What speed should I play old acoustic records at?

[Cadillac89]

I have several old Caruso records that I'd like to play at the proper speed. Anyone know what speed those old Victor Talking Machine acoustic records were cut at? I would guess 75 RPM but am not sure. I have a Numark TTX but unfortunately it doesn't tell me what the speed is when I change the pitch, just the percentage change. Any idea how much percent I should lower it? Thanks.

 

[DougMac]

Just curious, how did you come up with 75 rpm? Is it a WAG or did you read that speed somewhere?

Unless clearly documented, it's really hard to determine the correct speed for acoustics. Some records started with an announcement of a standard pitch, then the note played. Other than that, it's really hard to tell. Concert "A" was not standardized at 440 back then. It helps to know the key of the original piece, but even then it's not a guarantee since they would transpose keys. Even if you know the key, you pretty much have to have perfect pitch (which I don't) to correctly adjust.

 

[Dan ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ]

Many were cut @ 80 rpm. There really wasn't much of a speed standard at that point.

 

[cactuscowboy]

This is probably the most difficult aspect of playing "78s" that I encounter. My perfectionist tendencies want me to get the speed exact. However, I'm not a formally trained musician and I don't have "perfect pitch" so it's a real challenge.

I have a lot of old Victor acoustic discs. Some sound good at 78.26 rpm, others sound better at 74~76 rpm. You just have to listen and decide for yourself.

Here's an approach you can try to arrive at correct speed. Search the website for reissue compilations of Caruso 78s. Look for details on each track's running time. Based on the assumption that the engineer who did the transfers from original discs got the speed correct, you now have a basis to adjust the speed on your turntable.

 

[tpreaves]

Why not play it at the speed that sounds best to your ears?

 

[HTHMAN]

I recently visted the museum at the Edison estate in Ft Myers, Florida and looked at the old record players he made. I do not remember the exact speed he used, but it was different from the 78 rpm standard. His reason for doing this was so that the recordings that his company made would only play properly on an Edison phonograph. So, it depends on the year the recording was made and the company that made the recording. If the recording was made after about 1925, the 78 rpm standard would have likely been in effect.

 

[ke4jhj]

76.59 rpm was a typical speed for Victor acoustics, but not a rule. I recently saw a website listing John McCormack's discography and it listed the recorded speed of each of his Victor recordings. Most acoustics were 76.59 rpm, but quite a few were listed as 75.00, 76.00, 77.92 and 78.26 rpm. I would assume that Caruso's recording were similar.

I wouldn't worry too much about the details. I would vary the speed between 74 and 80 rpm and go with what sounded most natural. Some engineers find what key the recording was in and use a keyboard to match the speed with.

 

[HTHMAN]

Most acoustics were 76.59 rpm, but quite a few were listed as 75.00, 76.00, 77.92 and 78.26 rpm. I would assume that Caruso's recording were similar.

77.92 and 78.26 rpm were the European and USA standards due to the 50 or 60 cycle alternating current used in the countries and the gearing used to approximate78 rpm. Doubt if you could tell the difference. As was suggested, play at 78 rpm and vary the pitch to suit your taste.

 

[illinoisteve]

77.92 and 78.26 rpm were the European and USA standards due to the 50 or 60 cycle alternating current used in the countries and the gearing used to approximate78 rpm. Doubt if you could tell the difference. As was suggested, play at 78 rpm and vary the pitch to suit your taste.

I guess the record cutting machines may have been electric, but in those days many of the records were being played at home on wind-up spring-driven record players.

 

[Dan ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ]

Yup, and all the spring driven players had a variable pitch/speed control on them.

 

[js1138]

I suspect a clever user of Autotune could use it to determine the pitch correction.

Rather than "correcting" it with autotune, you could then adjust the turntable. Or you could make the pitch correction digitally without the side effects of Autotune.

One caveat. I tried using Autotune for something like this and failed to figure it out.

Edit to add:

I have used SoundForge to change the speed of a recording from 45 to 78. It was spoken word, so I just adjusted until it sounded "right."

From all this I learned that Autotune has a vast library of musical scales, ancient and modern.

 

[RogerKulp]

77.92 and 78.26 rpm were the European and USA standards due to the 50 or 60 cycle alternating current used in the countries and the gearing used to approximate78 rpm. Doubt if you could tell the difference. As was suggested, play at 78 rpm and vary the pitch to suit your taste.

I have read a lot from reissue,and mastering engineers,who talk about all sorts of varying speeds,to get records to sound right.75.something, 82.something,you name it.I have a couple of thousand shellac records,give or take,with many very rare pieces.I am sure I have all sorts of variations in the speeds.

I recently bought a nice pile of very rare early electrical classical shellacs from an online sale from the Finniish National Library.They were a flat three Euro each.All were British pressings,and most were rare enough to justify the insane shipping.A few years ago, I bought a number of piles of even cheaper rare 78s from eBay Germany,so I knew what shipping would cost.

One of the real gems,was Parlophone E10613 "The Barber of Bagdad Overture",by The Orchestra of The State Opera House,Berlin,with a young George Szell conducting.

Another thing that makes this record unusual,is this is an electrical recording, that plays at 80rpm.Says so right on the label.

So,is there any cheap,and easy way of manipulating speed,so that it sounds right?

 

[MelodyMaster]

I guess the record cutting machines may have been electric, but in those days many of the records were being played at home on wind-up spring-driven record players.

Actually, and I wish I could find the reference, Victor used a gravity-driven cutting deck, with a falling weight and flywheel speed controller - a governor. The weight ran off a fusee, with the larger diameter providing greater force against cutting friction for the outer grooves and it ran down to the smaller diameter where less force was required for the inner grooves. Rotational speed was checked against a clock for accuracy. Very occasionally something would slip and the speed would alter slightly. I've mainly only heard these pitch shifts in late 1925 Victors. A clockwork motor can hold better speed stability against cutting force than an electric motor. Also AC frequency was not dependable in New York in the 1920s. In fact the major labels rarely used a line-synchronous cutting deck.

 

[js1138]

So,is there any cheap,and easy way of manipulating speed,so that it sounds right?

Yes. I mentioned the possibilities. In addition to SoundForge, which is technically great, but offers not much help in finding the percentage change, there is DiamondCut software, which is specifically designed to restore old vinyl and shellac.

There are free programs like Audacity that can correct pitch. And there is Autotune, which can tell you the key and how far off the recording is. Once you know what percentage change to apply, software can do it. I don't know how good the free versions of Autotune are.

Or perhaps your turntable can.

then there's this:

http://www.charm.rhul.ac.uk/history/p20_4_3.html

 

[MelodyMaster]

I
Another thing that makes this record unusual,is this is an electrical recording, that plays at 80rpm.Says so right on the label.

So,is there any cheap,and easy way of manipulating speed,so that it sounds right?

All British electric Columbias up to 1931 were recorded at approximately 80rpm, or were supposed to have been.

Your Thorens TD 124 has a hysteresis brake for speed adjustmant. Most decks used by collectors have variable pitch.

If you mean in software, changing length WITHOUT maintaining pitch can adjust the speed of a wave file.

 

[DougMac]

I do not remember the exact speed he used, but it was different from the 78 rpm standard. His reason for doing this was so that the recordings that his company made would only play properly on an Edison phonograph.

Not quite right. First, Victrolas had a pitch control, so setting a different speed would be easy. Edisons were recorded at 80 rpm.

Far more significant, and what made Edisons incompatible with Victrolas, was the grooves were vertical (hill and dale) instead of lateral, like just about everybody else except Pathe. Edisons had a finer groove pitch, therefore selections could be longer than on lateral cut disks.

Because of incompatability with lateral players (think blu-ray vs hd-dvd), the business waned. Also, at least for a while, Edison insisted on being the A&R man and he had atrocious musical tastes.

The irony is that the Edison player was technically superior and arguably the sound quality of Edisons was better. I transcribe Edisons with a stereo cart, then invert one signal in software to be able to hear the music.

 

[MelodyMaster]

Not quite right. First, Victrolas had a pitch control, so setting a different speed would be easy. Edisons were recorded at 80 rpm.

Far more significant, and what made Edisons incompatible with Victrolas, was the grooves were vertical (hill and dale) instead of lateral, like just about everybody else except Pathe. Edisons had a finer groove pitch, therefore selections could be longer than on lateral cut disks.

Because of incompatability with lateral players (think blu-ray vs hd-dvd), the business waned. Also, at least for a while, Edison insisted on being the A&R man and he had atrocious musical tastes.

The irony is that the Edison player was technically superior and arguably the sound quality of Edisons was better. I transcribe Edisons with a stereo cart, then invert one signal in software to be able to hear the music.

There's no question, Edison acoustics DO sound better than acoustics made by anyone else. The electrics were pretty good too, but cutting table rumble is always a problem for H&Ds, and, in the case of Edison electrics, a lot of low-end information is obscured by the rumble.

My old Heintzman console had a rotatable soundbox and included optional "fine" ruby needle for playing Edisons, (and a large ball conical for Pathes) though the stylus point weight would have been greater than for a true Edison transducer.

 

[cactuscowboy]

Not quite right. First, Victrolas had a pitch control, so setting a different speed would be easy. Edisons were recorded at 80 rpm.

Far more significant, and what made Edisons incompatible with Victrolas, was the grooves were vertical (hill and dale) instead of lateral, like just about everybody else except Pathe. Edisons had a finer groove pitch, therefore selections could be longer than on lateral cut disks.

Because of incompatability with lateral players (think blu-ray vs hd-dvd), the business waned. Also, at least for a while, Edison insisted on being the A&R man and he had atrocious musical tastes.

The irony is that the Edison player was technically superior and arguably the sound quality of Edisons was better. I transcribe Edisons with a stereo cart, then invert one signal in software to be able to hear the music.

All good and valid points.

As for musical selections, some of my Edison records are godawful xylophone solos and other such dreck. But I've also got some that are great.

Of the ninety or so Edison Diamond Discs I own, the quality does vary. Some are crappy with excessive surface noise, but others exhibit outstanding sound quality, easily the best among the many acoustic recordings in my collection.

I'm using a Stanton 500 with one channel wired out of phase to play Edisons and other vertical-cut discs. Pretty easy to do, simply swap or reverse blue and white headshell leads at the cartridge pins.