"Deserter's Songs" 35mm Film

[Ryan Silva]

So i'm sitting here listening to 'Mercury Rev' and I finally thought to ask the questions: 1. Was the album tracked on 35mm Film or Mixed down to 35mm film? 2. What the hell possesed Dave Fridmann to do this? 3. Anyone else doing this? I have heard of useing old film pre amps for tracking but film, what could possibly be the benifit.


Thanks

[drumsound]

I don't know the record, but what makes you think it was recorded on film? Is there something in the liner notes or is you statement based on listening?

Dave Fridman might have done this to sound/be different, or maybe there's something about the sonics of film that he wanted to get from that record.

Or maybe his computer and 2-track took a shit the same week...

[klangtone]

The liner notes say

"Original master recorded on 35/mm magnetic film"

It's interesting because most of the album sounds pretty hi-fi.
And then there are a couple pieces that sound really old, like they were recorded on some vintage technology. But if it all hit 35mm film, I'm impressed!

Roy

[japmn]

The film is just 35mm Mag track. It is (or was) what they mastered film to for decades. It is the equivalent (very close to) 1" tape and I hear from people I know who have done film sync that 35mm 2 track is one of the better sounding formats. It seems the speed would be slow to me. As far as I know the only reason it is on film si so it (using the sprocket holes) stays in sync with the picture film. that means it moves at the same speed as movie film (24 fps) which is much slower than analog tape machines (30, 15, or maybe even 7 1/2 ips.)

[PeterSawatzky]

Assuming a four-perforation-high frame, 24 fps works out to approximately 17 ips. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35mm

[japmn]

Assuming a four-perforation-high frame, 24 fps works out to approximately 17 ips. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35mm

Cool, I've always wondered about that but been too lazy to look it up.

[centurymantra]

I always assumed this was simply a kitschy element of the sleeve design...more a graphic design element than anything else. Kind of like adding a "RECORDED IN PSYCHO-SONIC STEREO!!!" header to a record package that's emulating an old movie poster or something along those lines. I'm thinking of those Man or Astro Man album covers. It never occurred to me that they actually used film as a recording medium. Are we taking them too literally....? Or did they really use 35mm film. If so, that's pretty cool.

[japmn]

I have always assumed that they do actually use film and as far as what I have heard about the quality of the medium, I would too. Hmmm... Ebay search for a 35 mm machine anyone. How much does mag track cost?

[tfred812]

Sinatra recorded an album (The Concert Sinatra) on 35mm film in 1963. From Charles Granata's amazing "Sessions with Sinatra":

"...The proceedings were preserved via a Westrex 35mm recording system: a sprocket-type multihead-head magnetic recorder, utilizing 35mm recording film for the greatest possible signal-to-noise ratio. The advantages of the system were many. Since the transport film of magnetic film is 96 frames per minute (much faster than standard audiotape) it resulted in a better high-frequency reponse and lower noise levels. Also, the film stock was wider than half-inch, three-track magnetic tape, which allowed for increased saturation and frequency response."

[Ryan Silva]

I always assumed this was simply a kitschy element of the sleeve design...more a graphic design element than anything else. Kind of like adding a "RECORDED IN PSYCHO-SONIC STEREO!!!" header to a record package that's emulating an old movie poster or something along those lines. I'm thinking of those Man or Astro Man album covers. It never occurred to me that they actually used film as a recording medium. Are we taking them too literally....? Or did they really use 35mm film. If so, that's pretty cool.

For years I passed it off as such, but after repeated listening I was convinced somthing was a little different. Alywas just assumed it was "Mercury Rev" and passed it off as inovative, ya know? Anyway a very informative thread, thanks.

Ryan

[ned]

i have a bit of a fetish for collecting weird old LPs in the "super-poly-fidelity-explosion!" genre - they are usually big band records with copious liner notes that give you details on the exact mics and setup of the recording, as well as whatever "amazing advancement in recording technology" is happening.

as a result, i happen to be holding Clebanoff and his orchestras "Strings Afire", which was recorded by Mercury Records in f:35d High Fidelity Perfect Presence Sound. This album was recorded to 35mm magnetic film for the following (supposed) benefits:

This original recording is made from 35mm magnetic film. Film means better, broader sound with a greater distortion-free dynamic range. It means that insturments and singers' voices are more accurately reproduced in terms of timbre, clarity and naturalness, thanks to the absence on film of flutter and background hiss. It means that the entire recording gains in perspective and spaciousness.

truth? marketing hype? blatant lies? you be the judge.

to be honest, this particular record sounds a bit small compared to a lot of my other 60s big band oddities, but i have a feeling the mixing had a lot to do with this (as well as the record being a 46 year old thrift-store find). when i first saw this record, i thought they had actually recorded the wave-form to celluloid, but it sounds like this is just magnetic tape with sprocket holes on the sides (so isn't that tape-hiss claim totally bogus?). as of 6 years ago when i was a projectionist in a movie theater, the 35mm film reel actually had a stereo "sound track" on the side of the picture which was literally two graphic waveforms read by a laser. whenever our ancient projectors went on the fritz (which was daily), the soundtrack would slip into view and you could actually see the waveform scroll by on the side of the screen as the movie played (pretty trippy).

i might try to do a quick and dirty capture of a few songs off this gem tonight and if i can get my hands on a scanner, i'll grab some shots of the cover and liner notes.

as silly as a lot of them are, it's awesome that at one point depth and fidelity were selling points, instead of "hot new ringtone and wallpaper!".