I have a number of 78 EPs from 1955-56 ish. Are these likely to be vinyl rather than shellac due to the fact each side is approx. 6 minutes long (3 songs) and therefore I assume microgroove rather than standard 78 wide groove?
If you add them here and we can see what label they are on, I dont think 78 world cares what the physical disc composition actually is (unless its cardboard by way of note or acetate, which tend to be internal company use).
But as a follow-up is there concern on these as to what form of stylus is required for playback - if they are from your own family it could be a lightweight pick-up (sapphire stylus) was used on a correct type of deck, but if s/h they could have come from a place that used the original steel or fibre needles which I don't think can be used on micro-groove records.
I have UK His Master's Voice 10in Shellacs which do have multiple tracks on (sound effects), and the grooves seem narrow but I am sure it is a standard '78'. Reading the literature from the 1940s I am confused as to what the best player and tone arm set set up is for causing least damage to either type of 78 rotational speed discs.
Are your records hard, heavy, and fragile (= shellac) or light-weight and bendable (= vinyl)? In any case, since they are 78s, I would guess that they were made to be played with 78 rpm (macro-groove) styluses. I don't know that I would play them on wind-up gramophones with their heavy tone arms, but a more modern record player that plays 78 speed and has a 78 rpm stylus should do.
I used to have a good memory but now I can't re Member since May 2011 5096 Points Moderator
Steve1966 wrote:
and therefore I assume microgroove rather than standard 78 wide groove?
I'm not the greatest expert on 78 discs, but I would be extremely surprised if they created a 78rpm disc and then made it microgroove. It's more or less the definition of 78s that they have the wide groove which require a specific stylus. At any rate in the early days of Microgroove, they would, without exception, indicate it on the label.
Hi Amy, just seen your reply and message. Apologies. Yes I am aware that it is Matt Monro and that is the reason why I have EMO9 and so many of the others. I believe it is likely that Matt recorded more than this single track so keep searching hoping to find another song by him in this series. So far without luck..