Additional notes: 1. The 78 I smashed was already cracked. I hid the broken part with my hand. 2. Stereo 45s were a flop the first time around (1958-1961), as well, and didn't start coming back until the late '60s, so Columbia was right to sit out that fad. 3. Did you notice how the spindle hole forms part of Columbia's fancy "33" logo? That's really clever. 4. Columbia's mono 7" 33s were made from polystyrene, just like their 45s. Styrene was cheaper to make than vinyl, but more brittle and much more prone to groove wear. 5. The August 10th, 1963 issue of Billboard was the last to list 33 RPM singles on the Hot 100 chart; at that time, only 5 of the top 100 singles were available as 7" 33s. Even when priced lower than 45s, people still didn't want to buy them. 6. 33⅓ RPM remained standard on all Seeburg jukeboxes until 1971, when they made it an extra-cost option. Two small companies kept making Little LPs for jukeboxes until the mid-'70s.
I'm a big fan of The Beatles, and I'm in Uruguay. All their singles pressed here are 33rpm, not 45, and small hole, so for me "the normal" is "of course singles are 33rpm too!" hahaha. I think I've never seen a 45 made here, all the 45rpm records I have were made in other countries.
As a kid, in the early-80s, I could go into town, see a movie, get a hamburger then go buy a 7“ single with my pocket money. Back then I wasn’t into albums and the songs we listened to then weren’t really timeless masterpieces, so just having the band’s current hit was good enough. I can’t remember the prices but what I do remember was that 12“ LPs were darned expensive, so if I wanted the whole album I’d go visit someone with a blank cassette or just take the plunge and buy the real deal on tape.
Now you'd need $50 in your pocket to do that. $20 to see a new movie, add your popcorn and drink and you're close to $35 and then at least $10 for a fast food meal. The only thing that has stayed the same price is singles, $1 for a iTunes download but you don't get any of the nice looking packaging and you can't resell it or let a friend borrow it.
I have a minor nitpick! Duke Ellington actually had quite the youthful audience in the late fifties. In 1956 during his concert at Newport the jazz was so swinging that he caused a riot. People were in ecstasy and frenzy. Live At Newport is one of the landmark live jazz recordings (though a lot of it was re-recorded in the studio). Diminuendo in Blue is what caused the frenzy specifically. The epic tenor sax solo from Paul Gonsalves is amazing and will get you going! It's fifteen minutes long but just ramps up more and more with energy. It's what revitalized Ellington for the rest of his life and got him signed to Columbia Duke Ellington would collaborate with so many cutting edge jazz artists in the early sixties such as Mingus and Coltrane. But before the Newport concert his popularity waned big time and he could only get gigs at places like ice rings and community centers. Ellington couldn't even get record deals.
@@floydnut5908 One of the greatest comebacks in music history if not the greatest! If someone adopts it into a movie or something it'd be a hit for sure. The Duke always made sure to pay his orchestra no matter how tough the times were which makes the comeback all the more deserving.
I wouldn't call it a riot--though it sounded like one! There was no violence, nobody got hurt and no property was destroyed. Only people dancing and screaming and yelling. I love listening to the recording and hearing how the crowd starts gradually getting louder with each chorus, especially after that young blonde got up and began dancing. Together, she, Paul and Duke created a unique moment in music history.
The "Chicken Fat Song" actually has some mildly intersting history. It was an early government commissioned composition in support of Kennedy's then-new presidential youth fitness initiative which still exists today. It was even composed by Meredith Willson (Broadway composer, The Music Man, etc.) and performed by Robert Preston. Roughly 20 years later I remember it vividly being used in my elementary school gym class.
Me too! I certainly remember it being played on a school record player during my early elementary years of the late 70s. I seem to remember another song with something about Toe-Knee-Chest-Nut as some kind of warm up routine
At first I thought that song might have come from "The Music Man." Thanks for sharing the background. Speaking of Robert Preston, and a little off topic, whenever I hear his name I think of his hysterical performance as the doctor in the Blake Edwards' parody of Hollywood, "S.O.B." Maybe it's not a great movie, but some very funny performances.
I was recently in a record shop and i picked up a new sealed copy of Sergio Mendez and Brazil '66. To my surprise, this 12" LP plays at 45RPM. Apparently there are a number of these 12" 45s floating around. The additional speed provides better frequency response especially toward the inner groves. I can't say that I heard much difference, but it does sound good. Albums in the 60s tended to be pretty short anyway with only about 15 minutes of music per side. Most songs clocked in at about 3 minutes, which was the magic number for radio play.
And still brand-new new records can come as 12-inch, 45 RPM. A progressive heavy metal band, Ghost Ship Octavious, put out a record on vinyl, and it is 12" and plays at 45. I first put it on, thinking it was 33 1/3, but it just didn't "sound right", so switched to 45 and lo-n-behold! Didn't think modern records were still like that, but there you go!
Many late 1970s disco releases were 12" singles, and some ran at 45rpm. One example: "Born To Be Alive" by Patrick Hernandez, about 8 minute runtime on a 12" 45.
Zenith had tried making a player during the initial release of the 7" 33 that exclusively played 7' records. They called it the "Twin-7", because it had two 7-inch turntables that spin at two speeds: One with a small spindle that spun at 33 1/3 and one with a large spindle that spun at 45. It could change records on both turntables, and had a single tonearm that pivoted to either turntable. It failed pretty hard, mainly because the format failed. It also had issues with the pivoting tonearm breaking.
Thanks for raising awareness 📻 That product sounds like the "skiing slope" auto reverse cassette player: Fun as a novelty, and *insane* 😸 What was their reasoning that two tables at different speed were in some way better than one where you could change the speed (and spindle size)? 😅
Zenith also tried to go with Quadraphonic(4Track) disks and consoles. the real reason why, this idea flopped... was because of the discrete board. I have been using the wire setup for quadraphonic, since the 90's and I use this wire, to remaster LP's 45s,78s... with. mono and stereo. sound way better after the remastering!
@@wendysremix I'm in the US and I have several UK 45rpm records, and yes, the centers CAN be popped out to fit the larger spindle. I haven't done that as it would be pointless to me as my other (US) 45s have "spider" adapters so all of my records play on the smaller spindle.
@@wendysremix I never said all UK 45s have the feature, But the feature DID exist. Mine are from the '60s and '70s, perhaps this feature was abandoned by the 1980s 🤷♂️
In the 1980's I had over eighty 12" "Maxi-Singles." They were a mixture of 45rpm and 33rpm. There was one song, usually remixed, per side and since there was more space for wide grooves the volume of the mix could be much higher. I believe that they were meant for disco's and dance clubs and fans of the artists, like me!
Most maxi-singles I've seen are a longer remix of some song in one side and two songs on the other, usually one or both not available in the album standard edition
@@freeman10000Yeah a lot of remasters/hipster rip offs are produced as double albums playing at 45rpm. Superior sound quality at a much higher price of course 👍
The 45rpm speed was just better for singles, not only because of the genre of music like rock and roll, it’s also audiophiles liked faster recording speeds for certain songs!
@mipmipmipmipmip it’s only longer songs like extended plays! 33rpm has few advantages for those singles, but overall for 45s, they were easy to play and cheaper.
The original stereophonic recordings were released by an independent recording label, Audio Fidelity Records which did a lot of sound effects recordings,and that was in December of 1957. This is an extremely interesting video. Thank you for sharing this video and information with us.
In the U.K. all shop bought records had the same size spindle. The only players needing the larger size were jukeboxes (usually American made). Some singles had a push out section in the centre. If not the company owning the jukebox would have a special tool cut a larger hole. If you bought ex Jukebox records (like I did) you could buy plastic "spiders" to clip in the large hole and convert it down to normal size.
it's really interesting that Seeburg got behind the 33rpm 7". Seeburg was very influential in the success of the 45rpm single. RCA was not doing well with it until 45's began to appear in jukeboxes in the early 1950's, right at the same time as rock and roll music began to become popular. Back then, the newest music was first released to the jukebox operators prior to radio play. And the small size of the 45 allowed Seeburg to make machines that held first 50 records (100sides), and by 1955, 100 records. The 78 machines mostly held only 20 records, so it really boosted Seeburg over the competitors. But the multi-song 33 was their way of charging more for each record side, so it was strictly a profit driven move on their part. And the best part was that the newer dual speed machines required very little in the way of mechanical changes to play those records.
12" 45s are my fav. I have an old R.E.M. _The_ _One_ _I_ _Love,_ 12" extended single from their IRS records days. It sounds so great. Faster is sometimes better. sometimes.
I was born in 1972 and I missed out on the 7-in 33 and a half record craze. Thank you so much for making a great video about this subject. Also I love that you had Mr Jaws clipped up underneath the lid of your portable record player lol
I was born in 1959 and well remember the four-speed turntable. We had 33 LPs, 45 singles and 78s. I remember asking my mom about the 16 speed, and she explained to me that it was for spoken-word recordings, which were often made for blind people. My dad had a bunch of Spike Jones and his City Slickers 78s that we enjoyed listening to--probably my first exposure to recorded comedy. (I do not recommend, though, using the record changer for 78s! I did once, and when the next 78 fell onto the record beneath it, it broke into several pieces. I don't think I told my parents about it--I was too shocked and guilty.) I don't think we had any 7-inch LPs, though. Never knew they existed until now!
Here in the UK the 7in 33rpn stereo did have some success, right into the mid 70s. Where it was called EP(Extended Play), with 3 songs on each side.. And we had LP(Long Play) for 12in 33rpm stereo records.
Who would have thought, starting a trend in adults and hoping it spread to teens wouldn't work? It's almost like record labels have always been out of touch about music distribution.
Still a bigger success than the Highway Hi-fi. That was basically a 7 inch format intended for cars, it spun at 16 RPM and had even finer grooves than a regular microgroove LP or single, which made it possible to fit a whole LP material on it. However, it was only available for only one type of car, and only for a very limited time around 1956. It suffered from skips on more bumpy roads (the slow speed was partly chosen to prevent it), and the lack of things to play on it. There were only around twenty reissued LPs. This "ultra microgroove" technology never used afterwards, which is a kind of shame.
Interesting video! This reminds me of the DVD R/RW format war that just ended in a tie, basically, where eventually drives that can burn to and read both +/-hyphen formats became the de facto standard, and even newer generations of both formats were made more like each other (or at least + became more like the hyphen version while still meeting the + criteria). I grew up with my parents having, and then they gave me several of their old discs, 7", 10", and 12", some of which 7s are 45s and some which are 33s. And I've wondered about it for a long time, so thanks!
Another great video! BTW - if you can find the Elvis "Compact 33s" you'll have some quite rare records.
Год назад
In Argentina the single and double 7 inch 33 RPM was a standard. We also had 45 7 inch but with the small spindle. The large hole was only on imported 45.
The 33 1/3 rpm speed was introduced by RCA Victor in 1931, but it used the standard wide-groove like the 78's. The 33 1/3 rpm speed was used for radio transcriptions and recording studios used then as session discs, which would be used to cut the 78 rpm records. As a sideline, what we would call stereo later, the motion picture industry recorded sound optically on movie film starting in the late-1930's, and usually 3-tracks. It wasn't until after WWII, when magnetic film was invented that they moved away from optical film recording. It was still 3-track. Now, those movies on 16mm film we saw in school still used an optical sound track, as did the films used by TV stations. The 45 rpm 7" record was introduced to replace the 78 rpm format, not to compete with Columbia. Because these easier to handle records had larger center holes, RCA introduced a new kind of record changer to play them, which were offered as attachment players and stand-alone self contained record players. Remember, most record players were single speed 78 rpm into the 1950's. Special 33 1/3 rpm attachment players had been around since 1948 when Columbia introduced the LP. Adding attachment players were nothing new. Anyway, 78 rpm record changers could only play 10" or 12 " records automatically, so 7" records were out. Even the new record changers which could play both 33's and 78's had 2 tone arms and the one for the 33 1/3 rpm had to be operated manually. When Columbia introduced their 7" 33 1/3 rpm singles, they were a complete failure because nobody wanted them and only those 33 1/3 rpm attachment players could play them and manually. Who wanted to get up and change a record manually every 2 1/2 minutes? Didn't have to do that on a 78 or 45 rpm changer. Heck, a stack of 10 records played for over 20 minutes. The LP's didn't even play that long per side. When stereo records were introduced in 1958, the major record companies produced stereo LP's and 45 rpm records simultaneously along side the mono records and 78's. The jukebox companies, led by Seeburg and Wurlitzer, jumped on the stereo bandwagon. 33 1/3 7" singles and EP's were still around, so they often also had stereo and mono counterparts. The Columbia group ones were mono as well as most from Capitol. Because these 33 singles were 7", the jukebox industry picked up on these as a way to play more album tracks, and to show off their new stereo jukeboxes. With Seeburg jumping on that bandwagon, the 5-pack "Artist Of The Week". From a 12-song LP, 10 songs were chosen, each being put on one side of the 5 singles. These also had different song pairings than the 45 rpm singles. With the Seeburgs, eventhough they had stereo amps(which was still optional), the stereo wouldn't kick in unless a 33 1/3 rpm record was played from the 1960 Q to the 1962 DS. The 45's would only play in mono. Most jukeboxes would change speed automatically and mechanically but Seeburg did it electronically by changing the frequency of the current. It sensed when to change the speed because of the difference in hole sizes because the record clamps closed down further on the 45's, actuating a clamp switch. Seeburg used this system all the way to the end of their record playing jukeboxes. Seeburg decided that it was better to put more than one selection on each side of these 7" 33 1/3 rpm records and the "Little LP" was created. The 1963 Seeburg LPC1 was the first jukebox to go to this new formats. The others soon followed. Instead of 10 tracks from 1 LP, they could have 4-6 tracks from 10 different LP's. A dual-pricing section for 10 records was set aside so that the juke could play all 45's or 10 LLP's for a bigger price. Most of the LLP's you will find are M.O.R. or C&W artists, but all the Rock and Roll artists were represented too. The Beatles, Beach Boys, Led Zeppelin, etc. I have quite a few in my collection. Now, why did the Columbia group have mainly M.O.R. artists? Well, it is well known that Mitch Miller was the A&R person and he hated rock and roll, so he refused to sign any of those artists. Paul Revere and The Raiders were Columbia's first rock artists. With that, Columbia entered the main stream and had a resounding success and was on the map again. The British Invasion had taken over so Columbia was either going to sink or swim. They chose wisely. The only reason that they tried to kill the 45 rpm single was because it only cost peenies less than an LP did. We have the jukebox industry to thank for the 45 rpm single lasting another 10 years or so. There have always been record-playing jukeboxes and they are still being made, which only play 7" 45 rpm records. Jukeboxes were built to last 10-15 years in commercial service and when the record industry decided to cut back on 45's, as cassette singles had taken over the consumer market for singles, the jukebox operators said, hey wait a minute, we have brand new jukeboxes and others with a lifespan of atleast 10 more years which only play 7" 45's. So, the record industry kept making 7" 45 rpm singles. Although there were still many rock titles available, the jukebox industry had become dominated by C&W and Hispanic music, so those music styles ushered out the record-playing jukebox era. CD jukeboxes took over the industry and then they were replaced by jukeboxes with hard drive and online music access. Record and CD jukeboxes are still being manufactured but are now aimed at the home consumer nostalgia market.
The case for these things might have been stronger if more record changers could gracefully intermix 12", 10" and 7" records, but those from V-M, Ensing and RCA could only really intermix 12" and 10" records, with the switch to 7" records taking place on the first drop. Collaro changers, used by Magnavox, could intermix all 3 but only in descending order while ELAC and Dual were in the process of introducing changers that couldn't intermix at all. So Garrard and BSR were the only changers that could really take advantage of the "one speed, three sizes" rule. Also, RCA had flooded the market with 45-only changers with non-removable big spindles, making the new 7" 33s a non-starter for many. I'm surprised Seeburg was so enthusiastic about these records; I had always heard that one of the few advantages of the larger holes was they they allowed jukeboxes to mount and dismount records with less chance of a jam.
What I find interesting is that in the UK (maybe elsewhere), the 45's used the small 33 spindle. Oh, and 45 RPM 12" extended/maxi singles and EPs, though I think we may have had some of those in US.
When i was in my teens (51 years old now) this was the only affordable medium for me. The cost in the Netherlands was about 5 to 7 gulden. I had quite a collection of these, i also ad uncles and teachers that donated their old 45's to me. It formed me musically: Dutch bands, international artists, promosingles etc. Later on in my twenties i started collecting used long-play records till this day. I still have all my 45's in the old fashioned cases.
78s had so few songs on each side that the record sleeves were bound into albums of 5 or so records in a book. The word "album" stuck. 16 speed was used for Talking Books for the Blind. The players were loaned to each person and also had 33 and maybe 45 speed, too. First records were vinyl. Later records were a thin plastic. Those "cut out" records were also in magazines (samplers) and on cereal boxes.
I have an album of 78s I got from a thrift store a few years back that sadly no longer exists. The song names are written on the inside front cover in pencil. I've wondered a few times about who owned it and wrote those names.... The thin plastic records are called Flexi-Discs and I have three of them, and one is actually blue!
I don't really remember it that way....but....45's were relegated to two songs; an 'A' side and a 'B' side. That was great for us teens who wanted instant songs of our choice without having to buy the full album. But I can only speak from the late '50s onward. I even remember 45 spindle stackers that fit over the thin 33 spindle stackers.
The larger hole in the 7” was designed for easier handling. It basically worked. The jukebox mechanism could grasp and “flip over” the 45 rpm records. My understanding is that 78 jukeboxes could only play one side of any disc.
And about a decade after the second 7" format war things got even more mixed up when 12" 45RPM Disco singles (later renamed club singles, and similar names in the 80's when Disco stopped being cool) were introduced. They were initially more aimed at club DJs but as time went on some were targeted at the general record buying audience. They had some distinct advantages too. They could space the grooves out more an master the discs louder (greater stylus movement) which meant the records would have more dynamic range and sound better longer since the crackles had to be louder than normal to have the same presence on a louder recording (when you can't reduce background noise one way to have better SNR is simply crank the original signal way up when sending it into the carrier medium). They also had longer run time than a standard 7" 45 while also not being so long as to be a whole album. Most makers used them for 5-10 minute songs, but some crammed 2-3 cuts on a side...Some popular songs on Disco Singles often got the extended mix on one side and the standard 7" 45/radio mix, plus an instrumental mix on the other side.
And to make things more confusing, most 12" singles were 45 RPM in Europe and 33⅓ RPM in North America -- possibly for compatibility with turntables like the one I showed which assume that any record with the small hole must play at that speed.
Thanks for the short background on the 16 setting. I thought it was so I could listen to “The Chipmunks Sing The Beatles Hits” in their normal human voices.
Always like to take the opportunity to say VWestlife is a truly wonderful channel. The only issue with 33, 7 inchers is the fact the music programme runs further into the poorer distortion and velocity area. In general the inside track of a 7 inch would have no material on a 12 inch disc. Track 2 of a standard LP offers the highest fidelity from distortion levels, angular velocity and less prone to effects of warping (not Star Trek warping) combined.
If you look at a 7" 33 RPM single you can see that they kept the grooves as much towards the outer edge as possible, instead of spacing them to take up the whole side of the disc.
@@vwestlife Most every single will encroach on the run in groove area, some albums themselves have a very narrow run in but any that has been made with quality in mind will have a lot of real estate there. Just about every 7 inch will have at least a cm or so over the worst album, some will be all in what would be the run out of a decent LP, Decent 12'' 45s are on a different dimension and can be the pinnacle of what vinyl is capable, though so many were badly engineered.
Some 78s are surprisingly wonderful. I hope you listen to one you are about to break before doing it, to make sure you aren’t ruining something you’d be totally surprised that you like. I remember discovering Ave Maria that way.
It says here they stopped making 7 inch 33 RPM EPs around 1964 but I know that website shown on the laptop early in the video show record companies continued to make them until at least the mid 70s.
Back in the day you could buy a bag of adaptors for the large hole 45s at the record store. They were as flat as the record and snapped into the hole so you just needed to set the speed. I just left them mounted on the 45s that I listened to often.
To add even more to the mix for absolutely no reason, a Garfield record book I got when I was a kid, had the larger center hole as per usual on American 45s. However, this record was a 33.
My 1961 Jukebox has support for 45 AND 33rpm singles. I don't have any 33's loaded, so I have the support for that disabled at this time. Seeburg AY100
When I was in the third grade---heh, once a week, Mr. Mackler would play the chicken fat song as we kids marched (sorta) around the gym.He was a champion yeller, that's all I remember.
the spindle cut out was mainly a product of the need to quickly change records on a jukebox. And instead of making two different 7" records for both jukeboxes and consumers, RCA decided to just make the same standard for both even though in practice, the large hole created problems but by the time a large enough people cared, it was so engrained into music marketing that 7" singles had a large spindle in the center, that that became the defacto standard around the world and everyone just accepted that as such.
I'm a Connie Francis collector now since 51 years ago[1972] .I have a South African LP that has 24 tracks and runs on the rare 16 1/3 rpm called CONNIE FRANCIS SOUVENIR ALBUM on MGM E 4003 issued in 1967. i also have those Seeburg albums from her ,there are 5 of them taken tracks from her LP'S [My Thanks To You,Country Music Connie Style,Greatest American Waltzes,Jealous Heart, Movie Greats of the Sixties [all run at 33rpm and are mini albums issued by SEEBURG under licence from MGM and put together for the jukebox trade.4 CF 45's were issued on stereo MGM in FEB 1959 and they are very difficult to find in mint cond. CF 78's were issued in 1955-1959 on MGM 12015 WITHOUT THE K denoting 45rpm equivalents. There are 45's that speed at 33rpm also but are numbered. Another thing that you could make a vid about is the use of electronic stereo which was terrible.Why did they use this since most tracks they had true stereo?
Kevin, did you notice that there's been no widespread celebration of the 75th Anniversary of the LP Record? The format was officially announced and launched by Columbia Records at a press conference on June 18, 1948. I am shocked to see very few articles or videos on this anniversary.
How's that for a coincidence: You show An American Tale records in your video today. CinemaSins just happened to release EWW An American Tale today as well.
I found the 45 to be convenient for the bands where you like only one or two of their songs... Why buy an album for the one hit? K-Tel compilations, bands that put together great albums overall, or the easy listening/instrumental are the primary LPs I have collected, while the contemporary hits are all on 45s... identical to what the two camps of consumers were doing in the day!
hey VW, when I was a kid I had a changer and it would SWITCH SPEEDS as well as allow stacking of different sized records, it could tell if there was a shellac record by the weight. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself. it was a WEBCOR with one speaker in the front and I believe it had tubes.
In soviet russia, they were no 45 rpm records in production, they only had 33 rpm records, and there were a whole bunch of 7 inch records, with two songs per side, there were a whole bunch of different records, i even have 7 inch CCR and Beatles records, and 7 inch records were in mass production all the way up to 90s
Columbia’s stubbornness seems to work in other countries, my dad have a collection of 7” and all of them are 33 1/3. I never used the 45 rpm speed on the record player.
As far as the 7 inch LP is concerned, most of the major labels continued making them through the end of the 60s. I have a pair of Colgems jukebox LPs by the Monkees, released in early 1967. Each of these LPs are 7 inches in diameter and has three songs on each side. I also have one by the Dave Clark Five, two by Simon and Garfunkel and one by The Searchers. I have seen jukebox LPs by as varied of artists as Tony Bennett, Jack Greene, Petula Clark, Percy Faith and Jack Jones.
As a teen in the 1980s I would NEVER buy a turntable that didn't have a 78rpm setting. Doing so would cut me out of ~40 years of the pop music scene- and we all still dug many of the 1940s tunes in particular. Fortunately for myself and friends, Thorsens TD124 turntables could be had for $50 at the time... I bought a few of them and have never looked back!
6:20 98 cents for a 33 1/3 single hit record! To put that in perspective, US coins were 90% silver at the time and a Dollar represented an ounce of silver! That's 23 bucks for what is basically a single. That is just stupidly expensive.
What was the difference in manufacturing costs? (You mentioned that 33 rpm singles used more vinyl.) Also were stereo records more expensive to master and press than mono?
Record players made before Stereo records came out can't play them properly, and it took a while before Stereo records began to catch on, so they made both Stereo and mono versions. Later record players (like my 1975 Newcomb School Record Player) have cartridges that can play both (my Newcomb only has one speaker but a 'Stereo Compatible' cartridge).
The thing about the spindle size was it wasn't an issue in the UK (or to put it another way, the auto speed select wouldn't work with British records) In the UK, we only had one spindle size. The larger spindle size used for 45s in the USA was for jukeboxes over here Domestic 45s used the same spindle size as 33s (and 78s) Also, it's interesting that they didn't start with 7" 33s being "little LPs" with more songs on them than a 45. Surely the whole point of the slower speed was that a disc the same size would have a longer play time?
random fact: I'm in Uruguay and all the Beatles singles were released in 33 not 45, and they all have small hole. Only imported singles from other countries are either 45 or big hole. I think I've never seen anything 45 pressed here, only 33.
Fun fact (probably not): Those 7" 45RPM records with the large centre hole were actually a rarity here in England and were generally regarded as worthless "because they had been cut for use in a juke-box". Some did come with a centre you could break out for the large spindle though. I have examples of both. We have what we call a "master-dome" with many turntables for playing such records. Auto-changers only accommodated one size.
Garrard, Dual and Philips, and probably other manufacturers offered aftermarket adapters to enable their changers to also change 45s with the big center hole. Obviously, you couldn’t intermix big and small hole records in the same stack, but mixing different record sizes were often possible as long as they used the same playing speed.
@@unusualstuff Interesting to know that, thanks. I have seen one of the US counterparts which included something like this, maybe on this channel or Technology Connections? .. I have a number of clip-in plastic centres which we use here to avoid using the master-dome or centering the records by eye/feel (which I sometimes do anyway if I can't find a spare one). I don't know how well these would work with an auto-changer, though.
and the portion of video when you changed from 33 to 45 will not get content matched because the algorithm will not be able to match forcing content owners to download the video, slow it down and do manual reports. keep up the good work circumventing content match.
Interesting! In Argentina, from the early 60s to the early to mid 70s, singles were 33RPM. Older and newer singles were 45RPM (the older with big spindle hole or break-away center, the newer with small hole).
I don't remember all the details, but Seeburg and at least one other company did adapt 33 rpm 7 inch records for a weird sort of 'generic music' jukebox system. Same idea basically as Top and Hit records, in that they were popular tunes performed by NOT-original artists sold for cheap, but two or three to a record side., and only available via a subscription service via the jukebox manufacturer. Like the 33 rpm 7 inch record in the consumer market, it landed with a sickening wet THUD. One background music company, ROWE/CUSTOMUSIC, used 7", 33 rpm records with three generic tunes per side in their early BGM system. It used a carousel-type mechanism (from a Rowe jukebox!) with 100 discs to play up to 600 tunes. To update the library every three months or so, they would come and swap out TWENTY of those records. They were stamping replacement records for that system into the late 1960s, though Rowe had moved on to making discs for Seeburg 1000 systems (3rd party vendor) and tape-based systems of their own.
Not addressed in this video was the oddball large hole that 45s had. Originally all records used the small hole, but when Victor released their exclusive new 45s they wanted to make customers buy new players for them, which would only be equipped with that extra-large new spindle. (RCA produced record players in addition to the records themselves). Obviously that didn't really work, and other manufacturers soon either provided a removable larger spindle, or you could buy cheap plastic adapters to snap into the larger hole - although I was never able to successfully do that.
You would've had to buy a new turntable anyway, because the 33⅓ RPM LP format had only been on the market for less than a year when the 45 was introduced, and very few people bought 33⅓ RPM-only record players. By the time most people started switching over from 78s in the early to mid 1950s, both LPs and 45s had been well-established and virtually all new record players supported all speeds (even including the new 16⅔ RPM speed introduced by Zenith in 1950).
I don't know if this is representative, but here in Brazil my father had a lot of 33 compacts in his collection and you saw a lot on record stores too, but all with one song on each side or 2 songs (we called simple compact and double compact).
Just to cause confusion, Love Like a Man by 10 Years After, from 1970, has a 3:05 min studio version on the A side at 45 RPM, and a 8:16 min live version on the B side at 33⅓ RPM! I much prefer the live version, mainly due to the long guitar solo.
Having flashbacks to Mom buying us kids novelty singles at the mall. Disco Duck and Stars on 45 come to mind. We did manage to get the Pac Man Fever album after much begging. 🤓
12:58 How could that work? The tech didn't exist to selectively play one of the 3 songs per side in a jukebox. Like if you put in your nickel, you couldn't select disk 12, side A song 3. It would need to be able to detect (without touching) the blank spot in between songs 1 and 2 and 2 and 3.
