above: HOT RECORDS!
Record Piracy
I read Robert Angus' article on record pi rates [December], with great interest, primarily because he managed to shed a little light on how and where Eli Oberstein made at least some of the records he was issuing on his Hit label during the Petrillo ban. Discographers had advanced all kinds of theories to explain this; chief among them were that he had recorded outside the country--in Canada or Mexico--or that he used talented nonunion amateurs.
The company apparently never issued any catalogs; at least, I've never heard of any. Several discographers (myself included) have tried to assemble such a catalog, but now that we've listed our own holdings, we are at a dead end. If any reader of this publication has large holdings of Varsity, Royale, Elite, or Hit records, I'd appreciate his getting in touch with me to advance the cause of discographic research.
George A. Blacker
48 Foote St.
Cheshire, Conn. 06410 USA
I have just read the saucy and amusing article on record pirates, and how charming and lighthearted it is. What I miss from this informative and well-written entertainment is any recognition of the fact that record pirates are ruthlessly ripping off the men and women who write and publish music. At the risk of shocking a man as charming and sophisticated as Mr. Angus, there is an old-fashioned word for this: stealing. I disapprove of stealing from any one, and I particularly disapprove of stealing from creators, no matter how great the desire for unavailable recordings of their creations.
I wonder how the author would feel if he had a painting on his wall and I went in and took it simply because no prints of this painting were available--or just because I wanted to take it to resell for a profit. I can not accept stealing from a bookstore, a grocery, the collection plate of a church, Tiffany's, or the pocket of a composer. What are composers and lyricists supposed to pay their rent with? By the way, I may want to go up to visit the Berkshires, where your offices are located, and since I do not have a car I am considering stealing one. After all, it would be more convenient than buying a bus ticket.
Walter Wager
Director of Public Relations, ASCAP
New York, N.Y.
Mr. Angus replies: As a member of ASCAP, I um very happy to have Mr. Wager and his associates looking out for my interests, and I can understand his point of view.
I did not mean to suggest in my article on music piracy that I necessarily approve of the practice. I did mean to suggest that there is more than one side to this argument and that, as a record collector, 1 have much to be grateful to the pirates for. There is a big difference, both morally and legally, be tween stealing an object like an automobile or a painting or money from a collection plate and reproducing or copying a work of art. When the work of art is readily available through normal channels to anyone who wishes to buy and a pirate makes copies for sale (as in the case of bootleg pop music tapes), the loss to the creator is real in dollars and cents. But when the work of art is not readily available (or may never have been available) commercially, the loss to the creator would seem much more difficult to demonstrate. This kind of piracy does not involve the removal of property from one person or place and its transfer to another. Nor in any of the cases I cited, I believe, was there an out-of-pocket loss to the composer.
In the case of out-of-print recordings, isn't it the owner of the rights who feels that it's not commercially worthwhile to reissue them who is affecting the earnings of the creator rather than the pirate who attempts an end run around the system? Until the pirate comes along, the former's decision is final, no matter how many collectors might want to purchase copies. The collector who supports all of this does so because, unlike Mr. Wager in the case of a trip to the Berkshires, he has no alternative. There is no bus available. Most collectors, I believe, would much rather deal with the legitimate authorities than with pirates. But when it comes to many collectors' items, the bus has long since ceased to run.
Choosing Components
"How I Choose a Component System" [December] has to be the worst and most misinforming drivel to appear in any audio magazine. I have no ill feeling toward HIGH-FIDELITY magazine. What irks me is the pure garbage chosen as audio systems.
Mr. Berger seems to have some sense, generally, but opts for a PAT-4 rather than a modified PAS-3X, which will blow away a PAT-4 any day. Mr. Radford-Bennett has the most sense of all the experts except for his choice of the Genesis II speakers.
Really! Anyone who is still fooling around with four-channel systems is an utter idiot! Messrs. Myers and Marsh have piddled away vast amounts for equipment that is slurred (Bose 901 and Marantz 240), highly colored in the midrange (KR-9940 and SQD 2020), and total junk when compared to systems available in the $3,000 price range.
Mr. Zwicker has been suckered into including an ambience simulator and an el-cheapo Sony TC-377 reel deck. If all the funds spent on ho-hum equipment and frivolities were applied to a few carefully chosen pieces, the sound attainable at $5,000 would be absolutely staggering.
Mr. Zide mentioned some very fine equipment--Mark Levinson, GAS, Revox, Lux--but has chosen in an asinine way. If you can't hear the difference between a DC-300A and Ampzilla, you're deafer than a doorknob! Also, the difference between "top-of-the-line models from any of the established manufacturers" is more than slight! It appears that the so-called audio experts are choosing units that are more flexible, have lower distortion, or have snob appeal, rather than selecting equipment that most closely reproduces a live musical experience.
Thom Jakowczyk, Thom Jakowczyk Audio Systems, Alta Loma, Calif.
It was with great interest that i read the re port on six experts' choices within three budgets. Having searched for some time for an ideal component system, I would like to suggest that there is a better system avail able at less cost than that of the systems suggested by your experts.
I have come to the conclusion that the best of today's highly developed receivers are on a par with separate components (preamp, amp, and tuner). Consequently, I purchased a Yamaha receiver, and I could not be more pleased.
I have heard most of the speakers your experts named, but the best ones I have heard were not even mentioned. They were the large McIntosh and Yamaha 1000 speakers, either of which was easily superior, personal taste aside, to the Bose 901 Series II, the Allison One, and AR-11 systems. I purchased the Yamahas because the enclosure was, for me, better designed and better suited my needs.
I have a Dual 1229Q turntable with a Shure V-15 Type III cartridge and a Sony TC-377 open-reel deck, and for $2,950 I have truly superb--nay, incredible--sound.
It is difficult for me to believe that your experts' $5,000 systems are audibly $2,000 better, just as it is to believe that their $3,000 systems are as good as this one.
David P. Robinson; New York, N.Y.
Obviously, some people have missed the main point of the article. The idea was to let you look over our experts' shoulders and see how they chose, not so much what they chose. Clearly some equipment had to he picked, but we considered that a secondary matter and still do.
Mr. Robinson's conclusions are undoubtedly based on some experience and probably work fine for him, but in audio equipment-and especially in loudspeakers there is no such thing as "personal taste aside." Whatever the merits of Mr. Jakowcyzk's arguments, as a dealer in audio equipment he can hardly claim to be nonpartisan. From where we sit, the basic difference is that our experts are being subjective and will admit it; Messrs. Robinson and Jakowczyk are being equally subjective and will not admit it.
I must offer my congratulations on Harry Zwicker's decision to use an audio digital delay unit in his $5,000 system. Since it is an amazing piece of digital technology, I was surprised that none of the other highly esteemed audiophiles who contributed to the article even considered such a device. I hope that audiophiles will recognize that an audio delay unit will soon become a necessity in any well-designed system.
Keith Warner; Cranston, R.I.
Flattery will get you nowhere, Mr. Warner; you missed the point of the article. The letter from Mr. Kranenburg that follows provides a useful corrective.
I read with interest "How I Choose a Component System." I am certain each one of us has at one time stood back, viewed and listened to our system, and wondered what other serious listeners would think of the setup.
As we know, it is impossible to logically conclude that there is but one ultimate high fidelity system that would appeal to every one of us. Nevertheless, it is personally re warding to learn that there are others who tend to think and reason as we do where choosing a system is concerned.
John N. Kranenburg; Fair Lawn, N.J.
Just to set the record straight, Harry Zwicker is the treasurer--not the president--of the Boston Audio Society. Jim Brinton [who also has written for HF] is the president. Readers who are interested may obtain membership information on the BAS by writing to the Boston Audio Society, P.O. Box 7, Kenmore Square Station, Boston, Mass. 02215.
Michael Riggs Cambridge, Mass.
Mr. Riggs addresses the Boston audio scene in detail in his feature article in this issue.
I would like to point out a serious error in Mr. Zide's article. The price listed for the Magnepan MG-I1 is the price per pair. The cost per speaker, which is the way the other models were listed, is $312.50, which makes it the least expensive by quite a margin. Mr. Zide chose his speakers because they were the least expensive, not realizing that the MG-Its were actually $375 less per pair.
M. S. Sanders
Magnepan, Inc.
White Bear Lake, Minn.
Mr. Zide did not select the Duntech speakers only because they were the least expensive, but also because they most nearly suited his taste.
We would like your readers to know that the price given for our DR-1 speakers in "Larry Zide Chooses a $5,000 System" was incorrect. The price of the DR-1 is $1,185 per speaker, not $895 as printed.
Joseph Alinsky RTR Industries; Canoga Park, Calif.
Four-Channel Sound
Congratulations on your excellent article on quad ["Four-Channel Sound Today," by Alfred Myers, November]. I have had four-channel sound since SQ came out and have been a quadrimaniac ever since. As a sales man in a stereo store, I can tell you from experience why quad has not taken off as fast as I and others had hoped it would: sales men! Many customers have told me that other salesmen have said that four-channel is too complicated or too expensive. That's rubbish! To check for myself, I went to most audio stores in my area and asked some simple questions about it. The results? Nearly all the salespeople I asked tried to change the subject or told me to forget it and stick with stereo.
Maybe someday we will have one quad record system, but until then there are a lot of people who could afford this exciting new medium but are turned off by sales people who don't know their CD-4 from a hole in the matrix! Meanwhile, I for one will just keep turning on people to the sound of the Seventies.
Pat Shea Waukegan, Ill.
I am sure I am as enthusiastic a booster of quadriphonic sound reproduction as Alfred Myers, at least judging from the tone of his article. But he seems to be letting his enthusiasm interfere with his perception of reality. He mentions that no record company that has moved to quadriphonics has since ceased issuing four-channel discs. Yet ABC Impulse, which at one time seemed com mitted to producing its entire catalog in the QS matrix system, has now returned to two-channel stereo engineering. The Warner/ Elektra / Asylum / Nonesuch / Atlantic / Reprise group and A&M, both of which chose the CD-4 system, have released no four-channel discs for months. And RCA's CD-4 productions have recently become annoyingly sparse.
To boot, a check of the SCHWANN catalog over the past year reveals that quadriphonic albums have been discontinued at two to three times the rate that new ones have been released. Other than Vox and Angel (and perhaps Columbia, if it actually institutes its single-inventory promise), the situation looks pretty dismal. Now that the hardware is finally being perfected, another software crisis seems to be upon us.
Larry Clifton Capron, Va.
CB Blues
I am afraid that I consider your answer to G.P. Gennaro concerning CB interference ["Letters," December] inadequate. It is, in deed, a sad state of affairs when all of us who love our music in the privacy of our own homes are forced to surrender this right to a "ten-four, good buddy" neighbor.
If Mr. Gennaro has neighbors suffering from this same invasion of privacy, I suggest that it quickly becomes the rights of one vs. the rights of many and that some thing needs to be done about it.
A minimum of ten families on my street are being plagued with just this situation, and we are going to take a stand. I have a petition going to our city council with six teen names from my street alone! I feel that your magazine should stand with us on this issue and not tell us that it is the CBer's right to virtually destroy our expensive stereo systems.
Stephen P. Kirkton; Columbus, Ohio
We didn't say we liked CB interference. We simply reported that, according to current federal law. a CB user is within his rights as long as he obeys all applicable regulations while operating his equipment. Obviously, laws are subject to change-although one must remember that CBers vote too. Petitioning your city council, which has no jurisdictional power in this area, is a waste of time. Your senators and representative are the ones to contact. If you want to know what to do while waiting for the law to change, our March 1976 issue contained an article by William Warriner on ways to eliminate broadcast interference.
May I refer Mr. Gennaro to the Radio Amateurs Handbook, p. 484 et seq. (especially p. 502) in the 1976 edition? This book should be available in most electronic stores. It has some excellent suggestions as to how to keep the signal out of the set, and anyone should be able to correct the problem with its guidance.
James B. Holder; West Monroe, La.
Dett on Disc
In his review of Philips' "American Piano Works" [December], Irving Lowens says that the music of Nathaniel Dett, whose In the Bottoms was under discussion, has not been recorded before. Not so! Percy Grainger-who, as your reviewer pointed out, championed Dett's music-long ago re corded some of the same music appearing on the Philips disc, in particular the in famous "Juba Dance" [the finale of In the Bottoms-Ed.]. Mr. Lowens has reservations about the playing of pianist Clive Lythgoe, but he need have none about Grainger, who was one of the great pianists of the early part of the century.
Your readers might be interested to know that tape transfers of most of Grainger's recordings are available at cost from the Gustafson Piano Library, Department of Music, Bishop's University, Lennoxville, Quebec, Canada.
Derek C. Oppen; Stanford, Calif.
Mr. Lowens didn't say that there were no previous recordings of Dett's music, only that he didn't recall any. Actually, In the Bottoms was favorably commented on by Alfred Frankenstein in his February 1971 review of Natalie Hinderas' recording of "Music by Black Composers," Desto DC 7102/3.
-------------
(High Fidelity, March 1977)
Also see: