does the original tape speed of the recording session make a difference , ?
when it's transferred to a 33 1/3 r.p.m. record

do you require a different tape speed during the session if you will be making 45 rpm's or 78 rpm records?

example :
if a guy had access to the original beatle recordings

did they use two recorders ?
one for use at one speed for records being released on 33 1/3
and another recorder ( running at a different speed )for records being released as 45 r.p.m.
single's ?

No, they are totally independent.

AFAIK, vinyl records are stamped out with a metal press in the mass manufacturing process, they are not "cut" from a tape recording, although I believe the master that is used to make the stamping die is done so.

I am also pretty sure that back when the Beatles were making recordings, studios were using 1/2" tape, not the popular 1/4" width that was used in home tape decks.

Does anyone know of a young lady with whom we can hook bendable up? He seems to be suffering from Lackanookie disease.

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Shugart:
Does anyone know of a young lady with whom we can hook bendable up? He seems to be suffering from Lackanookie disease.

Aren't we all?

Back in the good ol days when analog tape was used for professional recordings, two speeds were commonly used; 15 ips and 30 ips (inches per second). The Beatles used Studer J37 4 track recorders that utilized 1" tape (1/4" per track ) at 15 ips. And I'm sure mixing and mastering down to 1/2 tape was at 15ips as well. Later when 24 track started to become the norm using 2" tape stock, 30ips became a standard, even though some still prefered 15 ips for a "beefier" sound. The recording speed had nothing to whether it was going on a 12" 33 LP or a 45 single.

Way back when (70's 80's) Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs used half-speed processing for their high end at the time vinyl.
It sure helped us sell more Turntables and Cartridges back then.

What blows my mind about cutting a record is the ground speed of the stylus: it is faster on the outside and slower on the inside. So the little squiggles in the groove that make the sounds are farther apart to start then get compressed as the stylus moves toward the center. Does that effect the fidelity? I dunno.

The master tape runs at the same speed throughout, I suppose. 33-1/3, 45, doesn't matter to the tape.

The things you learn on this forum...I remember changing the needle on our combo console Zenith TV with the record player on top when I was a kid in the early 80's. We kept spare needles in one of the built in cubby holes.

I love to learn how things work and I love threads like this!

Oddball, thanks for your post explaining that.
as someone who bought a few records in the 70s and many more in the 80s this technology amazes me.
I'm not even sure they could still do it that way if they tried!

I'm getting to be an old geezer and we do tend to accumulate bit's of information we find interesting. Having been an avid music listener for as long as I can remember and an Engineer I have read several magazine articles on to the process for going from tape to a final pressed vinyl disk.

The first step is to make the Master Disk, which is used to Press the Vinyl. BTW, new masters can be created at any time as long as the original mixdown master tape is usable. This is done by using what was called a Cutting Lathe or Cutting Turntable depending on who wrote the magazine article. This is sort of like a normal turntable but the head that does the cutting is fully powered at a preset spiral pattern to form the grooves. Note early on IIRC the masters were actually shellac and the shellac masters were used to produce the press plates. Note sure if they stayed with Shellac masters or went to another more modern material was used but suspect that more modern material was used. Originally the Cutting Lathe was turning at 33 RPM for an LP and the master mixdown tape would be running at the same speed used during recording. Later on Half Speed Mastering was touted as being more accurate because to cut a 15,000 Hz signal the cutting head would only have to cycle at 7,500 Hz at half speed.

As for how we go from a Shellac Master to a steel (or Aluminum ?) pressing plate I just don't know. Either due to my aging memory or it just wasn't put in the articles I read way back when. At a guess it was some type of Lost Wax casting process.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Way back when (70's 80's) Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs used half-speed processing for their high end at the time vinyl.
It sure helped us sell more Turntables and Cartridges back then.

They still do.

Didn't they launch a gold disk into space back in the 70's with greetings on it? Was it Voyager? Amazing that that was deemed the best way to capture sound to be replayed later by who knows what.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
Didn't they launch a gold disk into space back in the 70's with greetings on it? Was it Voyager? Amazing that that was deemed the best way to capture sound to be replayed later by who knows what.

They did indeed.



(Johnny B. Goode is at 46:41.)

thanks folks,

would the beatles sound better on a faster original recording running tape?

'The faster the tape speed, the better the recorded quality' would be a good guess.

Largely depending on the format/degradation/etc.

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
would the beatles sound better on a faster original recording running tape?

Not necessarily.

"Higher" speed (30ips) vs. "lower" speed (15ips) has been a long running discussion in the pro audio field. Believe it or not, there are merits to both.

In general, 30ips gave better clarity in the highs, an openness, and without having to use Dolby Noise Reduction, while 15ips with NR had the ability to have better low end and an overall punchiness. But some engineers felt NR provided artifacts to the sound. Hell, years ago, Jack White recorded an album at 7 1/2ips on a 2" 8 track tape machine, like the Beatles having a 1/4" of tape surface per track.

I always thought The Beatles had great sounding records, given the time period. The overall audio quality was better than most of their peers, thanks to George Martin.

The other thing that intriqued me about recording technology was when they moved from mono to stereo records, that is with each wall of the groove's "valley" being a separate channel.

quote:

Originally posted by cne32507:
What blows my mind about cutting a record is the ground speed of the stylus: it is faster on the outside and slower on the inside. So the little squiggles in the groove that make the sounds are farther apart to start then get compressed as the stylus moves toward the center. Does that effect the fidelity? I dunno.

The master tape runs at the same speed throughout, I suppose. 33-1/3, 45, doesn't matter to the tape.

A linear tracking turntable solves this problem.
I use a Revox Linear tracking turntable, built like a tank and is very gentle on the record grooves.

george martin was a genius,

he was every bit as important to the Beatles success as the boys