When and why did the term "HiFi" become associated with Lps

[medjuck]

I have a vague memory that that records weren't described as "hi-fi" until a few years after Lps were introduced. Was there actually a change in recording or playback techniques or was this just a sales pitch? (Remember "Stan Kenton in HiFi".)

[Teasing the Korean]

Because the LP era coincided with the availability of hi-fi media for in-home situations. The LP was, initially, the main medium for hi-fi. As for titles like "Kenton in Hi-Fi," they were used primarily for artists who recorded prior to the hi-fi era.

Edited September 29, 2008 by Teasing the Korean

[Stereojack]

The selling point of albums such as "Kenton in Hi Fi" (High Fidelity) was that these were new versions of the hits in superior sound. Actually Capitol made a whole series of such records, including Harry James, Glen Gray, Guy Lombardo, etc.

When stereo was introduced around 1958, it was felt that the term "monaural" or "mono" might be a little too down-beat, so mono was sold as "regular hi-fi". For years afterward many people mistakenly referred to the two formats as "hi-fi" and "stereo". Actually, all stereo records are also hi fi.

Edited September 29, 2008 by Stereojack

[medjuck]

The selling point of albums such as "Kenton in Hi Fi" (High Fidelity) was that these were new versions of the hits in superior sound. Actually Capitol made a whole series of such records, including Harry James, Glen Gray, Guy Lombardo, etc.

So was microgrove 33 1/3 recording superior 78 recording?

[Teasing the Korean]

So was microgrove 33 1/3 recording superior 78 recording?

The speeds are formats and don't directly have to do with recording per se. 78s in the early days were lo-fi. By the end of the 78 era, hi fi music was being released on 78s, and they sounded amazing (because of the higher speed).

Tape recording with an expanded dynamic range was what defined hi fi.

[Big Beat Steve]

And sometimes Hi-Fi sales pitches were taken to extremes, e.g. in the case of early LPs from the Norman Granz stable that touted the advantages of "MUENSTER-DUMMEL HI FI RECORDINGS".

I've heard that this HiFi sales blurb actually was coined after one sound engineer named Dummel whose favorite snack was "Muenster cheese". Don't know if this is the true story but at any rate it's a nice one! :D

Edited September 30, 2008 by Big Beat Steve

[Christiern]

Almost all the labels had their own alleged, patented audio process, but many of them were pure fantasy (Riverside's Judson blurb certainly was), in the tradition of Paramount's "electrically recorded" claims, which aural evidence indicated meant nothing more than that there was an electric bulb lighting the studio.

That said, I used to frequent a wonderful opera-oriented restaurant in Philly and vaguely recall seeing on the walls old Victor posters from the 78 rpm period claiming "high fidelity". I looked for something like that online, but in vain.

[tonym]

I was under the impression that in 1954, Yamaha coined the term 'hi-fi' for it's new turntable.

Sounds a bit late to me....

[medjuck]

I was under the impression that in 1954, Yamaha coined the term 'hi-fi' for it's new turntable.

Sounds a bit late to me....

Actually that sounds about right to me.

[Randy Twizzle]

Doing a search for "hi-fi sound" in the NY Times I found this in an Xmas day 1938 classified ad for what seems to be a prehistoric party DJ

[Christiern]

There you go!

[AllenLowe]

to me, hi fi is 15khz and above - stereo OR mono -

[Big Beat Steve]

I was under the impression that in 1954, Yamaha coined the term 'hi-fi' for it's new turntable.

Sounds a bit late to me....

Actually that sounds about right to me.

Not so sure about that date ....

April, 1953 issues of DOWN BEAT included a separate „High Fidelity“ section, a „Hi-Fi Flashes“ column, and the term must have been in widespread enough use to make it into headline quips such as "Here‘s’ Hi-Filutin Ride on Rail Gone Train“ (about an LP series titled „Sounds of Our Times“ that promised to „tickle the ear of a hi-fi man“). Around the same time Capitol ads promised that with their "full dynamic sound" "you get HI-FI and then some" ...

No immediately discernible use of Hi-Fi, etc. in late 1952 issues of Down Beat, however.

So it looks as if the term came into widespread use in early 1953.

[Randy Twizzle]

This 6/14/1953 ad in the Times mentions the "high fidelity industry"

[medjuck]

So did recording techniques actually change in the early '50s?

[Teasing the Korean]

So did recording techniques actually change in the early '50s?

Recording techniques changed as studios or labels acquired hi fi equipment. Naturally, it came earlier for some than others.

[Ted O'Reilly]

So did recording techniques actually change in the early '50s?

Recording techniques changed as studios or labels acquired hi fi equipment. Naturally, it came earlier for some than others.

That's right, and it's been so from the beginning...cylinders to flat discs, one-sided or both, acoustic to electrical, 78 to 45 to 33 to tape in all formats to digital on a hard drive. The search for most in the tech side of the record industry is for accuracy in recording, in any format using horns to crystal microphones to ribbon to dynamic to condenser.

The playback part has been mostly in the hands of retailers. Hi-Fi is a marketer's term more than an engineer's. (I recall London records used "FFRR" -- Full Frequency Range Recordings, which seems more precise).

There are recordings done in the '20s that sound wonderful -- and I mean off the original disc, played on appropriate equipment -- and just-released new recordings that offend the ear.

[Stereojack]

There are recordings done in the '20s that sound wonderful -- and I mean off the original disc, played on appropriate equipment -- and just-released new recordings that offend the ear.

Amen to that!!!

[Christiern]

Just as WWII delayed the development of television, so it also delayed certain audio advances. I can't locate it right now, but, a few years ago, I came across an interesting article in a 1940s issue of down beat. It was about a new way to play records, and I think Motorola was the company that was working on it. This development did not change the discs but rather the playback equipment, eliminating the needle (or stylus) and replacing it with a photo-electric "eye" that read the variations in the record's groove.

When it comes to thinking ahead, this item from the January 5, 1901 issue of the NY Times is even more remarkable:

[marcello]

This development did not change the discs but rather the playback equipment, eliminating the needle (or stylus) and replacing it with a photo-electric "eye" that read the variations in the record's groove.

I saw a recent interview with Keith Jarrett that says he has a turntable that has a laser eye.

Here it is: ELP Laser Turntable

"Recently, Jarrett put a couple finishing touches on his dream system, which he uses for work as well as for his rare moments of leisure: “I was completely blown away by one of the most revelatory things I’ve ever heard: the ELP turntable, the laser turntable. The presentation is not like anything I’ve ever heard before from an LP. As soon as it arrived, instantly, my entire record collection was brand new. I’ve never had that experience. I’m listening to real people and real bass—you even get depth and layers out of mono recordings.'"

[Christiern]

As pricey as it is interesting. Thanks, Marcello.

[porcy62]

This development did not change the discs but rather the playback equipment, eliminating the needle (or stylus) and replacing it with a photo-electric "eye" that read the variations in the record's groove.

I saw a recent interview with Keith Jarrett that says he has a turntable that has a laser eye.

Here it is: ELP Laser Turntable

"Recently, Jarrett put a couple finishing touches on his dream system, which he uses for work as well as for his rare moments of leisure: “I was completely blown away by one of the most revelatory things I’ve ever heard: the ELP turntable, the laser turntable. The presentation is not like anything I’ve ever heard before from an LP. As soon as it arrived, instantly, my entire record collection was brand new. I’ve never had that experience. I’m listening to real people and real bass—you even get depth and layers out of mono recordings.'"

ELP laser turntable

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php...laser&st=45

BTW May you provide a link for the Jarrett's interview?

[Shrdlu]

And sometimes Hi-Fi sales pitches were taken to extremes, e.g. in the case of early LPs from the Norman Granz stable that touted the advantages of "MUENSTER-DUMMEL HI FI RECORDINGS".

I've heard that this HiFi sales blurb actually was coined after one sound engineer named Dummel whose favorite snack was "Muenster cheese". Don't know if this is the true story but at any rate it's a nice one! :D

I don't remember where I saw the interview, but in it, Norman Granz said that he coined that expression as a put-on, and that he (Granz) was the fan of Münster cheese. All very much a part of that 50s era. I'm sure it would have been taken seriously by some - it was all so exciting and new back then.

I also remember the use of "hifi" for mono, vs "stereo", and, as a very young kid, saying to the neighbor that surely stereo was hifi too.

One of the greatest advantages of that era over the last 20 years was that we just accepted the LPs that came out as definitive issues, without all the worries and arguments about which remastering was the best.

[Jazzmoose]

to me, hi fi is 15khz and above - stereo OR mono -

So it's something neither of us can hear anymore...

[porcy62]

to me, hi fi is 15khz and above - stereo OR mono -

So it's something neither of us can hear anymore...

...and you have to add the reading glasses...