Phonograph Monthly Review, Vol. 2, No. 5 (1928-02)

February, 1928 The Phonograph Monthly Review 169 Sibelius: Symphonies (particularly the Second and Fourth). Rachmaninoff: Island of the Dead; Second Symphony. Liszt: Faust Symphony; A minor Piano Concerto. Mendelssohn: Scotch Symphony. Delius: Appalachia; Sea-Drift; Song of the High Hills; ’Cello and Violin Concertos. .... . Humperdinck: Prelude to Die Konigskinder; Incidental Music to the Miracle. Moussorgsky: Picture from an Exhibition (Ravel s Or- chestration). Ravel: Daphnis and Chloe Suites; Scheherazade; Le Tom- beau de Couperin. Respighi: Pines of Rome; Old Dances and Airs for the Lute; Gregorian Concerto. Bloch: Concerto for Strings and Piano; Jewish Poems; Solomon; Israel. Prokofieff: Classic Symphony; Scythian Suite; Le Pas d’Acier. Vaughn-Williams: Pastoral Symphony; Norfolk Rhapsody; Fantasia on a Theme by Tallis. Borodin: Second Symphony; Steppes of Central Asia. De Falla: Nights in the Gardens of Spain. Loeffler: Memories of My Childhood; Pagan Poem. Tchaikowsky: Violin Concerto; Romeo and Juliet; Man- fred Symphony. Bax: November Woods; E flat Symphony; Garden of the Fand. Roussel: B flat Symphony; Pour un Fete de Printemps; Evocations. Schumann: Third Symphony. Debussy: The Sea; Rondes de Printemps; La Damoiselle Elue. Rimsky-Korsakow: Sadko; Fairy Tale; Antar. Bartok: Dance Suite; The Wooden Prince; Piano Rhap- sody and Concerto. And so on and so on, as far as one’s fancy will carry! The above works are a few that have been mentioned from time to time in these pages; obviously an inclusive list would extend almost indefinitely. (Not attempt has been made in this article to summarize the Chamber Music, Instrumental, Vocal, etc., re-recorded and unrecorded works.) Among other features for next month will be the reviews of Columbia Bayreuth Fes- tival records. Also to appear then will be the conclusion of the article on Richard Strauss and the Popular and Foreign reviews which lack of space prevented from appear- ing in this issue. By FERDINAND G. FASSNACHT S INCE writing my first article on “Needles”, which appeared in the September 1927 issue of The Phonograph Monthly Review, I have had the good fortune of receiving two other semi-permanent needles which have pleased me so much since testing them that it would seem rather selfish not to pass the good word on, so that others, interested in this very important part of the phonograph, might likewise make tests and without doubt achieve the results here described. Before mentioning the names of these needles, I would like to state I have followed the reports of needle tests as printed in the November and December issues and have been gratified to learn that the vast majority agree with me, that is, the Euphonic needle is superior to the Sympathetic, giving a clearer definition in every respect and a tone almost as loud as the ordinary medium steel needle. For the benefit of some folks who were laboring under the impression that I tested these needles without using the grip, let it be plainly stated here, once for all, that neither the Sym- pathetic nor the Euphonic type lend themselves to being used without the grip. The needle box re- fuses to retain this type needle without the grip on account of the needle being so extremely thin in body. The grip was used with all tests. Now to resume to my further tests:— The two needles are made by the same manufacturer who turns out the Sympathetic, namely Edison Bell, Ltd., of London, England. They are called “Loud Tone” Chromic needles and “Electric” Chromic needles. The “Loud Tone” are simply called Chromic, so let there be no misunderstanding on this point. These Chromic needles (Loud Tone) are perfect for every type record. They play ten record sides without changing and the tenth side gives forth just as clear a tone, with as much brilliancy as this same needle brought forth from the first record side. They measure exactly % in. in length and are of a thickness which allows them to be used as the ordinary needle, without the grip. In addition, they burnish the record similar to the Sympathetic and Euphonic and and give forth no blast whatsoever. Their tone is tremendous—rightly named for they are Loud Toned, but notwithstanding the loudness, every detail, every shading is present and really em- phasized. The surface noise is more than that made by either the Euphonic or Sympathetic, yet less than the ordinary steel needle. But the one outstanding point is the fact that one’s records grow better and better with the usage of these Chromic needles, yet there is no sacrificing of Tone—clear, pure and exact. Take for instance the “Storm” scene of William Tell Overture as played by the Victor Symphony Orchestra—this particular side of the first record of this Overture was played at least seventy-five (75) times, natur- ally changing the needle after every tenth time, yet this record is better than when it was first played and without the slightest trace of blast. Unusual, when one considers the heavy recording necessary to make this life like rendition. My Brahms’ Symphony No. 1 set as also my Franck symphony set, both Victor and played by Stokow- ski are by far better records than when I first purchased them, simply from playing them with these Loud Tone Chromic Needles. My “Iberia” set of Debussy in the Columbia Masterworks proves beyond doubt all of the above and further- more, any needle that gives results on records that are so different from the other as Victor is from Columbia, and which deserve nothing but praise, surely this type needle can lay claim to that of the ideal one. From my Odeon records the same results are obtained. My “Bartered Bride” Overture is a wonder played with these