------------------------------
The Old-Time Radio Digest!
Volume 2001 : Issue 353
A Part of the [removed]!
ISSN: 1533-9289
Today's Topics:
Who killed OTR? [ "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@attorneyro ]
BBC Goon Show [ garcher@[removed] ]
"S" The Way It Is ... [ "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@ ]
TV Growth in the [removed] After WW II [ "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@ ]
Junk [ "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@ ]
Radio/tv signals in the universe? [ Jer51473@[removed] ]
Re: dead tapes [ Ga6string@[removed] ]
Re: Tape Failure [ Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed]; ]
Christmas Episodes [ "Jeff G" <jeffg@[removed]; ]
Tape,Cassettes, CD's, Etc. [ "jsouthard" <jsouthard@[removed]; ]
Looking for other collectors [ elliot s ferber <otrcollector@juno. ]
Re: CDs vs tape [ Fred Berney <berney@[removed]; ]
TV vs. OTR [ "David Phaneuf" <otr_fan@[removed]; ]
Buck Rogers sound effects [ "David Phaneuf" <otr_fan@[removed]; ]
mp3 quality (or lack of quality) [ Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed]; ]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 11:11:49 -0500
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Who killed OTR?
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 10:44:20 -0500
From: Udmacon@[removed]
I was eleven years old when dad had delivered to our Queens apartment a
brand spanking new 12 inch Muntz TV.
That was about what happened to us. I was about to start kindergarden when my parents bought
our first TV -- also a 12-inch Muntz. Before they got the TV, my parents used to listen to radio
frequently. After they got the TV, they didn't listen in the evening any more. Radio became the
way we listened to the morning news and weather while having breakfast. There was also a local
Sunday morning children's show that we continued to listen to. There was nothing on TV at that
hour, and I was already in the habit of listening to Children's Playhouse on WHDH.
A radio was also put in my room when I was home sick from school, and I heard a number of
programs then. The TV was a large piece of furniture, which stayed in the livingroom. Since I
had to stay in bed when I was sick, the TV was turned loud, so that I could hear Howdy Doody.
But otherwise, I heard the radio.
A few years later, I got a radio of my own in my room and began to discover what was left of
OTR. I discovered the Howdy Doody radio show, Jack Benny, the radio versions of the Lone
Ranger and Space Patrol, and Big Jon and Sparkie.
I watched as local stations gradually stopped carrying my favorite network shows. I remember
when the local station blanked the first half-hour of Big Jon and Sparkie -- which was the best
part of the show, since it contained the long-running serial "General Comet of the Universe
Patrol." I didn't know why this was happening, but it was clear what was happening. Elizabeth's
explanation is really the first I've ever seen of why it was happening.
Seems to me the radio networks committed suicide. One would think they must have realized
that decreased affiliate payments would mean decreased clearance of network programs. But
apparently the decision was made to develop television at the expense of network radio. Not
only were affiliate payments decreased, but so was advertizing and other resources.
There's one thing I don't understand about this explanation, though. I can understand how NBC,
CBS, and ABC would have starved their radio networks to divert money to television. But what
about Mutual? It didn't have television to take resources away. So it was more than just
television development that starved radio. It was also the phenomenon that I noticed at age 4
1/2. When a family got a TV set, they stopped most of their radio listening.
Radio could have fought back with better promotion. People still might have listened to radio if
there was something interesting that wasn't on television. That was proven in the mid-1960s,
when radio briefly regained its former glory, as America tuned in to listen to the Clay-Liston fight,
which wasn't on TV. But radio didn't bother to promote itself that way. Instead, it changed to a
music and news medium, and it survived that way.
A. Joseph Ross, [removed] [removed]
15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@[removed]
Boston, MA 02108-2503 [removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 11:12:06 -0500
From: garcher@[removed]
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: BBC Goon Show
Where would I find on air copies of The Goon Show that the BBC produced in
the 1950's and were replayed here in the DC area (WETA) on Sundays in the
1960's?
This was a comedy program that was staffed by Peter Sellars, Spike
Milligan and many other British comedians. Its sound effects and images
were virtually surrealistic and humor completely side-splitting.
George Archer
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 13:24:40 -0500
From: "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: "S" The Way It Is ...
Craig Wichman asks,
I assume the "S" in OSR means "sounding"?
No, the "S" stands for "Style." The basic idea is to develop new shows
that are written and constructed like OTR shows, but on modern storylines
(save, of course for historical dramas). I firmly believe that there is
a place for OSR, particularly in the 15-minute serial format. And that's
at drive time (rush hour), particularly in the afternoon. Folk stuck in
their cars would probably appreciate the break from music and call-in
talk shows.
Stephen A. Kallis, Jr.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 13:23:39 -0500
From: "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: TV Growth in the [removed] After WW II
The renowned Elizabeth McLeod, commenting on the idea that "early" TV
emerged in the US because of the country's industrial base, notes,
I think that in the immediate postwar era you'd be right about this --
but don't forget that Great Britain was far ahead of the US in television
development prior to the war.
True enough. Nor do I believe that was the primary reason. IMHO, and
having lived back then, the reason TV took off was because it seemed a
part of the future to the average citizen, and like the view of atomic
energy at the time, seemed to be nothing but a Good Thing. It was mainly
psychological. In those days, we were living in Exciting Times, and TV
was part of the excitement. That this might impact radio in the period
was something that, at least I, didn't consider.
Stephen A. Kallis, Jr.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 13:24:25 -0500
From: "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Junk
Rodney W. Bowcock Jr., speaking of quality presentations, notes,
As a 22 year old male, I can assure you that 99% of our TV, Radio,
Films and Comics produced during my generation are not worthy for human
consumption.
Well, "human consumption" is a bit steep, but it's worth noting that
there is -- and was -- an awful lot of substandard stuff. In the
pretelevision years, the only analogous medium was the motion picture,
and a lot of that was drek. One of the reasons movie serials
proliferated for a while was that it provided a means to induce people to
visit their theaters on a weekly basis, even if the feature was pretty
lame. To a lesser extent, some of the weaker OTR shows were in serial
format, IMHO, to induce people to listen in again to see how things would
come out, even if the show wasn't an instant grabber.
But it's worth reiterating that not everyone has the same tastes. Not
everyone listened to The Adventures of Superman; others listened to Jack
Armstrong, the All-American Boy. Although I would have considered it
inconceivable as I was growing up, some people were listening to
something other than Captain Midnight. That there were multiple networks
attests to the fact that some people's treasures were other people's
junk.
Stephen A. Kallis, Jr.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 15:09:33 -0500
From: Jer51473@[removed]
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Radio/tv signals in the universe?
I seem to recall that some years ago there were reports or claims that
signals had been picked up of programs that were from years past that were
still moving in the universe and it may be that signals never stop traveling.
Does anyone have any info or theories about this or heard of such?
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:38:25 -0500
From: Ga6string@[removed]
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Re: dead tapes
Hi all,
My only experience with magnetic tapes losing its content came in the early
'80s, when I recorded a few things on Memorex cassette tapes (which featured
"MRX3 oxide," as I recall!). Within a few years those tapes were virtually
blank. Amazing. I've never had any experience like it, in my 20 years as a
musician, music fan, and OTR fan. I have TDK and Maxell cassettes from that
era that sound as good, or almost as good, as ever.
Bryan Powell
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:47:54 -0500
From: Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Re: Tape Failure
From: Henry Howard <hhoward@[removed];
Michael Biel says
A LARGE percentage of tapes--including the highest grades--made
from the mid 70s thru the early 90s have failed.
I am aware of no such massive "failure".
It is true that many many tapes using a new backing treatment
by Ampex and especially 3M developed what is known as
sticky tape syndrome, but if properly baked they definitely
were salvageable. ... Digital formats on the other hand either
work or don't. The don't work I would call a failure. The sticky
tape I would call a major inconvenience.
Actually we are dealing here with two sets of terminology, one being
what the archival and broadcasting industries use and the other being
your own personal definitions. I am using the terms that have become
the accepted "official" terms in the archival community. When the media
doesn't work as it should and has to be replaced--but the recording can
be recovered--that is a "failure" of the media (in this case, magnetic
tape.) If the recording cannot be recovered (as in your digital
example), that is "irreversible failure."
The archives and the broadcasters have to budget for the replacement of
items such as recording tape because they have to be replaced if they
have failed. Because baking is only a temporary fix--the tapes soon
again become unplayable--the recordings have to be re-recorded onto a
new medium. That is the official archival definition of failure.
Because there is an assumption that nothing is forever, re-recording
onto new media ("migration" is the term used by archives) is expected
and built into future planning. But archives throughout the world have
been shocked (and outraged) that there has been such a massive PREMATURE
failure of open-reel recording tape. (Archives have never considered
cassettes to be of archival quality and have never used them.) It was
not expected that open reel tapes would have to be migrated onto new
media for perhaps another 50 years. I have attended many conferences
that have discussed this matter. This has thrown all of their planning
and budgets out of whack because this tape has to be replaced but they
do not want to replace this failed medium with the same thing.
One of the themes in these archival conferences between the mid 1980s
until the mid 1990s was that digital formats were not considered
archival because of the all-or-nothing situation that you described.
When the previously trustworthy open reel tapes started to fail in huge
quantities, we had to look to digital media that have safeguards to
protect against irreversible failure. The systems they are developing
have never entered into any discussions on this OTR-D forum because they
are far more advanced than things like CD-R, DVD-R, mini-disc, R-DAT,
MP3, etc etc. The archival community are working on Mass Storage
devices that can store tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of
hours of recordings with automated self-diagnosis that will
automatically re-migrate the recordings whenever there is an increase
in digital errors. Some of the European national broadcasters and
archives are already introducing on pilot programs. These systems can
also store "metadata" which is the indexing information of the recording
along with the recording. In addition to being able to call up the
sound itself, all of the cataloguing data can also be called up. This
can include all printed materials such as scripts, scans of the original
labels and artwork, technical data concerning the settings used when it
was recorded or re-recorded, etc. etc.
The sticky shed and vinegar syndromes were the wake-up calls. I well
remember all of the arguments against digital as digital media were
first introduced at our archival conferences. Boy, were we stubborn!
But now the archival community is firmly looking to the 22nd century and
is about to leave all of you (and myself) in the dust. Hopefully there
will be smaller and affordable systems for us which will result from the
millions of dollars of research that are entering into this endeavor.
In the meantime, the maintenance of our original masters in the best
possible (non data-reduced) formats will be essential so that there WILL
be an archive of recordings to be saved in this new generation of
media.
Michael Biel mbiel@[removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 17:01:12 -0500
From: "Jeff G" <jeffg@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Christmas Episodes
Hi all,
I tried this a little earlier with no success, but now that I've broadened my
search I'm hoping someone can help me;
I'm looking for crisp, good-sounding copies of Christmas episodes from the
following series ON AUDIO CASSETTE, not Mp3. (simply because its for a friend
who cant use that format; this is also why I need good quality sound).
Aldrich Family
Fred Allen
Bergen & McCarthy
and any adaption of A Christmas Carol
Thanks to anyone that can [removed] We'll make a trade of it.
jeff
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:27:25 -0500
From: "jsouthard" <jsouthard@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Tape,Cassettes, CD's, Etc.
I have found the discussion of OTR formats and agree with most of what has
been said. I have been collecting OTR since 1960's and have boxes of reel to
reel tape, cassettes, phonograph records, and now CDs in MP3. I have a
problem with Reel to Reel tape. My Webcor tape recorder is too old to be
fixed (say the local repairmen) and where can you find a reel to reel tape
recorder or player the plays tapes at the slow speed they were recorded?
John Southard
jsouthard@[removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:27:40 -0500
From: elliot s ferber <otrcollector@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Looking for other collectors
If you live in Palm Beach or Broward County, Florida and would like to
join a small group for a monthly get together please contact me. We meet
once a month for an informal chat about OTR and related subjects. If you
are a collector or were involved in radio or just interested in OTR we
would like to meet you.
Elliot
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:28:12 -0500
From: Fred Berney <berney@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Re: CDs vs tape
For those of you that stopped by our table in New Jersey and picked up one
of our CD catalogs, take a look at the short article I wrote on the CD issue.
Now, my very short thoughts on this subject. Why do I promote digital
recording? Because, if the first transfer is done correctly, all of the
future generations will sound the same.
If that could be said of tape then I would probably side with those who
talk about tape.
Notice that I said "transferred correctly". GIGO as the computer people use
to say. But, after trading with dozens of collectors for about 30 years, I
have found that some people know how to make a good recording and some
don't. And since I never knew the original source material, I had no way of
knowing if what I got from another collector, sounded the same on their end
as it did on mine.
But, even if everyone was using professional recorders at 7 1/2 ips, full
track, with properly aligned heads and clean heads and good tape, after the
10th generation, the sound would start to deteriorate. Maybe even sooner.
If I create an audio CD correctly and it goes through everyone on this list
(each person keeping the copy he gets and making a disc copy and sending
that on) the last person to get the disc will be hearing the same sound
quality that I have on the original CD.
That is why I am for a digital format.
Fred
For the best in Old Time Radio Shows [removed]
New e-commerce page [removed]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:28:48 -0500
From: "David Phaneuf" <otr_fan@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: TV vs. OTR
The much discussed question on why OTR faded from the scene and TV prevailed
reminds me of a conversation I had with my mum a few years back as I
expressed my interest in OTR.
Born in 1933 she grew up in the golden age of OTR, and to hear her imitation
of the Shadow "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow
knows. Heheheheheheh" is downright [removed] not because it resembles
the Shadow in the least, but because it is so absolutely awful! ([removed]
sorry mom!) But when I was growing up, the only radio we listened to was
music radio. Other than that, the medium of choice was TV for entertainment.
How shocked I was to learn that OTR actually continued on into the 60's! All
I ever knew was TV (and music radio). Oh, in some nostalgic moment, Mumsy
would tell me about life "back then" when she was a child. "What!?!? no
picture???? Just sound???? How could you stand that????" was my inevitable
reply.
Later, after I discovered the joy of OTR, she was never interested in sharing
my joy (at least until I dragged her along to the Cincinnati OTR convention).
When I asked her why, she just simply replied "because I had enough of it
when I was a child, TV is so much better."
Well, I suspect that for many of that era, TV was so much better. "Greed" or
the almighty dollar may have been a factor. Sponsorship, too, may have been
a factor. But I suspect it was not so much these or anything else, but the
fact that TV is what people wanted. As someone said, the lure of sound AND
picture was irresistable, no matter how good the quality of radio had become,
or how poor the quality of some of TV's early programming may have been.
Just my humble opinion.
Oh [removed] thanks for all of you not pointing out my error in a previous post,
calling it "skip band" instead of "skip wave." See what happens when you
don't get enough sleep? hehe
Dave Phaneuf
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:30:01 -0500
From: "David Phaneuf" <otr_fan@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Buck Rogers sound effects
---Tom Mason wrote:
Talking to an old radio audio engineer, who had worked the original
Buck Rogers radio shows in NY, I was amazed to find out that the sound
of Buck's rocket ship was actually the recorded sound of a flushing toilet
in the cavernous marble walled restroom at ABC radio headquarters.
Awwwww, [removed] did you have to tell us that??? Now how can I ever hear
another Buck Rogers episode without picturing our hero getting flushed
down into the NY sewer system? LOL
Dave Phaneuf
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 09:15:38 -0500
From: Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: mp3 quality (or lack of quality)
From: JBeck57143@[removed]
Some of the shows might sound better on regular CD or cassette,
but a lot of the mp3s I've heard sound so good I can't imagine
the quality being that much better on CD and cassette.
I don't know how experienced you are with original sources, but a lot of
OTR collectors are very tolerant of what I would consider lousy sound
quality because they haven't heard how the original recordings actually
sounded.
Maybe the loss of quality due to compression is more of an issue
with recordings that don't sound very good to begin with. A lot
of the Easy Aces shows I have in mp3 format don't sound very good
--on some of them it's hard to make out what's being said. Even
if the quality isn't much better on CD and cassette, maybe it's
at least easier to make out what's being said. Jim Beck
Almost all of the Easy Aces programs originated from discs used for
syndication of the program, and even the early ones from the 1930s were
fine recordings done by RCA Victor. If you have any programs from this
series that sound bad it is because either they were poorly transferred
from the magnificent sounding original discs or else what you have are
copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies etc
etc etc. Take a great recording and make an mp3 of it and there will be
noticeable loss. Take an average recording and make an mp3 of it and
you might not notice the difference. Take a lousy multigenerational
recording and make an mp3 of it and it will probably be worthless. A
copy can be no better than its source
Michael Biel mbiel@[removed]
--------------------------------
End of [removed] Digest V2001 Issue #353
*********************************************
Copyright [removed] Communications, York, PA; All Rights Reserved,
including republication in any form.
If you enjoy this list, please consider financially supporting it:
[removed]
For Help: [removed]@[removed]
To Unsubscribe: [removed]@[removed]
For Help with the Archive Server, send the command ARCHIVE HELP
in the SUBJECT of a message to [removed]@[removed]
To contact the listmaster, mail to listmaster@[removed]
To Send Mail to the list, simply send to [removed]@[removed]