The Influence Machine: A Commentary on Hähnel and Martensen (2019)

IF 0.6 0 MUSIC
D. Shanahan
{"title":"The Influence Machine: A Commentary on Hähnel and Martensen (2019)","authors":"D. Shanahan","doi":"10.18061/emr.v14i1-2.7118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This commentary discusses and contextualizes Hahnel and Martensen's analysis of Edison's recordings and correspondence, situating their study within some of the work done on the diffusion of innovations, and some other work on the history of recording. Their findings–that the mechanical limitations of recording possibly contributed to Edison's distaste for vocal vibrato–is mirrored in much of the work on early instrumental recordings, but whereas the effect for instrumental recordings was an increased vibrato, the solution for vocal recordings was the opposite.","PeriodicalId":44128,"journal":{"name":"Empirical Musicology Review","volume":"42 1","pages":"50-52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Empirical Musicology Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18061/emr.v14i1-2.7118","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MUSIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This commentary discusses and contextualizes Hahnel and Martensen's analysis of Edison's recordings and correspondence, situating their study within some of the work done on the diffusion of innovations, and some other work on the history of recording. Their findings–that the mechanical limitations of recording possibly contributed to Edison's distaste for vocal vibrato–is mirrored in much of the work on early instrumental recordings, but whereas the effect for instrumental recordings was an increased vibrato, the solution for vocal recordings was the opposite.
影响机器:Hähnel与马腾森评论(2019)
这篇评论讨论了hannel和Martensen对爱迪生录音和通信的分析,并将其置于背景中,将他们的研究置于一些关于创新传播的工作中,以及其他一些关于录音历史的工作中。他们的发现——录音的机械限制可能导致了爱迪生对人声振动的厌恶——反映在早期器乐录音的许多工作中,但是器乐录音的效果是增加了人声振动,而人声录音的解决方案恰恰相反。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信