*February 2023 update:* "Arabian Nights", "Mother Machree", and "A Little Bit of Heaven" are now correctly identified by Shazam, and "Sand Dunes" now yields no result instead of an incorrect result. So in addition to "Ave Maria" and "Cavalleria Rusticana", it can now correctly identify five out of the 25 songs I played.
I would not be surprised if the only algorithm that can easily identify music from 1922 and earlier is RU-vid's content ID match for that sweet licensing money. Public domain is not in the vocabulary of the music industry or Google.
Now going to see if I can find my dad's 78 of The Runaway Train and The Bum Song, that I used to listen to all the time even into my teenage years; and see if either Shazam or RU-vid can identify them. It is too bad the one that we used to call the Chinese Music Torture got broken decades ago...
I think it's really just a matter of whether or not the song is indexed in Shazam's database, more than having anything to do with the effectiveness of the algorithm.
2 года назад
They seem to have claimed it. Many countries have laws, that say that the copyright will expire after 50-100 years after the dead. This means that early recordings from ABBA will not expire till at least 75 years from now (with German law), while Avicii works will probably expire even before ABBA works, in 2093. I generally think that the way they do it in the US sometimes is better, but sometimes can cause unfortunate things to happen. If you want to do things like in the video, you should consider laws of other countries (my audience is like 20% German, 10% Indonesian, 10% Brazilian and 20% UK, with the rest being other countries for example).
Imagine how many bangers there used to be from the early 1900s that were never heard again because the people who owned the records either lost them or broke them, or they were just never recorded at all.
I’ve done it with a lot of early gabber stuff 92-99 and it seems to pick it up fine for most of them even terrorcore, breakbeat. I’ve also had the same luck with internet genre’s like future funk.
I tried to Shazam a song that was recorded onto an audio cassette. It was a Nicaraguan station and found at least two songs that Shazam could not figure out.
I'd think it is a bit difficult and would bring up multiple results perhaps with some more modern music, not least because of multiple samples but also the reuse of tunes and 'phrases' in a lot of them. Just a thought!
I'm old enough to have grandparents who would sing "I makes mine myself" when the libations came out at family gatherings. Never heard the recorded version, thank you for that delightful trip down memory lane.
I find that song interesting, because if it was released in 1921, it would have been actually _illegal_ to "make yours yourself", as well as to get it any other way. I suppose it makes sense given how often illegal drugs are the subject of modern popular songs, but it's not something you'd really expect.
@@doorhanger9317 I have seen some pics from WWII of soldiers letting a kitten play with a grenade and another with a bazooka between his legs. Some of the oldest surviving grafeti is dicks. People have not changed much.
So idk if anyone mentioned it but Shazam has a database that's typically linked with distributors. Whenever a musician uploads a song in order to get on online stores or streaming services, most of the time they have the chance to add it to the Shazam database. Now, if the song is never added to the database, Shazam won't recognize it. This makes sense when it comes to older records because everyone involved with the records is dead and, unless they were (and still are) big artists like Louis Armstrong, chances are no one cared enough to add those songs to the database. So technically it's not Shazam's fault, mainly just people not conserving records (but even that is a complex process cause you'd have to go through record labels)
That was the comment that I want do read. Searching for a song that is not in the Shazam's database is completely ridiculous. The songs that Shazam finds are currently on Spotify. The waves coming out of this device are hardcore analog waves. It is almost impossible for shazam not to recognize these songs. So Shazam has a 100% success rate.
@@petersteele7503 "Shazam has a 100% success rate for songs it knows" me too, I can recognize every song I know. Did that sound stupid? That's how your statement sounds
So how would someone get there music uploaded? Who’d be the surviving people to take care of this? Also, what about copyrights that are extremely old and still valid today, but whose people that care about it are dead? Can it even be enforced?
@@wolfattacker1 If the copyright is privately owned they can be enforced by their estate, but it's quite likely their estate doesn't care or, in many cases, doesn't even know about the copyrights copyrights; however, most were owned by labels and the either merged or were bought out. Sony owned the copyrights to most these songs (acquired from RCA who had owned most of them since the 20's) before they entered the public domain.
the records are conserved, you can listen to most of these on Library of Congress National Jukebox collection...its just that Shazam doesn't prioritize integrating this into their database because nobody cares
When you started playing foxtrots and waltzes, I thought: I wonder if there’d be a difference if we played music that had remained more popular over the century that’s passed. So I tried it with Mamie Smith and the Original Dixieland Jazz Band, using recordings from 1920 and earlier. They were instantly recognised. Jazz and blues still has a following whereas foxtrots and waltzes are way more niche.
The problem is a LOT of these acoustics are damn obscure even to a collector like me! I didn't recognize half the titles, but more popular stuff like Paul Whiteman or Billy Murray would be recognized by the software.
@@25566 But everything before 1923 is now copyright free and un-monetizeable. So only stuff that was monetized before 2022 would be recognized by Shazam, nothing new is getting in there.
Yeah this isn't a problem with Shazam's ability to match old music, it's a problem with old music's ability to be popular enough to be in the database Shazam accesses.
I did the same experiment with my 78s. Shazam didn't recognize Irving Berlin's "Cheek to Cheek" from the movie "Top Hat" with Fred Astaire, issued in 1936. It did, however manage to pick up the rather obscure "Sing Mit Mir" by Lutz Templin's orchestra from 1943, "Glutrote Rosen" by Rudi Schuricke fron 1942, as well as two other German songs from the same time. Conclusion: Shazam knows its WWII-era German schlagers.
Talking about german stuff, i got my first turntable, a Technics SL-BD20D, and the dude that i got it from gave me a bunch of... schlagers to go with it :D ... Furthermore, every Sunday, there's a local market where people sell stuff, like produce, clothing and footwear and various other stuff. There's this dude that sells various tools and stuff, electronic or mechanic knic-knacks.. He also has a crate of .... MORE SCHLAGERS :D
There is a thing that makes my blood boil with shazam and other music identifiers. Lots of NCSs and public domain songs are getting identified as songs by Jincheng Zhang a known music thief. He just puts some background noise over NCS an public domain songs and releases them en masse.
That's quite annoying, for sure! On one hand, you have to hate copyright for it's absurd restrictions and guidelines, but, on the other hand, you could have people like Jincheng who steal music and take it as their own product.
@@user-ph3ji8gp3p public domain means you can do whatever you want with it, and since he is technically changing it by adding background noise, he is able to sell it as his own, it’s extremely scummy, but not illegal
I tested it on old Russian music, performed by Varya Panina and Anastasia Vyaltseva, recorded in the beginning of XX century (about 1905). Some songs issued later on CDs were recognized. But songs not issued on CDs were not recognized at all.
because shazam only recognizes songs that were digitally upload and are in shazam s digital database. the question is not can shazam recognize its did the creators over at shazam put the song you are trying to recognize in shazam s database
Music from 1995 and older can be hard to recognize if the artist wasn't big. 1993 and older techno artists can be missunderstod often for anoter artists or not found. I'd say that the digital music archives in general is still very lackning, as well in movies.
@@defcreator187 each to there own taste. But Shazam have helped me discover new artists now and again Now No listening to it i prefer Cassette or Viny, and even Minidisk and CD sometimes but rarer. 👌.
What blows my mind is that the 1920's was a century ago now. Seems like just yesterday that 100 years wouldve put you back in the mid-19th century. Really good music, by the way (thanks for showing the titles of each). I hope with the PD ruling we get a lot more of it on RU-vid now.
Those prices are accurate. That was the actual price they paid for them. That $1.75 record ($30+ today) was the standard rate for 12" records. Victor was a premium brand. They had the best available technology and they sounded excellent. Most 78s were in the $0.75-$1.00 range with cheaper brands in the $0.30 range. Like today, you get what you pay for.
I feel spoiled being able to go to a thrift store and buying a full alblem on cd for $0.50. though i do have to go on sunday or they will charge me $1.00
@@bland9876 New technology is always expensive. The very first CD players were multiple thousands in the early 80s. When those Victor records were made, they replaced extremely crude discs and cylinders that were bad even by 1890 standards. But it was new technology. Printed paper was the closest predecessor to the pre-recording era. The technology "jump" from the 19th century recordings to 1912 was almost as great as what we saw when the microgroove LP replaced the 78 in 1949. There's been a few watershed moments in recording. That was the first around 1908. The next would be 1925 when the vacuum tube was perfected and electronic amplifiers, microphones, recorders were developed. The microgroove vinyl records were next in 1949, then stereo in 1958. The next one was digital recording.
@@gunnarthefeisty That's true. Edison was not only 90% deaf and a great inventor, but one of the greatest recording engineers of all time. His disk and cylinder players used a proprietary diamond stylus shaped like a half of a clam shell. The groove was a concave "trench" and that stylus fit perfectly. The wide section gave the stylus wear resistance and the thin section enabled it to respond to high frequencies. That groove shape is why Edison players use a half-nut lead screw to pull the stylus along. Edison also believed recordings should be recorded in a dead room with no ambience. His idea was if it's recorded in a room that's acoustically "live", the ambience of the studio will be added to the ambience of the playback room, causing an inferior sounding playback. That's why Victor and other brands didn't sound as good. The downside to Edison recordings is Tom himself. Nothing got recorded without his express approval. If he didn't like the song it didn't get recorded. Tom's taste in music was outdated even by 1912 standards. (source: "From Tinfoil to Stereo", by Oliver Reed (c. 1959)
To be fair, i’d try shazaming songs playing on youtube and the app wouldn’t pick it up. There’s a quite talented japanese male singer named Yasuhide Sawa who’s most notable work was the theme song for “the Bushbaby, little angel from the grasslands” animated series based on the novels. Show was made in 1992 yet Yasuhide Sawa has nothing on him. I had to go digging to figure out who was the vocalist. And to my knowledge, this theme song is the only piece of music saved from his career. Nothing else shows up. Which is disappointing because he seemed to be quite notorious in japan. If a fairly large artist from barely 30 years ago is forgotten or erased, what does that say about any artists beyond that time, regardless of country of origin? Some countries are especially notorious for terrible media archives. :(
I immediately had a feeling that Shazam really doesn't care about that old-timey music so much. And you said it. Enrico Caruso *_WAS_* the superstar of music back then. And the $2.00 is real. Holy cr@p! let's say that was 1916 when that record was put out, $2 in 1916 is worth $53.63 in 2022! For only one song!! And yes, double sided records before 1910 did exist. I still remember as a very young one back in the early 80's 1983 to be exact, finding hundreds of 78 RPM records in a dumpster. I was a kid and tried to save lots of them but having limited space and moving a lot they got lost. How I wish to go back in time to grab them all. They were in very good shiny condition too most in their paper sleeves. Most were from the 1910's to the mid 1940's. One I specifically remember, it was the oldest one and I loved, was Rossini, "The William Tell Overture" it was a blue label Columbia record, it was a 12" very heavy copyright year 1908. It was double sided. The piece of music continued on the other side. I broke it accidentally by holding it with my thumb and index finger by the very edge. I mentioned it was very heavy, and brittle. It snapped leaving me holding a chunk while 95% of the record dropped to the floor. 😯
If that record still cost two silver dollars, and it was still under copyright... Shazam would have recognised it in a second. But as both those things are no longer so.... it will never be recognised by Shazam. Why would it?
Five months later, I followed along with my copy of Shazam, and in addition to Ave Maria and Cavalleria Rusticana, it correctly identified 'Arabian Nights' (1918), 'Mother Machree' (1915), and 'A Little Bit Of Heaven' (1915). Whether that's simply because they're still expanding their catalogue, or because the app is getting better at ignoring the hiss and crackle of old records, or both, I don't know, but it seems to be improving.
I do know it’s getting a lot better at ignoring background noise seeing as I could pick up songs on the radio of a school bus and in a busy supermarket.
you would be inpressed to know that shazam doesn’t actually need the audio to know the song, it’s not an audio recognition software, but rather a fingerprint recognition system, it builds a spectrogram of songs and catalogues them, and when it “listens” to new songs, it actually converts the sample and start comparing it to its database, which means, the database just grows over time, and maybe the algorithm gets better, but shazam already knows how to deal with special echoing, compression, scratching noises as well as vinyl effects.
Hey! The reason it recognizes songs so quick is because it's listening before you even press the button. Most newer phone operating systems have a little indicator telling you when the microphone is used, and if you notice any time the Shazam app is open it is listening (Similar to how modern phones are constantly taking pictures with the camera app open, you pressing the shutter button just chooses the most recent one and combines it with nearby frames)
I use Soundhound for my music identifying app and it only found one of these songs. I have a huge feeling that these things are primarily geared towards popular music like 1957 and newer like you mentioned. They really should expand their libraries to include music like this as it is important to the landscape of music throughout time.
The apps themselves only exist to sell music. They always link to streaming services so they either make money directly or through referalls. The likelihood of anyone wanting to download and buy scratchy low-fi recordings from 100 year old records is low anyway, and I doubt Shazam itself holds the sound files being used to compare wavefiles. Not criticising the joy of playing these old records by the way, just being realistic!
@@PotatoPirate123 Very true. All about selling us all something for sure. Sad that they pose as something all about music when the history of music like this is not there.
I wonder when the last time some of these recordings were heard? It's fascinating thinking that some of these may not have been heard since the 1920s. What a great and fun video.
I belive the last time they were heard of is somewhere in 1960-1980 when thos people who bought this music is becoming old and play it while enjoying their old age. Before they finnaly gone together with the listeners...
@@noobscoopsies1100 and it depends how many copies if they were very very small and only a few hundred produced the chances of one making it to 2022 and being listened since the 1920s is even rarer
It's a lovely question, and the answer may surprise you. Record collectors like me who started when they were little - and there are a lot of us - have been playing records like these all our lives. The generation that bought them gave them to us, as they were cleaning out their homes, or were upgrading to stereo and got these out of their basements/attics while they were at it as well. The ones shown here are fairly common, so they have been heard much more recently than you might think. As a full-time musician myself, I often wonder whether my predecessors gave any thought about their work being heard and enjoyed 100-plus years later. Now that it's been digitized (check out the Library of Congress' Digital Jukebox) their sounds will live on until the end of the world.
Just like music made in the 1930's , there are still fans of that era, and im sure there are still people alive today that had parents or grand parents that played these when they were wee babes.
Shazam is quite easy to beat especially if you're a dance music nerd! Also fox trot seems like it was the equivalent of house music back in the 1910s -1920s with so many fox trot variants of popular songs. Kinda like house remixes today but without the remix but a rerecord
As always, a very interesting, entertaining and informative video. I enjoyed this as always. However, in regards to the Victrola/Victor recordings, RCA Victor/Records had a warehouse in Camden NJ until the mid 1960's. The warehouse was demolished around that time, but before demolition of the warehouse commenced, they gave many record collectors a chance to salvage what they could for their personal collections. The warehouse contained many metal masters, test discs, promotional discs and many other types of recordings. When the demolition began, there were still many more master recordings in the building and after the demolition, the remaining masters were bulldozed into the Delaware River, with a pier subsequently built over them. Most of the masters that were bulldozed were that of Sergei Rachmanioff, who was one of the 20th Century's leading composers. When RCA Victor wanted to create a set of his complete recordings in 1973, the label had to search out collectors for more of his recordings as their list of them was incomplete. However, many masters that RCA Victor/Records considered very important were saved, such as Caruso's, Toscanini's, Gershwin's and Jimmie Rodgers, but why they didn't save Rachmaninoff's masters is a mystery indeed as he too was very important. I think that the best way for Shazam to recognize the recordings that weren't recognized is that whoever owns the rights to these masters to digitize them and make the available for purchase as downloads on a music downloading site, where you pay a small price for the song so a listener can have the song in their digital library. Thanks again. Looking forward to more.
Imagine seeing these artist live. How they where back then. The mind takes you back in time, imagining the room , some cigar smoke, all dressed in the time period fashion... Just crazy. Voices from past.
Especially the end of WWI songs. They thought such a war could not happen again. But it did barely 20 years later. And they had no idea smoking was so harmful.
Many of these pieces are so rare that even big streaming services like Spotify or Amazon don't have them, so it's not surprising Shazam doesn't have them indexed either.
It doesn't have to be old. The majority of music from around the world (1950-2020) isn't on those corporate sites if that wasn't mainstream in yankland. A huge amount of top 40 in my country from my teens and twenties is nowhere to be found. You'd think it doesn't exist if you had to depend on Stealify.
Definitley not, it's almost like a longing for retrieving a memory from a life you probably never lived. On the off chance you actually have past lives, who knows?
Honestly would be a good idea to digitalize and distribute old no copyright records to Shazam/others so they can add them to the catalogue. They probably want more data for their systems.
My experience is that shazam only recognises music from that era when it has been re-released later, on a compilation album for example. The only reason it got Heifetz and Caruso right is because those songs have been re-released. Click on them and it'll show you the album they're from.
It usually only identifies really well-known commercially released music - works best under the following conditions: It’s not treble-heavy or bass-heavy; The volume is quite loud on the speakers (might upset the neighbours, but it can’t be helped); You’re not listening on AM radio and you have other stations trying to creep in or you’re listening to a station from outside of your area - especially after dark - or listening on short wave; There’s not a lot of noise in the room, like a party or a vacuum cleaner or a washing machine or other background noise; It only identifies actual music recordings - not live concerts or stuff off the telly, or your old maiden aunt playing a piano - especially when she hits a bum note - or dad on the karaoke machine! He probably didn’t have them loud enough for the phone mic to pick up - or the speaker wasn’t all that loud!
I used to record a lot of music from FM radio in the 1970’s into the 1980’s. Many stations didn’t bother to announce the title of the songs and/or the artists. I have used Soundhound and Shazam and found that many songs are not found. The songs are not pre-1957 but, as others have commented, they weren’t “popular” or of a genre that the masses are interested in. So, I still have many songs in my Apple Music library entitled “Mystery Song”.
I’ve had Shazam give me some interesting results when there is a lot of background noise. One time it identified a song as a track that sounded like someone recorded themselves taking a logic probe to data lines on an 8 bit computer or something. Certainly wasn’t the song I was trying to identify.
Yeah, this comes up a lot. Also, weird dark ambient and chinese rap. Shazam sometimes has trouble identifying even fully digital niche titles, like indie game and movie OSTs.
Foxtrot was indeed the most popular form of music back in this era, at least according to Wikipedia. It apparently even got applied to early rock and roll recordings, since they were generally 4/4 like foxtrot.
A lot of futurists of the day imagined thinking boxes that we could speak to and which could remember and recall things for us… but I think _even they_ would be surprised by how light and commonplace these computation slabs we all have are!
@@kaitlyn__L I’m only 39 and I’m still amazed by the stuff we have now like a portable computer in my pocket with our phones that we take for granted. I can’t imagine what the world will be like if I make it to 90.
@@mikeg2491 yes! I’m 27 so I saw PDAs go from glorified calculators to, well, powerful smartphones that are replacing computers for many people. But I can only imagine how exciting the first portable calculator boom was. (Though of course that was before you were born too!) I sure hope I can see as much of where we’re going as possible.
Another one of your "how the heck did he come up with this idea?"-videos that I love so much. :) I suspect the main reason Shazam fails is that there are no modern reissues on digital format from which it can index them. It's no surprise that both Heifetz and Caruso were picked up instantly since they have been reissued digitally countless times. Pretty sure Shazam will fail on any analog-only recordings no matter when it was released, but I haven't extensively tested it. Anyway, I enjoyed some fine old tunes! Keep up the splendid work, especially if it involves vintage music.
@@jamescollins6085 Its highly unlikely. Shazam doesn't use the literal song to create a match, instead using a songs "hash". Shazam can match over 15 Billion songs, while apple music has 90 million. Your friend probably said that as Shazam is owned by Apple and usually shows Apple Music as the default option to listen to the song you just Shazamed. For instance if you Shazamed an Amazon exclusive song, Shazam would detect it, but it won't give you the option to listen to it on AM. Cheers
@@jamescollins6085 I have some music released, and I can choose where it goes, Spotify, Amazon, Deezer, etc. I have to separately select Shazam as well, so that would suggest they don't get their data automatically from another source. I can also leave out Apple Music and still check Shazam, so they wouldn't be able to use Apple as a source then.
Several years ago, I bought an Empire floor-standing gramophone player from a vendor at a local antiques mall and the vendor, a kind elderly woman, gave me 73 78 rpm records for free the next day and many of those were fun, quaint fox-trots from the 1920's. :)
I used to upload music from my 78 rpm record collection to RU-vid. The only time I ever got a content ID match was for a later remastered version of the recording. By arguing my original non-remastered upload was out of copyright, I won the claim.
Double sided records were introduced in about 1906, and everyone followed, but Victor retained their "Red Seal" label for prestige titles by well known artists, and priced them accordingly. They kept them single sided to remind the public of their higher class status. Other color labels from Victor signified a different kind of music, and were often priced lower. Victor maintained the one sided status of their "Red Seal" records well into the 1920s.
Those photos @10:00 are cool. I didn't really know how they recorded these records back then. To see how it was done in it's most primitive form is very cool!
a little late to see this but as someone who has worked with shazam, the reason they aren't being found is because the license holder, usually in most cases say example, warner bros music, would have to communicate directly to shazam and upload their artists song onto the platform to be found. my guess is because they're now free reign and so old the companies that originally produced and published the music aren't around, or just are lazy and haven't communicated with shazam, if someone would do it on behalf of the artists, then the shazam algorithm would easily pick up every song here. this is also why ave maria is easily found, this song is still popular and circulated, so its for sure on their algorithm, and also why sand dunes might have been picked up as that electronic song, the electronic song might have used a sample, but is so modern it is uploaded into the shazam system.
I have Shazam too, but no music that old to test it out. My Mother was 12 in December 1922. She told me in the latter 1920's, she was a Flapper, and in Europe was a fashion model in the late 1920's and early 1930's, going to Paris, Milan, and Berlin, back in the Cabarat days, before she met my Father in 1937 in Zurich, Switzerland 🇨🇭 where she was from. I remember the 78's when I was younger, before the modern LP's came out in late 1950's. Also, downtown Manhattan, NYC, had stores with the old records for sale, when I was working down there in the 1970's.
"Fox trot" is old record label code for "we never figured out the exact dance for this one, so it's going in the one-size-fits-all pile." The Raymond Scott Quintet's "Powerhouse" is listed as a fox trot, too. Try it sometime. :)
I have practically evey one you have played...started collecting these old "classics" back in 1963...they were had for give-away prices back then...now very hard to find in the "everyday" world. My late dad, being in the radio/tv service business brought home boxes of these records from families who no longer wanted them! Art Hickman had his start in San Francisco in 1918...my hometown. Back then, people would have Victrola Dance Parties at home...the dance music was a hot item. 1918...the start of the "Spanish Flu Pandemic"...and my parents birth year. The $1.50 price is the original selling value! So many of these vintage numbers are lost in time. Tenor John McCormack's "A Little Bit of heaven" was nearly a million dollar seller. All these label prices are the original over the counter value. Caruso's Red Seals commanded that price! He was the first Victor Recording artist under that company's contract.
None since these are all public domain and the whole point around content matches is that the copyright holders felt that that your video is definitely going to impede sales badly enough to issue a notice strongarming to cut out the section of the video or face getting a strike and worse having you're entire taken down because some greedy fuck wanted to squeeze as much money out of everyone they possibly could as humanly possible.
@@TheCatLady65 I've had copyright notices for public domain recordings of classical music. If it's public domain, someone can just take it and claim copyright. Most people might not know about the copyright status, so they'll leave it, and others will just contest the claim, which is then usually released within minutes. And yes, claiming copyright when they don't actually own the copyright is illegal, but who's going to spend that much time and money on something that didn't really affect them that much?
I’m about positive I’ve heard some of those - including the very last one -before. Anyway, I really liked “A little bit of heaven”, the guy had an amazing voice. I’ve been trying to find it somewhere online, but don’t seem to be able to? Anyway, this video was really cool. I’m glad you made it.
Anecdote: I use both Shazam and SoundHound. I noticed that, when playing from my cassette tape deck, SoundHound has a difficulty identifying songs if the tape speed is not calibrated to the proper speed. Shazam identifies songs regardless of speed for the most part. So I often check my tape speed though SoundHound. If it can’t identify songs that it usually does then chances are the tape speed isn’t right. I learned this when trying to figure out what was wrong with my Tascam 202 MK VII a couple of years back. The store I bought it from replaced it with a brand new one and second one I got was perfect.
Shazam sometimes works for pre-WW2 records in case the (former) copyright owner invests into a modern or a re-issue album, containing the original sound, perhaps also de-hissed and de-clicked, and made it public. As an example, some records that were popular in the former Czechoslovakia in the 1930s under long-forgotten brands such as Ultraphon or Esta, can be detected as a Supraphon (which still exists to this day), album "Historie psaná šelakem" (The Shellac Time) - "edice Esta" (Esta release). For even older records though, which are in the public domain and were never publicly "remastered" on a modern reissue, it's another story as you can tell. And I be damned if you got a Content ID match whilst playing back a wax cylinder on an antique Edison phonograph :)
Besides some minor mispronunciations, good video. Also thanks a lot of new good listening material for me since this is the era I listen to for regular music. It doesn’t shock me that these modern music identifiers haven’t the slightest notion of the music from the ragtime and early jazz period. Also Fox-Trot basically was their go to term to represent Jazz or Dance music, you’ll also see a lot of One-Steps or Two-Steps around from then aswell. And yes $1.50 to $2 and sometimes even $3 were indeed the prices of those 12 inch 78s, and 75¢ was standard pricing for 10 inch 78s. Aeolian Vocalion was originally more expensive because at that time they weren’t very big and they needed to make a profit. I also would like to note here that there are many many 78s from this era that sound stunningly clear, the earliest clear recording I have is from 1906. Lastly Columbia introduced the double-sided disc in 1908, and Victor followed in 1910. The latest single-sided discs were Victor’s Victrola Red Seal foreign series (of which you featured a few here), to my knowledge they had single-sided discs all the way up to the introduction of the electrical process recording in 1925. Another interesting use of late single-sided recordings was done through Sears & Roebuck under the auspices of their record brand Silvertone, which opened in 1916 on contract to reissue some turn of the century (ie 1901, 02, 03, & 04) Columbia masters.
im more interested in hearing these old recordings and thinking how everthing was so different then...i think of myself being back in those days...it is facsinating!!
That's a pretty tough challenge. In a less obscure, but still challenging vein, I have been surprised by Shazam's success rate with 1950's classical recordings, even on lesser known European labels. It usually gets the orchestra, date and performers, so someone has done a lot of inventory work in making the algorithm what it is. Congratulations on your 78RPM reproduction results. Sounds pretty good!
Back in the day, the hyperbole used to sell them claimed: "You cannot distinguish the recording playing from the actual live performance of the singers!"
These songs are pretty great. It's interesting to see what level shazam is indexing music apparently not from the twenty's. I wonder if just using streaming services to index or if it has another database.
Excellent choice of scene at the beginning. You have to be really familiar with old records. That shellac record really shattered! Kudos to the turntable for tracking those wobbly old records.
Out of idle curiosity, do you suppose it might be possible to grind up a chunk of broken record, dissolve it in alcohol and use it to finish wood, like any other shellac? I know there is at least one broken record in a box in my mother's basement.
@@moconnell663 You could do that. But be sure to save the labels! Just cut everything off around it and you'll have a memory of the record. I plan to do that at some point too
I'm actually rather surprised at how Shazam was able to pick up a few of them! And, yeah, some of the stuff they managed to pull off before microphones is just incredible!
A Little Bit of Heaven sounds like it might’ve been sung by a Scotsman, where indeed tapped and rolled Rs are still a thing! His singing delivery reminded me a bit of Ivor Cutler, albeit nowhere near as silly as Cutler. Of course I can’t be bothered to look up the artist printed on the record label even though it would’ve taken less time than writing this comment :)
That’s not shocking. The demographic that would use apps such as Shazam are not the demographic that would listen to these classics and likely not even search for it either.
I think the lack of recognition for such old music is because the demand for it is pretty low and as companies everything they try to do is see what makes more profit, so the company behind shazam probably just doesnt deem it cost effective
Music and recordings like these are basically interesting only to hobbyists or historians. It happens to be a hobby of mine so I knew most of the artists, but most of these songs weren't even big hits at the time they were new. Japanese Sandman, My Buddy, Nelly Was A Lady, the two Irish songs were big hits, though the Irish songs & Nelly would have been old even in 1920. Those and the classical selections were the ones that would be recognized even in 1930, but most of the others would have already been forgotten.
