August 2024 – hello…
I just realised I’ve not posted anything for a while. There’s an understatement. Can’t have me losing ‘engagement’ with the algos, can we? Whatever that is/they are. I could post this on my FB group but I really need to make it look like I’m not asleep on here. Quite the opposite in fact, I’m at bursting point with the workload yet again. Long may it continue.
Anyway, I was thinking about how the technical aspects of microgroove records have become something of an obsession for me, since I started doing all this. Having bought and played thousands of records over my lifetime, I sort of understood how it all basically worked, but I had no idea just how difficult it was/is to create something that sounds decent and plays properly, and how much intricate work goes into that piece of plastic which you listen to twice and then forget about.
I cut a few 7″s earlier this week for a very satisfied customer indeed (modesty prevents me from quoting his feedback, but suffice to say he feels they were a lot better than the ones he’d had done elsewhere of the same tracks previously, so that’ll do me nicely) and to be honest it was a bit of a squeeze. Two five minute tracks with pronounced beats and a fair bit of low end on them, one for each side. Keeping a decent overall volume without losing too much bass at 45rpm on a seven inch is a tricky act, because there isn’t very much space to fit it all in, if you’re sticking to the technical standards laid down – for very good reasons – a million years ago by the RIAA. Example: keeping the inner concentric (lock) groove where it’s supposed to be, 98.4mm from the centre of the disc. Going past that point can cause problems on some record players, aside from the compromised sound due to dimensional losses and increasing tracking angle error, which will affect *all* of them. Some auto units will reject the disc before the end of the audio, some will cut the motor, sometimes the arm will be physically unable to swing in any further (Soundburger owners, take note). If you’re cutting a novelty 5″ disc or whatever then obviously the rules don’t really apply so much, but for a ‘proper’ record I feel it’s best to stick to them.
As a result, one of the things I’ve been noticing on older records – cut before the days of super sophisticated lathes with pitch computers, and then Direct Metal Mastering which can pack grooves even more tightly together – is how much space there is (or isn’t) between the end of the audio and the lock groove. Going by the aforementioned standards sheet for the 7″, the last ‘recorded groove’ should be at 108mm from the disc centre, giving 10mm of run-out area. On a track which is up to around 3 minutes long, it’s easy to stick to this and get a nice ‘hot’ (ahem) level with full range. Past 3 minutes, you start to run into problems, and certain things may have to be compromised.
So, in the pop world as songs started getting longer but overall volume was still important for jukebox play and whatnot, people started to push things a bit and eat away into that 10mm area. It’s not uncommon to find 7″s from the late ’60s and ’70s with 5-6mm or so ‘deadwax’, sometimes even less, as the cutter strove to make it just that little bit louder without cutting the bottom end away. And the more they got away with it, the more they pushed it, either for length or volume or both. Therefore I’ve been examining dozens upon dozens of 7″s, just to see how close to the wind they rode. I found a record recently (cut and pressed in Spain) which was only just over 3 minutes long, but cut with a peak level of nearly +12db for maximum sonic impact at discotheques, and barely 3mm of space to spare before the end. The identity of this particular hot stamper club banger? Erm…