July 21, 2016 - 09:52 pm|
|Hi Steve, Sorry I wasn't more informative in last post. Specifically, when one looks at a typical Dynagroove record, the grooves have a dramatic, three-dimensional quality, almost as if the grooves are deeper, with higher walls. I realize this may not be completely accurate, but it is how the grooves look to me. The Italian LP has an ordinary, almost flat-appearing grooves, much like that on any 45rpm record. The sound is correspondingly disappointing. I am thinking this was just a marketing attempt for the Italian market. I hope that makes sense. |
July 21, 2016 - 01:52 pm|
|Hi Robert, Thank you for your comments and for reporting your experience with Questo e' il Dynagroove. Just curious, did you say that "it is not a true Dynagroove LP" because of the audio issues you heard or was there another reason? |
July 21, 2016 - 12:43 pm|
|As a late addendum, I did locate a pristine copy of the Italian release, "Questo e' il Dynagroove". It was listed on eBay italia and cost a mere $10., but $30 to ship!!! Sadly, it is not a true Dynagroove LP, and while the vinyl is in excellent condition, the sound quality is fair at best. No dynamics and spaciousness that are the norm on American pressings. Anyone else have any experience with this LP? |
July 21, 2016 - 12:31 pm|
|After much personal experience, and reading many articles referencing Dynagroove, my own opinion is that the criticisms have been very overstated, much akin to political opponents' attempts to caricature their competition. Seriously, if half of the condemnations were accurate, these records should have been a colossal failure for RCA Victor and the system would have been abandoned in short order. As I said in an earlier post, I have an Al Hirt Dynagroove LP that never fails to impress my fellow audiophile friends with its spaciousness of instruments and vocals, powerful dynamics, and crystal clarity of the trumpet high notes. I just don't hear the flaws that are thrown about. I like the comment about Dinah Shore!!! |
April 05, 2016 - 08:02 am|
|Hi Jeff, Thank you for your reasonable and thoughtful comments. While it's somewhat disturbing that there are so many unsubstantiated or erroneous comments posted in audio forums, I guess that's the price we have to pay for such a free marketplace of ideas. I sometimes have to remind myself of the the cornucopia of truly useful knowledge that the free Web also provides. It is perhaps the eighth Wonder of the World, if you will. |
April 05, 2016 - 01:07 am|
|I appreciate your balanced discussion of the merits and faults of Dynagroove. Go to some of the high-end hi-fi web forums and you'll still find the old dinosaurs (Dynasaurs?) from the 60's vilifying RCA for developing the process. Some have even gone so far afield as to claim that Dynagroove was invented to create records with a sound that would appeal more to women, who have no ear for music! (THEIR OPINION - NOT MINE!!)|
They also kvetch about RCA's lightweight Dynaflex discs of the 1970's; this despite the fact that the original RCA itself hasn't existed for 30 years, and it's been years more since they made any records with Dynagroove, Dynaflex, or for that matter Dinah Shore...
On my medium-level system, and played at the moderate volume I prefer, RCA's Dynagroove records sound fine, though maybe not noticeably better than other labels. (My experience is with "pop" recordings; I'm not much of a classical buff.) RCA's vinyl surfaces do seem to me very high in quality, clean sounding and durable. Unless they have been really abused, older RCA albums (and singles) usually sound quite good 40 or 50 years later.
By the way, I have some of the Dynagroove LPS mentioned here, including "The Best of Al Hirt" and "Supercussion," and think they sound great.