Klarinet Archive - Posting 000425.txt from 1997/11

From: Richard Lahrson <tripspud@-----.net>
Subj: Re:Recording the clarinet
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 12:40:51 -0500

I have an older Revere-Wollensak reel to reel from about 1958 to 1960
that I got for free when someone was cleaning out their garage and
they had placed it on the street for trash reuse pickup. It's a two
speed but only the 7 and 1/2 inch works. For its time this was one
of few choices for the home recording market.
On another "lucky" day I bought about 75 5" reel to reel tapes
for $5. This old machine sits next to my computer and is in constant
use as a "notebook".
This old Wollensak uses tubes as it predates transistors. The
volumn control goes up to 11 instead of 10. The signal can be recorded
rather hot as even the old manufacturers seemed to indicate. The tube
design allows for a very pleasing roll off of the signal. This type
of roll off is not possible with transistor design which causes
a harsh clipping.
Modern studio recorders are mostly digital. Yet these studios
spent large amounts of money on proccessing equipment that either
uses tubes or digital proccessing to simulate tubes.
I'll even step out on a limb here and wager that even if you
were rich enough to take all the clarinets you wanted to audition
into a well equipped recording studio, you would learn very little
about the instruments. And why is this? The answer is simple. Listening
live is different than a recording of any quality. For example, when
I walk by on the street and hear music playing I, and I'm assuming
most other people, can determine whether the music is live or a recording.
This has to do with the directionality of the sound. But its got
to be more than this:
Recently I was watching some ballroom dancing on tv. They used
recordings. I made a mental comparison of this broadcast with an
earlier one I watched that used a live dance band. And I tell the
truth when I say that even over the tv the live band was way more
satisfying.
Rich Lahrson
tripspud@-----.net