That's right, I forgot about the red vinyl DV series of RCA classical records! I know quite a few labels pressed on vinyl for radio releases, RCA in particular, but I've never known where those fell in the timeline.
> From: cdh...@earthlink.net > To: phono-l@oldcrank.org > Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 22:31:19 -0500 > Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Really Vinyl? > > I also believe that RCA's pre-grooved discs were purely vinyl. I bought a > box of new ones a few years ago, and tried to make a recording off of the > sir on the RCA 381 phono combo I have. The result was, that there was a > recording on the disc (using the proper styli, of course), but since the > disc was hardened from age. I had to drive the slats out of that pichup > head to get a signal on the disc. > > The only way to get a decent disc recording would be to get some freshly > lacquered blank discs, or get one of the old disc recorders and cut a > master on the big wax cake, and .......let's not be silly. > I have several blank discs. I've tried to cut a new recording on one, but > the groove is so screechy, it's ridiculous to even try, and that's on a > Presto K-8! > > Anyway, the stories tell that, since shellac had been a critical material > during WW II, Victor and a few others began to resort to vinyl as a > substitute. Vinyl is cheaper that shellac. and made quiter surfaces, so RCA > pressed quite a few of their classical records on transparent red vinyl, > and called them "Red Seal Deluxe" and charged double the price of the > sheelac discs. It wasn't long after that that Dr. Goldmark (CBS) launched > his LP discs. > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Robert Wright <esrobe...@hotmail.com> > > To: Phono L <phono-l@oldcrank.org> > > Date: 11/20/2010 12:01:23 AM > > Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Really Vinyl? > > > > > > Actually, the Victor Home Recordings discs are straight up modern vinyl > in every perceivable way -- exactly as flexible and plasticky as today's > records. And those were what, 1929? Vitrolac, MGM's Metrolite, and other > branded fomulations were part vinyl, part shellac-type something-or-other, > and were certainly more flexible (less breakable) than shellac discs, but > they were still more like shellac than pure vinyl. Meanwhile, the V-Discs > from WWII (many of them but not all) were fully PVC like modern records. > Vinyl didn't become common until the LP in 1949 as far as I remember. > > > > > > > From: cdh...@earthlink.net > > > To: phono-l@oldcrank.org > > > Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 21:52:47 -0500 > > > Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Really Vinyl? > > > > > > I was surprised a few years ago to see that RCA used Vinyl on their LP > > > discs of the early thirties. In many places, the material for those > Program > > > Transcriptions was identified as "Victrolite" whatever that was > supposed to > > > have been. But, I have the RCA Victor dealer fact book from 1932, where > the > > > Long Playing records were anounced, and they said that the discs were > made > > > of "Vinylite". It's really interesting how vinyl plastics ahve been > around, > > > in one form or another. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Phono-L mailing list > > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org _______________________________________________ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
