1944 recording better than/equal of today

bikezappa · June 2009

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index.php?blogId=1

I purchased this CD of this 1944 recording made in Germany and was blown away at it's clarity and low noise. The tape speed was 33 1/3rpm. Wow.

Check out his review of the CD of this recording. It's all true. Amazing what could be done over 50 years ago.

My big question is what type of audio equipment were they listening to that required them to make such a stella recording. I would guess that if the listening equipment was crapy then why make such a clean recording?

By todays standards this recording is excellent. Nobody, I think, had 30 1/3rpm tape equipment back then or now for home playback. There was no Revox. Who would listen to this recoding in 1944? It's almost like they made CDs back then but had no CD playback equipment. Maybe they broadcast it on AM radio but the niose level and frequecy response would so degrade the recording.

Who knows?

George Grand · June 2009

I've been spooked by stuff like that. They always got "the room" better too.

bikezappa · June 2009

What spooks me is how did they know what this would sound like? What amplifiers and speakers were they using back then in Germany in 1944?

heiney9 · June 2009

I think it's all about the simplicity of the gear and simplicity of the recording process, ie; fewer mic's perhaps more strategically placed, the use of "real" instruments and the fact that back then you had real musicians that played real music.

I find many recordings using as little as 8 tracks sound incredible. I collect a lot of bootlegs for many artists and many times I enjoy the stripped down bare bones recordings over commercial stuff. Something about feeling like you're right there.

The simplicity of the recording process is what makes many older recordings sound so good and they don;t cut corners like they do today to save time and money.

H9

bikezappa · June 2009

Simple has it's advantages Heiney.

I wonder if they even had compression technology in 1944.

Even though the recording is mono there is a very clear presence to the recording of the voices. But to enjoy this you need to like Wagner alot.

TNRabbit · June 2009

33 and 1/3 rpm for a tape?? They say in the article it was recorded at 30.4 INCHES PER SECOND. RPM would be for LP recording...

That is HAULING ****$ on a tape player!

bikezappa · June 2009

my mistake it's got to be 33 1/3 inches per second.

Big reels keep movin

BigMac · June 2009

bikezappa · June 2009

That's great BigMac. I know there may not be many Wanger fans out there.

I can't hear these samples at work and compare them to the CD I purchased, but I remember one or two selections on the CD did have some audable tape hiss. The others were just dead quiet however.

What did you think of the recording quality?

BigMac · June 2009

bikezappa wrote: »

That's great BigMac. I know there may not be many Wanger fans out there.

I can't hear these samples at work and compare them to the CD I purchased, but I remember one or two selections on the CD did have some audable tape hiss. The others were just dead quiet however.

What did you think of the recording quality?

The samples are only like 20 seconds or so and are low quality (64kbps) but still sound very good. Based on the samples I provided (all I have heard of the cd is these samples) I am going to purchase it. As a matter of fact, I am ordering it now as I type. I am all about listening to most any music........I get tired of the same ol' stuff. Another one for the collection.:D

adam2434 · June 2009

Huge advances in quality came with magnetic tape, and the Germans were the experts prior to the end of WWII.

I'm also blown away by what was achieved in many of my earliest recordings from the 50's. In many cases, I prefer their sound to modern recordings. On the good recordings, they kept it simple and got it right. Of course, there were awful recordings made then too.

One of the things that draws me to the best of the era is the tone and presence they were able to achieve on vocals and horns. It probably has a lot to do with the tube mics and electronics they were using.

Dawgfish · June 2009

Great stuff. Actually I'm a big Wagner fan. I kind of consider that and Bach as the Metallica of the classical world back in the day. Lots of dynamics and power.

no1maestro · June 2009

Thanks for the links and the information. I have several transcriptions from some years later which aren't even close to the quality and presence of these recordings. I suspect the mikes were about 15 feet above and just at the edge of the stage, itself. Although they were only working in mono, they had the capacity to "mix" a couple of mikes, one on the orchestra and one for the singers together or more. I am very curious as to the playback equipment that they had. There is very little information that I have come across concerning this. We all know that the Germans had the tape technology but what about the rest of the chain? If anyone in here has more information about this please share. Again thanks for the shock!! ( A big Wagnerian BTW)

mhardy6647 · June 2009

The epitome of recording technology (arguably) was reached in the 1950s (RCA "Living Stereo", Mercury "Living Presence", etc.). Solid state consoles and amps entered the picture in the 1960s; close miking/multi-track recording (even of large-scale orchestral music) became fashionable, and it's been all downhill ever since :-P

1944 recording better than/equal of today

Comments