Subject: [removed] Digest V2006 #331
From: [removed]@[removed]
Date: 11/25/2006 9:16 PM
To: [removed]@[removed]

------------------------------


                            The Old-Time Radio Digest!
                              Volume 2006 : Issue 331
                         A Part of the [removed]!
                             [removed]
                                 ISSN: 1533-9289


                                 Today's Topics:

  trading rules                         [ "Martin Grams, Jr." <mmargrajr@hotm ]
  Altman On Studio 360                  [ Steve Carter <scarter2@[removed]; ]
  Umbriago                              [ Richard Carpenter <newsduck@[removed] ]
  MP3, bass and treble, etc.            [ "[removed]" <asajb2000@ ]
  This week in radio history 26 Novemb  [ "Joe Mackey" <joemackey108@adelphia ]
  He's dreneing of a white Christmas    [ <otrbuff@[removed]; ]
  Luster Cream Shampoo                  [ "Arthur Funk" <Art-Funk@[removed]; ]
  November birthday                     [ "Tom Bewley" <fords3137@[removed] ]
  Dream Girl                            [ Stuart Lubin <stuartlubin6686@sbcgl ]
  OTR and stereo, etc.                  [ Chargous@[removed] ]
  Oh NO! More on sound!                 [ Ken Greenwald <radio@[removed]; ]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 11:12:50 -0500
From: "Martin Grams, Jr." <mmargrajr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  trading rules

Richard Smith asked:

I was wondering what the new rules are for trading OTR on Mp3 and how should
I set up the ID3 tags?  Any help would be greatly apprecated.

I don't go for the MP3 format because of the sound quality issues.  I still
listen to audio cassettes and my highly treasured audio cassettes that are
"remastered" from original materials.  However, I was curious what the "old"
rules were since I did not know there were "new" rules.  My assumption would
be one disc for one disc but Charlie is correct - as cheap as blank audio
discs are, what expense would there be in trading?

>From my own personal trading (as everyone has probably traded before), I
trade DVDs with people who have something of interest.  I myself go by a few
rules when trading . . . perhaps others follow the same light?  (There's no
right or wrong answer for trading, just opinions and preferences, by the
way.)

1.  I never trade for materialI intend to circulate beyond my own house.  If
someone tells me they have something they think I'd be interested in, and
offer to trade for it, I usually remind them that anything I sell or trade
has been from my own collection and my own transfers.  Not from others
unless there is that odd execption to the rule.  I have a lot of recordings
at home that are not in circulation or rarely available though I have broken
that rule when helping supply a film or radio recording for a movie
convention or a documentary and I don't usually getanything out if so I
wouldn't even consider it [removed]
2.  I don't get anything from someone by trade intending to see the best
quality production available on disc.  If I do, I find myself disappointed
so I pretty much live with "what I get is what I get."  If the quality is
awful, I just get rid of it and wait till later.  I don't complain to the
person I got the recording from because I myself cannot guarentee the
quality I have will meet their standard but I am picky and that's what makes
me proud of what I have.
3.  I don't trade for anything I don't want to listen or watch.  I have been
at friends' houses where they have more radio shows than they could possibly
listen to in their lifetime and they are still [removed]

Case in point: There's a friend of mine in NYC who trades DVDs all the time
and I humor him.  90% of what he sends me is awful quality.  Harshly edited,
multi-generation, logos and watermarks in the corners, and so on.  He
apparently has a 5 inch TV so for him, everything is superb quality but on
my 22 inch TV it gets pixelated.  (I don't think he's on the digest so I'm
not afraid of posting this.)  But I continue to trade with him because he's
a good friend, and I don't mind so long as it doesn't cost me a lot of money
for blank discs.  Most of the 90% of what I can't use or watch I either
throw away or mail to a friend in the mid-west for their own use if they
have a use.

I have a friend in Brooklyn who hands me MP3s at conventions all the time,
asking me if I have an interest in making a copy for myself and has
constantly insisted that I take them home and make a copy for myself and
bring them back when I next meet up with him.  Had I accepted all of his
offers of kindness, I would have easily more than 50,000+ radio shows in my
collection but I would probably never have time to listen to them.  I think
I made a copy of three discs total and it was for research purposes only.
At the last FOTR I purchased about 10 MP3 discs from a total of two vendors,
Bob Faulkner and Jerry Randolph and that was about it.  I'm using them as
gifts to friends for the holiday season coming up.  I preferred to
financially help out the vendors rather than get the same discs for free
from my friend.  I have my morals.

When it comes to trading, however, I have had some weirdos.  One fella in
Australia actually wanted to trade recordings on an hour-for-hour basis.  He
sent me a DVD containing 8 1/2 hours of TV shows which, had I known he would
have crammed so much on one disc and thus damaged the quality, I would never
have done the trade.  I sent him in return a disc from a TV series he asked
about and I prefer not to have more than 2 hours on a DVD unless there is a
logical exception, to keep the quality excellent.  Sadly, after he got his
disc, he sent me a nasty e-mail telling me I owed him 6 1/2 hours of TV
shows because he sent me 8 1/2.  I told him that I have always traded one
disc for one disc, because of the cost factor in the blank disc.  Why trade
four or five discs for one and especially when the one had bad quality cause
it was all crammed on one DVD?  I never traded with him again and that's
been a couple years.  I even sent his DVD back cause the quality was so
pixeled that I couldn't watch two of the shows.  Never made a copy for
myself either.

In short, I do not think there are any official rules for trading OTR and
OTTV but there are a few rules that EVERYONE should abide by:
1.  Clarify with the trader exactly what the deal is in advance (I didn't
with the fella in Australia, oops) and that both parties will be okay with
the trade before a second trade.
2.  Start small at first if you do not know them, so you can che check their
quality and to ensure you don't get ripped off by someone who wants to do an
initial 200+ disc trade.

Now I'm off to watch the first few episodes of BIRDS OF PREY, which I traded
with a friend last week.  My wife and I are eagerly looking forwrad to
watching throughout the next week or [removed]

Martin

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 11:16:20 -0500
From: Steve Carter <scarter2@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Altman On Studio 360

This is GREAT!
I'm listening to an Altman interview and he is spending a good deal
of time talking about radio drama and Corwin in particular.
He refers to TV as:
". . .this monster came along that took away our imaginations."

[removed]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 11:50:45 -0500
From: Richard Carpenter <newsduck@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Umbriago

I ushered in the holiday season by listening to the
1945 Commdand Performance Christmas show. On it, Jimmy
Durante uttered his famous word, "Umbriago," which set
me to wondering if he ever explained who or what
Umbriago was. I suspect not, and the meaning of
Umbriago will go down in mystery along with the
identity of Mrs. Calabash, wherever she is.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:38:05 -0500
From: "[removed]" <asajb2000@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  MP3, bass and treble, etc.
X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: from multipart/alternative
X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: Alternative section used was text/plain

The ongoing discussion about MP3's and sound quality has been very
interesting and informative.

Personally, I will generally not buy already-created MP3's or those that are
available online and through eBay because the sampling rates are too low and
more often than not, I have been extremely disappointed.  When I issue a
flyer, I always ofer the option of an MP3 disc comprised of about 12 .wav
files or aiff files and each disc is either custom-made from the files or
else is copied in high-speed on a cd duplicator, but the problem with most
MP3's is the source material must be pristine and the sampling rate must be
adequate.  Quality is sacrificed in the name of quantity.  That is why I
offered DVD as an alternative.  You need not be worried about the lack of
space when using better sampling rates (which cause the files to be bigger
and take up more space).

There is a phenomenon called the Fletcher-Munson effect.  It says that at low
volumes less detail is heard of whatever is being played.  When you increase
the bass and treble in equal amounts you can hear more detail without
increasing the volume.  I have an old Harmon-Kardon 330B that has a loudness
switch.  This boosts the bass and treble and seems to function the same as
simply inceasing the volume.  Personally, I like my playback with more treble
than bass and maybe the white noise mentioned previously when dubbing reel
tapes is similar to adding treble.  I use OTARI broadcast decks almost
exclusively and several of the machines I have bought over the years seem to
play back half-track tapes fine but since 1/4-track tapes have to be more
exacting and playback is more
precise (4 tracks as opposed to two) the audio is not as good.  Alignment
affects the 1/4-track playback more often than the 1/2 track because you can
fudge a little bit on the half-track playback, because you have a larger area
and it is less
particular.  The OTARI machines can record and play in 1/2 track but only
play back in 1/4 track with a switch of the head array (electronic, not
mechanical).
As far as trading MP3's, I basically do not trade anymore, eveer since reels
stopped being in vogue.  I used to trade cassettes but it seemed like a lot
of trouble and I just didn't, event though I didn't intentionally stop
(deliberately).  When trading MP3's, the consideration is no longer what it
costs to do, it is the time involved in getting the source material into MP3
format and then transferring the resulting MP3 files onto a disc.  Charlie is
correct; it doesn't cost anything for the discs, not with $12 or $15 for a
spindle of 100; that's 15 cents a disc, much cheaper than the cost of
cassettes and what reels used to cost us.
Andy Blatt
asajb2000@[removed]

  *** This message was altered by the server, and may not appear ***
  ***                  as the sender intended.                   ***

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:38:14 -0500
From: "Joe Mackey" <joemackey108@[removed];
To: "otrd" <[removed]@[removed];
Subject:  This week in radio history 26 November to 2
 December

>From Those Were The Days --

11/26

1945 - The program, Bride and Groom, debuted on the NBC Blue network. It is
estimated that 1,000 newly-wed couples were interviewed on the program
before it left the airwaves in 1950.

11/27

1930 - Broadcasting from "...the little theatre off Times Square," according
to the show's introduction, The First Nighter was first heard. The program,
which actually originated from Chicago, then from Hollywood, aired for 23
years and featured dramas and comedies.

11/28

1932 - Groucho Marx performed on radio for the first time.

11/29

1950 - "I Fly Anything", starring singer Dick Haymes in the role of cargo
pilot Dockery Crane, premiered on ABC. With a title like that, is it any
wonder the show only lasted one season? Haymes went back to singing and did
very well, thank you.

11/30

1940 - Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz were married.

12/2

1932 - The Adventures of Charlie Chan was first heard on the NBC Blue
network.

 Joe

----
Visit my homepage: [removed]~[removed]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:39:54 -0500
From: <otrbuff@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject:  He's dreneing of a white Christmas

My trivia mind snapped to attention to the OTR Luster Cream
Shampoo singing commercial "Dream Girl, Dream Girl Wonderful Luster Cream
Girl". At the breakfast table I told my wife about the commercial and said
it was "Dream Shampoo" I know I'm right, but my wife says she is. What
program did Luster Cream sponsor?

I'm thinking our friend Frank McGurn could be slightly misinformed on a
couple of points.  Actually the words to the singing jingle were "Dream
girl, dream girl, beautiful Luster Cream girl."  (I checked my recollection
by verifying against a radio script for Our Miss Brooks.)

The real confusion, however, exists in the matter of TWO products and not
just one.  "Luster Cream is Hollywood's favorite" was another ditty often
heard in 1940s and 1950s radio.  "Better than a soap, better than a liquid,
Luster Cream is a dainty cream shampoo," effusive Colgate-Palmolive-Peet
pitchman Bob Lemond assured his listeners.  "Leaves hair three ways
lovelier:  fragrantly clean, free of loose dandruff, glistening with sheen,"
he explained.  "Even in hardest water, Luster Cream lathers instantly.  No
special rinse needed after a Luster Cream shampoo."  Lemond often left his
audience with:  "Tonight, yes tonight, try Luster Cream shampoo."  I used to
wonder how you could do that if there was none already in the house and it
was Sunday night and no grocery store was open, the drug store had closed
for the day and discount chains hadn't come into vogue.  (I digress.)

Frank, I don't know what this will do to your connuibal bliss after you
further [removed]

Please help keep a 56 year marriage out of the divorce court., and tell us,
I'm right

...for the truth of the matter is, when you name "Dream Shampoo" you are
probably thinking of "Drene."  The two commodities are often confused so
don't feel badly.  The jingle likely leads to the misunderstanding.

Procter & Gamble, one of Colgate's biggest rivals, introduced Drene in the
1930s.  According to one of its web sites, Drene was "the first synthetic
(non-soap) shampoo for superior cleaning, later and rinsability of hair."
Unless somebody else is still producing it, I don't think it's been on the
market for decades.

I don't know what this does for Frank's marriage but maybe it straightens
this out.  Oh yes, Luster Cream (Colgate) also sponsored Mr. and Mrs. North
in addition to Our Miss Brooks and part of the runs of Hilltop House and
Lorenzo Jones among its radio arsenal.

Jim Cox

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:43:17 -0500
From: "Arthur Funk" <Art-Funk@[removed];
To: "OTR Digest" <[removed]@[removed];
Subject:  Luster Cream Shampoo
X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: from multipart/alternative
X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: Alternative section used was text/plain

In Digest 330 Frank McGurn asks what program was sponsored by Luster Cream.
Luster Cream was a sponsor of "Our Miss Brooks."   I found this by googling
"luster cream" and came up with the following reference:

[removed]

It is a program log for OMB done by a Gary Hart.

I also found the following reference by googling "dream girl, dream girl,
beautiful luster cream girl."

[removed]

ANNOUNCER:
Eve Arden as Our Miss Brooks returns in just a moment. But [removed]

MALE VOICE:

(Singing) Dream girl, dream girl, beautiful Luster Cream girl.

ANNOUNCER:

Tonight, yes tonight, show him how much lovelier your hair can look after a
Luster Cream shampoo. Luster Cream - worlds finest shampoo. No other shampoo
in the world gives you Kay Dumas magic blend of secret ingredients plus gentle
lanolin. Better than a soap, better than a liquid. Luster Cream is a dainty
cream shampoo. Leaves hair three ways lovelier. Fragrantly clean, free of
loose dandruff, glistening with sheen. Soft, manageable. Even in hardest
water, Luster Cream lathers instantly. No special rinse needed after a Luster
Cream shampoo. So gentle, Luster Cream is wonderful even for childrens hair.
(SFX: SHIP HORN) Tonight, yes tonight, try Luster Cream shampoo.

MALE VOICE:

(Singing) Dream girl, dream girl, beautiful Luster Cream girl. You owe your
crowning glory to, a Luster Cream shampoo.

ANNOUNCER:

And now, once again, here is Our Miss Brooks.

Hope this helps, Frank.

Regards to all,

Art Funk

  *** This message was altered by the server, and may not appear ***
  ***                  as the sender intended.                   ***

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:43:42 -0500
From: "Tom Bewley" <fords3137@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject:  November birthday
X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: from multipart/alternative
X-Converted-To-Plain-Text: Alternative section used was text/plain

Another amazing and wonderful Radio and TV star who is celebrating her
birthday today is Peg Lynch. "Ethel and Albert"; "The Couple Next Door:; "The
Little Things in Life", etc.  [removed] 11-25-1916.

Happy Birthday [removed] Bewley

  *** This message was altered by the server, and may not appear ***
  ***                  as the sender intended.                   ***

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:43:57 -0500
From: Stuart Lubin <stuartlubin6686@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Dream Girl

You have got to stay out of divorce court, Frank!  This is the way I remember
it:  "Dream Girl" was a small commercial song that a male singer on "Our Miss
Brooks" sang weekly for Luster Creme Shampoo.  Your wife may be thinking of a
shampoo that may or may not still be around:  DRENE SHAMPOO.  Spelled with an
"n", not an "m".

Divorce lawyers: Please forgive me!

Stuart Lubin

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:44:30 -0500
From: Chargous@[removed]
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  OTR and stereo, etc.

The thread about stereo made me recall one of my biggest OTR pet peeves.  A
mono show that's deliberately been converted to fake
stereo.  Yuck.    That's got to be the worst OTR I've ever heard.  If you
want to hear how that approximately sounds, the Soundblaster XFI card has
the stereo surround turned on by default.  I turned it off.  Sounded ok on
stereo music, but dreadful on OTR.

This peeve is followed closely by splitting a show up into tracks.  I
recently got some very hi-quality shows, but they were mulitple
tracks.  What a pain to put it into .wav and reconnect all the parts. I
could see if perhaps they made the tracks the changeovers on the ET, but I
think tracks, even on music shows, are a pretty poor idea. Fake stereo AND
multiple tracks would be icing on the cake.

As long as I'm doing pet peeves; old transcription turntables.  Even if the
rubber and other parts are replaced and maintained, which no one seems to
bother to do, these still have a lot more noise than (well-made) modern
ones.  The 15 minute Charlie Chans (Landini mystery had
this).  Double-whammy, not properly equalized AND old turntable.  (However,
even though the transfer was pretty poor, I'm very much looking for a
lo-generation copy of this).

Before the thread gets to completely be a dead horse, I don't miss analog
recordings at all, especially tape-based.  No more multi-generational,
off-speed recordings, if everything's recorded right in the first
place.  Per mp3, I notice only the slightest and virtually imperceptible
difference between a quality source and a well-done non-low bitrate
mp3.  If it's done wrong, then we get digital copies of mutti-generational,
non-properly-re-equalized offspeed recordings <grin>. Like I said before,
mp3 is a convenience format.  I archive my shows as thus, I have the
archival .wav, and a folder with mp3 encodes also.  95% of the time, the
file that I use to listen to (whether it be on the go or broadcasting to my
radios is the mp3 file).

[removed]  I don't know if it was the right day to start, but I started the
Cinnamon Bear on Friday night,  I listened to it on the 9-S-367 Zenith
console.  I'll probably try the 7-D-126 tonight.

Travis

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 23:14:51 -0500
From: Ken Greenwald <radio@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Oh NO! More on sound!

May I apologize for misquoting the wrong person? I DO apologize.

Glenn P. is correct about white noise. The human ear seems to need
white noise added to recordings of all sorts simply because from the
time we get up in the morning to when we go to sleep, our world is
filled with white noise, in the background, no matter whether we
talk, listen or just sit in silence.
When Fritz Lang made his first film in sound ("M" starring Peter
Lorre) he and the audio recordist on the film had no prior knowledge
of white sound. If you see an original print of "M" you will notice
whole sections where there is no sound at all. Street scenes and
other scenes where no one speaks for minutes at a time. Those silent
scenes stand out like a sore thumb. Quite disturbing to the film
viewer. On latter prints, white noise was added to those scenes and
the picture "plays" better. "M" was made in 1930, at the dawn of
sound films, and German filmmakers were behind what the Americans had
found out since 1927. It quickly became obvious that white noise was
needed in the background of every shot, every scene. To this day,
this is still being done. After shooting on a set or someplace on
location, the sound man asks everyone for absolute quiet in order to
record white noise (now called room tone) for the film. That white
noise is added into the mix of every film and, quite simply, the
sound for the film just sounds natural,

One other thing: In 1994, the Federal government had a special
symposium in Washington, DC. That symposium was about the
preservation of recordings. The conclusion was that there were two
mediums that, under proper conditions, would last a hundred years or
more.
The first medium:  1/4 inch open reel tape, recorded at 15 ips, FULL
TRACK, tails out.
The second medium:  12" and 16" metal based acetate discs. (I've
heard the FBI has since transfered all pertinent information to 12"
acetate discs for their preservation vaults)
The government ran extensive tests to simulate aging and the above is
there conclusion -- CDs, cassette tapes and other media for recording
simply didn't hold up.
Now, with technology improving and new methods of manufacture arrived
at, it may have changed since then. Yet, I have seen no word about
any changes in the governments conclusion.
I once did some audio restoration for The Getty Museum and I made all
final restorations on open reel tape, full track, with tails out. And
on backup CDs. These masters for preservation are now stored in their
special vaults at a temperature (all year long) of 55 degrees.

In the long run, don't we record OTR for the enjoyment of it? Even if
a cassette wears out or breaks, or a CD gets some CD rot, we can
always get another copy from a friend or a person we know. But before
that happens I bet we get a lot of play out of our radio shows!

Ken Greenwald

--------------------------------
End of [removed] Digest V2006 Issue #331
*********************************************

Copyright [removed] Communications, York, PA; All Rights Reserved,
  including republication in any form.

If you enjoy this list, please consider financially supporting it:
   [removed]

For Help: [removed]@[removed]

To Unsubscribe: [removed]@[removed]

To Subscribe: [removed]@[removed]
  or see [removed]

For Help with the Archive Server, send the command ARCHIVE HELP
  in the SUBJECT of a message to [removed]@[removed]

To contact the listmaster, mail to listmaster@[removed]

To Send Mail to the list, simply send to [removed]@[removed]