G.I. Jukebox 1938-1946 - surprisingly good comp

Message

anton · #1 Post by **anton** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 1:13 pm

A 5-cd compilation available for download on Amazon, E-music, Rhapsody, etc. It looks like your average gas station swing collection, but it is surprisingly good! It only contains transcription recordings (at least from what I can hear - correct me if i'm wrong), many "new" versions of well known songs, and the sound is OK. Worth checking out.

Haydn · #2 Post by **Haydn** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:07 pm

You mean this one ...

http://www.amazon.com/G-I-Jukebox-Origi ... B0018N1B9W

Yes, I liked this too. Track 11 is a nice version of 'No Name Jive' by the Casa Loma Orchestra - as you say, this sounds like a transcription because the sound quality is very good.

dogpossum · #3 Post by **dogpossum** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 4:49 pm

What's the difference between a 'transcript' and an ordinary recording?

phantom dancer · #4 Post by **phantom dancer** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:16 pm

Dogpossum,

Transcriptions are recordings made for radio only - as heard on the Phantom Dancer radio show (playlist on the radio show page of http://www.gregpoppleton.com)

In the US and Australia they were made at studios (and the networks) specialising in producing 5 min, 15 min or 30 min discs of songs and complete programs for syndication to radio stations. Transcriptions were made on acetate, then vinyl, reel-to-reel tape and in the 1990s - cassette! Now they are on CD or can simply be downloaded if you are a broadcaster subscribing to a service - for example ABC Radio might take a transcribed portion of a Deutsche Welle show for their News Radio service

Many surviving Frank Coughlan recordings from the mid 30s in Sydney come from the Featuradio studios, for example

Cheers
Greg

trev · #5 Post by **trev** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:18 pm

dogpossum wrote:What's the difference between a 'transcript' and an ordinary recording?

Transcript usually means recorded "live" for a radio show.

dogpossum · #6 Post by **dogpossum** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:39 pm

Ta, you blokes.

anton · #7 Post by **anton** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 2:55 pm

How come the sound is sometimes so much fuller on transcriptions? Especially the bass. What was different in the recording process?

Fave transcription at the moment (and a case in point): Larry Clinton's A Study in Blue (not on this comp). Really chunky and bassy.

Haydn · #8 Post by **Haydn** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:47 pm

anton wrote:How come the sound is sometimes so much fuller on transcriptions? Especially the bass. What was different in the recording process?

Really good question Anton. I'd like to know as well

. The transcription recordings never seem to have those harsh treble sounds from the high-pitched 'horns' that many late 1930s recordings on CD suffer from.

anton · #9 Post by **anton** » Wed May 06, 2009 11:52 am

And check out this transcription recording of Ain't Misbehavin' by Woody Herman on another Hindsight compilation:

http://www.emusic.com/album/Various-Art ... 06660.html

If I am to trust the Lord's discography, this track would be recorded in 1937 ("Liederkratz Hall", New York, Sep 1937). Have you ever heard anything with this rich audio quality recorded in 1937??