This is especially meaningful to me, because I am the one who hand made those brown wax recording blanks used in this demonstration. I am very honored to have participated from behind the scenes.
Spectacular work ! I would love to learn more about this and discuss how this technology can continue to be applied to contemporary classical music. May I write to you?
The recording phonograph looks to be an Edison "Triumph"; the playback phonograph looks like an Edison "Fireside". Before the molding process of duplication, a singer sang into 4 or 5 closely-placed phonographs; hence 4 copies were made, and a popular selection was repeated, perchance, many times. Four phonographs times 10 takes, thus yielded 40 copies. . . . . . And I must say, Piotr, your performance with Sondra was PHENOMENAL!!
Many years ago, I heard (the other) Gerald Moore (1899-1987) talking about his early career accompanying artists such as Peter Dawson during pre-electric recordings. He said that in order to be clearly heard , his piano had to be stripped down and modified so that it sounded “like a giant banjo”. If my memory serves me, he also mentioned the hard, wooden, reflective surfaces of the studio.
Now I can finally see how Caruso was greater than them all. The sound that came from his voice from this technology 100+ years ago was so much better sounding than Beczala's voice recorded from a similar machine I've always wondered why we compare today's technology to that of years ago. Finally, we we put our singers of today back in time .
Beczala does not sing with the same technique as the singers of that era, he doesn't have squillo which is very prominent on these old recordings. It is somewhat of useless experiment.
in my many endeavors in wax cylinder recording, I found that the split double horn technique works best if you have a small horn on a rubber pipe (speaking tube with a small brass horn) with a handle that the artist can use to sing in and a big horn connected to the same recorder via a Y split recording the piano or orchestra behind the singer, the singer will always sound loud yet the piano or orchestra sound equally loud though a little bit lower in volume with a single horn recording the accompaniment will always be obscured somewhat by the person in front of the horn making it sound far away in the post-1903 recordings they definitely used the split horn system as a standard and they would use 2 3 5 horns until electrical recording came in 1923 first and as a standard in 1925.
This is beautiful the Fidelity is fantastic exactly like an accounting disc! ( I've never heard a brown wax in person yet this is a great impression!) This is the only time I have ever heard original Edison tech work and sound pleasant! Other online demos fail somehow yet this was flawless besides the flutter which was a small issue. Thank you for preserving history this is a great interest to me!
I'm impressed how, from the male singer's comment, they could clearly see what effect different tones and volumes had had on the cylinder. I wonder if it had any effect on how they approach their singing?
This is a fascinating experiment! I had wondered why opera stars don't try it and let us have a better notion of how and how much the operatic voices were changed when they were recorded by this incipient recording technology. I know Birgit Nilsson made such an experiment - and the result was quite surprising IMO, though you could still definitely tell that voice was Nilsson's. With Beczala I feel it's the same thing: a lot is definitely lost, but the "core" sound is preserved. It's nice to see contemporary singers trying it, too.
I agree! I'd like to hear some of the greatest voices of our days, like Garanca, Harteros and Kaufmann, in this technology and then compare with the recordings of the great divas of the early 1900s.
Yes, one of my biggest doubts about it all is whether in fact this primitive technology made people sound much worse than they were or, even if unwillingly, its limitations ended up making us more "forgiving" of their sound and also didn't capture all the subtler imperfections and flaws of the singing that are now even excessively amplified by the recording mikes of our days (they record so close that we even hear the breath of singers!), giving us this "golden age" sound. I'd like to hear more of that to have a firmer opinion on this point. ;-)
Homoclassicus Very good point. I do think the medium definitely affected the capturing dynamics and overtones and probably hid many "flaws". It is why it is said that microphones don't lie. About the Nilsson recording, I haven't heard it but no one is said to have been happy with the results, not leadt the soprano herself.
I wonder if there'd be some way to compare the wax sound with the modern-recorded sound and feed it to a computer to remaster the old wax recordings...
Fascinating. They both sound more 'smooth' and similar in tone to the old recordings as I remember them (it's been a while since I was really i to early recorded singing)..Susanna - I'm guessing - was exaggerating her dynamic contrasts to see what would register on the wax. I'd like to hear more singers try this! It's a more organic sound than you get with digital recording, for sure.
Although interesting, attempts to have contemporary singers recorded acoustically on Edison cylinders is not the same as having them recorded on acoustical disc equipment. A better way to hear what was lost to the acoustical process is to listen to the acoustical and electrical discs of Rosa Ponselle, Claudia Muzio, Toti Dal Monte, Feodor Chaliapin, Riccardo Stracciari, Giovanni Martinelli, Beniamino Gigli, Giacomo Lauri-Volpi and others who were in their primes when they recorded acoustically in the early-1920s and electrically after 1925.
They’re all about preservation they wouldn’t shave originals, im sure ive heard them say that there’s a guy that knows the formula and makes them and supplies them
I wonder if doing this enough times would allow an AI to be trained to reverse the fidelity loss of early recordings and thus make them sound like new.
Whatever is being used to record this video, please use it for the HD broadcast! The current HD sound technology takes away so much qualities and texture of the voices away and everyone sounds like the same. There is no colour, no "thickness", no texture of the voices at all with the HD audio recording.That is not what we hear at the house live. I hope it can be corrected.
You see, it’s just a piano and a solo standing singer here. If you’ve ever tried, you would understand, it’s much harder to record an opera, with orchestra spanning a larger space and multiple singers singing together and moving around. That’s to say, MET HD can do better, though using whatever used for the video is not a solution at all.
Earliest recordings always used piano accompaniment for the singer. Though band records were also popular. With band numbers, a whole bay of up to a dozen recording phonographs were used.
01:40 Piotr trying to blame the recording equipment for his increasingly labored and wobbly singing. Nice! No, P. That's what you get when you distend the jaw and support wrong.
Everything he sings has a blatant wobble. This is objective fact. Vibrato speed is measurable. Compare his to that of, say....Caruso, Wunderlich, Björling, Lemeshev, Elwes, Villabella, Jobin, Corelli... @@Luancalfa
Lollll he sounds nothing like Caruso. Just compare the difference and you hear how less smooth and open and colorful and stuck the voice is. It doesn’t flow
This is especially meaningful to me, because I am the one who hand made those brown wax recording blanks used in this demonstration.
I am very honored to have participated from behind the scenes.
Spectacular work ! I would love to learn more about this and discuss how this technology can continue to be applied to contemporary classical music. May I write to you?
Caruso like this ❤️
The recording phonograph looks to be an Edison "Triumph"; the playback phonograph looks like an Edison "Fireside". Before the molding process of duplication, a singer sang into 4 or 5 closely-placed phonographs; hence 4 copies were made, and a popular selection was repeated, perchance, many times. Four phonographs times 10 takes, thus yielded 40 copies. . . . . . And I must say, Piotr, your performance with Sondra was PHENOMENAL!!
Many years ago, I heard (the other) Gerald Moore (1899-1987) talking about his early career accompanying artists such as Peter Dawson during pre-electric recordings. He said that in order to be clearly heard , his piano had to be stripped down and modified so that it sounded “like a giant banjo”. If my memory serves me, he also mentioned the hard, wooden, reflective surfaces of the studio.
Interesting fact!
Now I can finally see how Caruso was greater than them all. The sound that came from his voice from this technology 100+ years ago was so much better sounding than Beczala's voice recorded from a similar machine I've always wondered why we compare today's technology to that of years ago. Finally, we we put our singers of today back in time .
Beczala does not sing with the same technique as the singers of that era, he doesn't have squillo which is very prominent on these old recordings. It is somewhat of useless experiment.
in my many endeavors in wax cylinder recording, I found that the split double horn technique works best if you have a small horn on a rubber pipe (speaking tube with a small brass horn) with a handle that the artist can use to sing in and a big horn connected to the same recorder via a Y split recording the piano or orchestra behind the singer, the singer will always sound loud yet the piano or orchestra sound equally loud though a little bit lower in volume with a single horn recording the accompaniment will always be obscured somewhat by the person in front of the horn making it sound far away in the post-1903 recordings they definitely used the split horn system as a standard and they would use 2 3 5 horns until electrical recording came in 1923 first and as a standard in 1925.
I bet when this technology was first demonstrated everybody in the room must have been absolutely gobsmacked ! !
What a thrilling experiment this is! :D
This is beautiful the Fidelity is fantastic exactly like an accounting disc! ( I've never heard a brown wax in person yet this is a great impression!) This is the only time I have ever heard original Edison tech work and sound pleasant! Other online demos fail somehow yet this was flawless besides the flutter which was a small issue. Thank you for preserving history this is a great interest to me!
I'm impressed how, from the male singer's comment, they could clearly see what effect different tones and volumes had had on the cylinder. I wonder if it had any effect on how they approach their singing?
Singing for an acoustic phonograph was best with a modified technique, as opposed to singing on stage, for the audience.
This is a fascinating experiment! I had wondered why opera stars don't try it and let us have a better notion of how and how much the operatic voices were changed when they were recorded by this incipient recording technology. I know Birgit Nilsson made such an experiment - and the result was quite surprising IMO, though you could still definitely tell that voice was Nilsson's. With Beczala I feel it's the same thing: a lot is definitely lost, but the "core" sound is preserved. It's nice to see contemporary singers trying it, too.
Homoclassicus tbh, I think it would be awesome or at least interesting to record an entire album with this method!
I agree! I'd like to hear some of the greatest voices of our days, like Garanca, Harteros and Kaufmann, in this technology and then compare with the recordings of the great divas of the early 1900s.
Homoclassicus I have also wondered for a long time why this wasn't done at all. Beczala sounds like the golden age through the medium.
Yes, one of my biggest doubts about it all is whether in fact this primitive technology made people sound much worse than they were or, even if unwillingly, its limitations ended up making us more "forgiving" of their sound and also didn't capture all the subtler imperfections and flaws of the singing that are now even excessively amplified by the recording mikes of our days (they record so close that we even hear the breath of singers!), giving us this "golden age" sound. I'd like to hear more of that to have a firmer opinion on this point. ;-)
Homoclassicus Very good point. I do think the medium definitely affected the capturing dynamics and overtones and probably hid many "flaws". It is why it is said that microphones don't lie. About the Nilsson recording, I haven't heard it but no one is said to have been happy with the results, not leadt the soprano herself.
It caught and clearly reproduced Susanna's trill on the last word!
So amazing!!! Thank You
I wonder if there'd be some way to compare the wax sound with the modern-recorded sound and feed it to a computer to remaster the old wax recordings...
Beautiful✨
Livin like it’s 1899
I wonder if a collection of wax & digital pairs could be used to train AI to better restore the sound from vintage wax cyninders
yes
Fascinating. They both sound more 'smooth' and similar in tone to the old recordings as I remember them (it's been a while since I was really i to early recorded singing)..Susanna - I'm guessing - was exaggerating her dynamic contrasts to see what would register on the wax. I'd like to hear more singers try this! It's a more organic sound than you get with digital recording, for sure.
Пётр, как всегда, вы на высоте! Ждём вас в Москве.
I remember a story of them doing this with Birgit Nilsson and maybe two others in the late 70s or early 80s. People couldn't identify the singer!
Glorious!!!!!
Although interesting, attempts to have contemporary singers recorded acoustically on Edison cylinders is not the same as having them recorded on acoustical disc equipment. A better way to hear what was lost to the acoustical process is to listen to the acoustical and electrical discs of Rosa Ponselle, Claudia Muzio, Toti Dal Monte, Feodor Chaliapin, Riccardo Stracciari, Giovanni Martinelli, Beniamino Gigli, Giacomo Lauri-Volpi and others who were in their primes when they recorded acoustically in the early-1920s and electrically after 1925.
Jim Drake I agree... those wax cylinders can’t be trusted.
A very interesting session - well adjusted machines, and first rate musicians. May I ask if the blanks were shaved originals or were they new ones?
They’re all about preservation they wouldn’t shave originals, im sure ive heard them say that there’s a guy that knows the formula and makes them and supplies them
I wonder if doing this enough times would allow an AI to be trained to reverse the fidelity loss of early recordings and thus make them sound like new.
Whatever is being used to record this video, please use it for the HD broadcast! The current HD sound technology takes away so much qualities and texture of the voices away and everyone sounds like the same. There is no colour, no "thickness", no texture of the voices at all with the HD audio recording.That is not what we hear at the house live. I hope it can be corrected.
You see, it’s just a piano and a solo standing singer here. If you’ve ever tried, you would understand, it’s much harder to record an opera, with orchestra spanning a larger space and multiple singers singing together and moving around. That’s to say, MET HD can do better, though using whatever used for the video is not a solution at all.
Fantasztikus!!!!!
Should do more of these kind of recordings. Besides using the piano, include the Stroh Violin
Earliest recordings always used piano accompaniment for the singer. Though band records were also popular. With band numbers, a whole bay of up to a dozen recording phonographs were used.
Good to hear Piotr!
Wow
sounds better than on android microphones
🤓📱🍏
Beautiful! What aria is the soprano singing?
Ricardo Guerrero The conclusion to Fiordiligi’s aria “Per pietà” (“A chi mai mancò di fede”) from “Così fan tutte”
I like the accompanist's name. Hint: hide his middle name, and you'll see what I mean.
I was thinking: damn, he plays really well for a dead guy!
01:40 Piotr trying to blame the recording equipment for his increasingly labored and wobbly singing. Nice!
No, P. That's what you get when you distend the jaw and support wrong.
You didn't say too much but all that you said was bullshit!!!!
Wobble???? Where??? Please turn on your hearing aids sir!
Luiz Antonio Caldeira Falci it‘s a small wobble, but still a wobble
Everything he sings has a blatant wobble. This is objective fact. Vibrato speed is measurable. Compare his to that of, say....Caruso, Wunderlich, Björling, Lemeshev, Elwes, Villabella, Jobin, Corelli... @@Luancalfa
so...the only thing we like about the old-school singers is the low fidelity?
I thought I was listening to the Placido!
magnificent. i thought for a second that it was maria callas in the recording of the female 2:48
Piotr....Be still my beating heart!!💕💕
Hope this is enlightening to him to he should find a bel canto teacher and help him find fluidity, delicacy, the center of pitch, lose the wobble. Etc
My gosh that tenors old school handsome! 😍
Blue ray :-))))))
hahaha, both wobbling like masters and no equalized register changes.
contraltissima wobble??? Where?? On the wax you mean?
they are both terrible although he's better. she's a total mess. wax cylinders expose them. there is no mercy.
What's terrible about them
Haha, agree. I can’t hide anything from wax cylinders
Now record some hip-hop music snd see how it sounds.
Lollll he sounds nothing like Caruso. Just compare the difference and you hear how less smooth and open and colorful and stuck the voice is. It doesn’t flow
Nah
yeah and his vibrato is really wobbly
The gurl sounded like the last castrato ahhahaha Moreschi...
Nop
😂
Stars? You must be kidding. 31K + 3K on FB. My karaoke auntie not far behind.