Audiophile 78 rpm?

[Clipped and Shorn]

I am curious to know how many amongst you are set up to play 78 rpm discs? More specifically, who is set up to play 78 rpm microgroove, that is, does your turntable have a 78 rpm option so that you could use the same stylus and cart that you use for 33 1/3 rpm. ?

How many who have turntables for vinyl also have the 45 rpm speed?

Probably most of you.

Although shortived, there have been audiophile 78 rpm microgroove (12") vinyl recordings. The vinyl needed to be thick to insure laying flat especially at the outer edge where any wavering at that speed would be a problem. However, a 10" microgroove 78 rpm would be less inclined toward this problem. Remember, in the old days of 12" shellac the discs where more rigid and layed flat (for the most part).

The sonic advantages of 45 rpm over 33 1/3 are fairly dramatic, the sonic advantage of 78 rpm over the 45 rpm is also an improvement, however, in a recent A/B comparison that I was privy to, those improvements where not as dramatic as the 33 to 45, although still an improvement, in fact, the 78 rpm was as close to reproducing what was on the original tape master as you can possibly imagine.

I was just wondering about any wacko art niche audiophile market that might possibley exist for audiophile mircorgroove recordings (best produced on 10" vinyl). I am pretty sure of the 12" 45rpm market, because this has already existed in the DJ world and perhaps already in the Audiophile world. A 45 rpm 12" vinyl makes alot of sense since most people with turntables have this option, the sound is better, and who needs all that "time" on the 33 LP anyway.

C&S

[Parrot]

The playing time on 78s is just too darn short, just enough for one quick song.

I can't see the market for audiophile 78s when, as you note, there are almost no players for them. The mastering and manufacturing per 78 disc sold would be astronomically expensive.

[garymd]

Allan is the only one I know who occasionally plays 78s on his TD124. It's a PITA because of all the adjustments he needs to make to the table.

Like Paul said, I highly doubt many audiophiles go to the trouble on a regular basis.

I've had my Basis for almost a year now and have yet to play a 45 although I own quite a few. I may give it a try soon though.

[Clipped and Shorn]

With a microgroove 78, I don't think you would necessarily have to make any adjustments beside changing speed. But the point is well taken that there are not enough people out there who would bother about the 78s, however the 45 rpm 12" is pretty cool. You could probably get 3 tunes on a side if you pushed it, but in the dj world even one tune per side works. They get more fidelity, more volume, and it is easier to cue up with the one tune.

I decided against the 78, but I did explore the 12" 45 with one tune per side (mostly because I only had two tunes which warranted the attention), also did a 33 12" of the rest of the original album minus a longish track which didn't fit (will be included as bonus in CD). Looking through the microscope on the Scully was a revelation! (all this a vanity reissue of a 1986 New Age product (with a couple of Latin Jazz tracks worth preserving because of my friend the flutist among other things).

http://www.actmusic.com/act9213.htm

c7s

C&S

[LarryC]

78 microgrooves must have been rare and virtually experimental. "Microgroove" was probably coined at the dawn of LPs to distinguish the less than 1.0 thousandths of an inch stylus dimension (the tip radius) for LPs from the 2.8 to 3.0 thousandths inch radius 78 rpm styli -- over three times bigger. All but one of the websites on 78 rpm records I looked at made a pure distinction between the larger 78 and the smaller "microgroove" (45s and 33s) stylus.

The exception was http://users.telerama.com/~agp/faq.html. After urging 78 users to never play their 78s with a microgroove stylus, it said there was an exception: "If you happen across one of those special promotional vinyl 78s made after the era of the 78, such as the Dave Edmunds, Sundown Playboys, or Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, play it with your regular LP stylus at all times."

Intuitively, 78 rpm seems very fast and potentially destructive for the very small, higher-pressure LP stylus.

Larry

[Mallette]

I have a dedicated Empire 598 MkII with a Grado for 78's. I have about 400 78rpm recordings and listen to a lot of them. I have yet to hear a tranfer as good as listening to the originals. Everyone tries to reduce noise and they always seem to suck the life out of the music as well. I've often wondered just what a person can reissue with minimum or no copyright issues. There is SO much great music on 78's that will never be heard, or, in many cases, even preserved, unless it is re-issued. Need to check copyright laws or send a note to RIAA one of these days.

If I were re-issuing, I'd use the very best playback conditions and record precisely what is there, no attempts to "fix" it, then leave it to the purchaser to process via hard or software if they felt it necessary.

In my own case, I have a number of 78's that rival modern recordings in "realness" and "presense." One of them is a Benny Goodman recording from the 40's that was obviously cut direct to disc. It had never been played when I purchased it at the famous "Record Shop" for the cover price about 1975. Oscar Glickman and his partner had been in business since the 30's, and NEVER sent a record back. Anything they ordered that did not sell was still there, at the original price. They had a basement full of 78's.

Anyway, this one amazes people with it's sonics. Very little groove noise.

I've many others covering all kinds of music going back to WWI, and a few Edison Diamond Discs and cylinders as well...no way to play either of these.

I have also heard a modern 78, an interesting piece by Leon Redbone, sonically excellent except the artificial groove noise, pops and ticks they had put on it purposefully didn't sound real.

As to 45, I have a couple of Angel releases of David Munrow issued in that format. The main thing I hear from higher RPM's is a higher and higher "cieling" or sense of headroom. It is similar to the sense many report when comparing the CD version of a piece to either LP or SACD/DVD-A.

With an LP, it seems the music just barely "fits" on the disc, while 45 and 78 seem to do it effortlessly.

Crappy discription, but best I can do right now.

Anyway, the bottom line is that anyone who really loves general music should get into 78's. With jazz in particular, there is a VAST legacy of 78 rpm recordings either for the asking or next to nothing containing material you will never otherwise hear. Any Dual or similar turntable in good condition from the 60's on up that has 78 speed will do the job, and 78 cartridges or stylii are available for Grados, Stantons, and Shures, to name a few.

Dave

[Clipped and Shorn]

I just saw an historical example of a 12" 78rpm microgroove recording (for a recommended 1 mil stylus). I was studying it because I was considering the format. Just for fun I had lacquer reference masters of my own project in 33, 45, and 78. Sonically the 33 is great, the 45 is even greater, and the 78 is better yet, but I chose not to make masters of the 78 because A) 12" vinyl pressings might not lay completely flat at the edge (I couldn't afford to press it as 180gram because that company had a 1000 piece minimum and I was thinking of pressing 100. Also the two tunes I was featuring did not fit on a 10" 78. But for future possibilities ( eg. recording new material under 3 minutes) that would fit on a 78, I was wondering if there would be an audiophile market for such a thing. But I think not because few have 78 rpm on their high-end tables. So 45 rpm 12" is the way to go, that and the 33 rpm LP. I am on a fun learning curve with all of this and let me tell you looking through the microscope on the Sculley Lathe is a revelation!

C&S