Accidental stereo Elgar (Record Review 10/9/16)

[LeMartinPecheur]

Anyone listen to this (in stereo)? I was convinced, particularly when I tried listening on headphones.

Just a pity that there is no Elgar 'big work' where there are these duplicate takes off different mikes for all the 78rpm sides, so as to be able to create a complete stereo recording. But where it worked in the bits they played the sound opened up wonderfully.

One question that wasn't IIRC addressed at all: if there are these duplicate discs from so many of Elgar's sessions surely there must be some from other conductors. Has anybody had a look?

[Nick Armstrong]

Listened and was fascinated - but couldn't hear the difference on my DAB radio. Good idea re headphones, might have to have another listen.

Loved the brief snatch of Elgar humming along to his Cello Concerto...

Your last para. is intriguing... I wonder if the Elgar ones were preserved (by him) with especial care.

The photo of EE with his ghetto blaster referred to by the reviewers is here (for them as baint be twitterers... )

[Rosie55]

I tuned in just at the moment when Elgar hummed the cello concerto. I wondered if I was still asleep, and dreaming.
Much enjoyed the unexpected Dove exploration after too having raved about the Naxos song cycles CD (Patricia Bardon - that voice!) previously. Always a pleasure to hear Claire Booth and Toby Spence. The Magic Flutes dances were the most perfect music as the sun started to show itself here too.

[LeMartinPecheur]

Your last para. is intriguing... I wonder if the Elgar ones were preserved (by him) with especial care.

Cali: as I understand it there are several different things going on with (going into) this SOMM box.

Most of the new stuff is alternative takes, often those rejected for good reason by HMV. I'm afraid "EE sings his Cello concerto - accompanist B Harrison" would have been one of those These are the ones where EE's private library has coughed up the newly issued discoveries: presumably they were effectively test-pressings provided for him to choose what he thought was best for issue. (A slightly different case was the two different versions on the 2nd symphony's Rondo: the first one was actually issued commercially in the complete 78rpm set rec. 1/4/27. But HMV and I think EE were worried by its orchestral lapses and rumble so it was re-recorded on 15 July, and that was what purchasers got thereafter.)

There's also the private recording of BH and Princess Victoria playing the slow mov't of the cello concerto very intimately, a fine contrast and complement to the orchestral recording(s).

As I understand it the duplicate versions used for the stereo remasterings arose because somehow two very slightly different recordings of the same take were made, using 2 different microphones a few feet apart (actually not ideally separated for the best stereo definition, but hey they weren't to know!).

Presumably the idea was to get two 'identical' usable wax masters in case one got damaged?? Nobody seems too sure. In this case the different versions are I guess traceable by different matrix-numbers in the pressings, and I don't think EE's private copies are the source because HMV wouldn't have sent him two versions of what to them were identical recordings. Seems that in some cases commercial copies were pressed from both masters (because of wear?). And perhaps the reason that there are no 'stereo pairs' for some discs might just be that one wax master did indeed get damaged and binned(?).

No doubt the extensive notes in the Somm box will make much of this clear but I haven't seen them

I can't see any reason why these EE sessions should have been the only ones where two wax masters were generated. Tracing other examples should surely be just a matter of careful checks on matrix-numbers(?).

[seabright]

I didn't hear the Elgar review referred to above and have only just seen these comments. However, I hope no-one thinks there's anything new in all this "78rpm stereo" business as it was all discussed on Record Review back in the 1980s! Barry Fox explained that two Californian record collectors had found that certain 78s made by Duke Ellington, Leopold Stokowski, Serge Koussevitzky and Elgar sounded slightly different when they compared two copies of the same disc. In brief, as stated above, they concluded that for some sessions, two turntables were running, each with their own microphone, the second being a safety back-up to the first. There was also the theory that the engineers were experimenting with two different makes of microphone to see which was the best.

The matrix from the second turntable was given a different number and some pressings of them were issued, enabling these Californian collectors to play the two different takes and get a quasi-stereo feel out of the sound. Of course, it all depended on the position of the mikes in the studio. Anyway, you can hear the results on You Tube (link below). Also, Pristine Audio issued an "Accidental Stereo" CD of 78s made by Elgar, Stokowski and Koussevitzky (PASC 422) as well as an all-Elgar CD on Naxos which concluded with the same final "stereo" 78 of the "Cockaigne" Overture (8.111022).

I'd be interested to know what it was that was played on the Elgar review that was said to be in stereo. Meanwhile here is Barry Fox's talk, best heard over a stereo radio! ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ozxezwy-cjM