|
Post by garygraham on Sept 8, 2019 2:23:27 GMT
missing radio is far more likely to turn up as reel to reel audio recorders were common in the early 70s to a lot of children even, and to olders before that, hence why audio to all Dr Whos exists, video recorders didnt become common to the mid-1980s even then the early 1980s home VHS was only 288 lines rather than 576. my 1980 VHS recordings of Not The Nine O'clock news show this when converted to 576. We shall see in all the Top20 shows turn up as they were recorded by lots of children at the time. I think you're confusing the picture resolution of VHS (240 vertical lines that can be made out) with the horizontal lines of the TV system. If early 1980s VHS didn't have 576 horizontal lines then it wouldn't be interlaced video. Which it is. I had several VHS recorders during the 1980s and there isn't a great deal of difference between recordings from 1980 or 1989. In fact I also have Not the Nine O'Clock News recorded. There was no significant increase in picture resolution until SVHS came along at the end of the 80s and most people weren't interested in it.
|
|
|
Post by Natalie Sinead on Sept 15, 2019 10:43:20 GMT
One of the problems is also that most domestic tapers wanted the music not the DJ's, so cut them out. Years later, the tapers who grew up to be collectors realised with regret that they now wished they'd done the reverse.
|
|
|
Post by martinjwills on Nov 10, 2019 8:14:54 GMT
In the Top20 shows some recording have removed the chart run downs, which is annoying when ive been working on a list of the rundown tracks used, the edited Bo Rhap which is 3mins 30sec that Tom Browne used at the end of its chart rundown stille exists thankfully, as after the 9 weeks at number one, people probably had enough recordings of it by then. The edited Music by John Miles i havnt come across yet, again cut down at the end of its run, its great slao listning to the traffic news in the middle of shows, still the same all these years later. I have a few of the Tommy Boydd Nightlines on tape somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Byers on Nov 10, 2019 16:31:14 GMT
There's at least one dj we don't want to hear about.
|
|
|
Post by stevenprentice on Feb 9, 2021 13:23:39 GMT
Hi Eveyone,
New recordings can still appear. I inherited a huge amount of reel to reel and cassette recordings from a fellow enthusiast who died a few years ago. I have converted all the reel to reels - some going back to the 50's to digital files. Lots of radio recordings including many unheard pirate radio material. He worked in the pirate radio ships, as did I. The National Sound Archives have coppies of the files. I'm still faced with hundreds of cassettes that need transcribing to digital files and need some help. My career has been as an audio engineer so the transfers are up to professional standards. If anyone is interested in helping with this task - please get in touch. My e mail address is spe186@aol.com
Steve
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Feb 9, 2021 18:15:14 GMT
....In other words, a certain Rolling Stones song is fast becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. 19th Nervous Breakdown? Not Time is on My Side... Got it! 2000 Light Years From Home. (We have to find a way to collect the signals).
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Byers on Feb 9, 2021 23:38:41 GMT
Yes - old radio recordings can appear now and again. I'm wading through a load of reel-reel tapes right now. Lots of radio drama on them!!! But I would never offer the tapes to Kaleidoscope - its a black hole - stuff deposited never reappears. Sadly radio is of little interest to many even on this board. Luckily there is a thriving community in the UK OTR scene such as the ORCA folk. The American OTR scene is also very active and organised too with OTR communities kept in touch by an IO Groups mailing list and Facebook Group page, and with regular distros, and uploads to Archive.org
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Feb 11, 2021 10:00:52 GMT
Yes - old radio recordings can appear now and again. I'm wading through a load of reel-reel tapes right now. Lots of radio drama on them!!! But I would never offer the tapes to Kaleidoscope - its a black hole - stuff deposited never reappears. Hi all, I echo Stephen Byers view that offering material to Kaleidoscope does nothing to get the material heard. I think it's also worth pointing out what Kaleidoscope is; on the one hand you have an organisation that aims to save our lost TV heritage whilst at the same time raising money for charity. It is not in itself a charity. There is also a second Kaleidoscope that sometimes gets confused with the first and consists of Kaleidoscope Television Archives, which is a limited company and was incorporated in July last year and also Kaleidoscope DVD, a private limited company. The Kaleidoscope Television Archives Ltd company should not be confused with an earlier version of the company also called Kaleidoscope Television Archives Ltd which was incorporated in 2015 and was compulsorily dissolved in early January 2018 because, well, it never submitted any accounts. Its assets (if there were any) now belong to the Crown. In both versions of Kaleidoscope Television Archives Ltd. (the principal business of which was noted as "Television programme distribution activities") the only people involved in them were/are Christopher Perry and his wife. If you are thinking of donating material to Kaleidoscope, it might be worth asking which one you are donating to. As Stephen has pointed out there are alternatives; I have a good relationship with the BBC archive and regularly forward material directly or put people in contact with them. There are several criteria they use to assess whether they retain material. If the recording you have is a television soundtrack and it's a missing programme, the BBC Archive will take it, even if incomplete, if the material is of a listenable quality. They will even take material that they have alternative copies of so they can produce a single 'best' version. That is my recent experience. I do also forward material on to the BBC sound archive via the BBC archive. It helps that both archives are now housed in the same building. Stephen, your radio drama if missing could in theory get an airing on Radio 4 Xtra etc... if the BBC had access to it so do get in touch with me if you're interested in sharing with them. Paul
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Feb 11, 2021 16:45:16 GMT
Is Paul auditioning for the part of Sir Humphrey Appleby? He’d clearly be brilliant 👍
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Feb 11, 2021 17:14:30 GMT
Is Paul auditioning for the part of Sir Humphrey Appleby? He’d clearly be brilliant 👍 I like you.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Byers on Feb 11, 2021 17:52:18 GMT
Whilst a group of us are researching and recovering Brit. comedy - and indeed have discovered lots of 'missing' episodes - my personal interest is in recovering musical docudramas. These are the forgotten and rarely aired productions from producer giants such as the prolific Charles Chilton, Charles Parker, Philip Donnellan, Alan Lomax, Ewan MacColl, A.L.Lloyd, Brian Vaughan, Michael Mason, et al. The young socially aware people at the BBC appear to be totally disinterested in their productions. There is a growing movement to collect ad restore their works and then put these out into the public domain - where they belong. Strangely a number of retired-BBC staff are supporting us; many have worked on these very productions. These too are unhappy at the dismissive attitudes of current staff towards these classics.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Feb 12, 2021 1:12:58 GMT
Whilst a group of us are researching and recovering Brit. comedy - and indeed have discovered lots of 'missing' episodes - my personal interest is in recovering musical docudramas. These are the forgotten and rarely aired productions from producer giants such as the prolific Charles Chilton, Charles Parker, Philip Donnellan, Alan Lomax, Ewan MacColl, A.L.Lloyd, Brian Vaughan, Michael Mason, et al. The young socially aware people at the BBC appear to be totally disinterested in their productions. There is a growing movement to collect ad restore their works and then put these out into the public domain - where they belong. Strangely a number of retired-BBC staff are supporting us; many have worked on these very productions. These too are unhappy at the dismissive attitudes of current staff towards these classics. Hi Stephen, I'm sure that you're being ironic when you describe retired BBC staff interest in your endeavour strange, and believe me, there is a big interest in all forms of lost entertainment with the archivists at the BBC. Things come in and out of fashion like the wind but these shows will have their day again; it just needs someone to put forward a well thought out case. But they'll only reach a wider audience if they're in the archive to be re-broadcast. You can't make much of a case if there is nothing to play. Regardless, good luck. Paul
|
|
|
Post by Richard Marple on Feb 12, 2021 22:36:18 GMT
Whilst a group of us are researching and recovering Brit. comedy - and indeed have discovered lots of 'missing' episodes - my personal interest is in recovering musical docudramas. These are the forgotten and rarely aired productions from producer giants such as the prolific Charles Chilton, Charles Parker, Philip Donnellan, Alan Lomax, Ewan MacColl, A.L.Lloyd, Brian Vaughan, Michael Mason, et al. The young socially aware people at the BBC appear to be totally disinterested in their productions. There is a growing movement to collect ad restore their works and then put these out into the public domain - where they belong. Strangely a number of retired-BBC staff are supporting us; many have worked on these very productions. These too are unhappy at the dismissive attitudes of current staff towards these classics. Hi Stephen, I'm sure that you're being ironic when you describe retired BBC staff interest in your endeavour strange, and believe me, there is a big interest in all forms of lost entertainment with the archivists at the BBC. Things come in and out of fashion like the wind but these shows will have their day again; it just needs someone to put forward a well thought out case. But they'll only reach a wider audience if they're in the archive to be re-broadcast. You can't make much of a case if there is nothing to play. Regardless, good luck. Paul The use of socially aware doesn't help either, being a good way to make yourself sound like a miserable old Gammon.
|
|
|
Post by Ed Brown on Feb 13, 2021 4:14:50 GMT
I think it's also worth pointing out what Kaleidoscope is; on the one hand you have an organisation that aims to save our lost TV heritage whilst at the same time raising money for charity. It is not in itself a charity. There is also a second Kaleidoscope that sometimes gets confused with the first and consists of Kaleidoscope Television Archives, which is a limited company and was incorporated in July last year and also Kaleidoscope DVD, a private limited company. The Kaleidoscope Television Archives Ltd company should not be confused with an earlier version of the company also called Kaleidoscope Television Archives Ltd which was incorporated in 2015 and was compulsorily dissolved in early January 2018 because, well, it never submitted any accounts. Its assets (if there were any) now belong to the Crown. In both versions of Kaleidoscope Television Archives Ltd. (the principal business of which was noted as "Television programme distribution activities") the only people involved in them were/are Christopher Perry and his wife. If you are thinking of donating material to Kaleidoscope, it might be worth asking which one you are donating to. I could be misunderstanding the situation, but it does seem that only one Kaleidoscope organisation currently exists. Originally, Kaleidoscope was an unincorporated association, that basically just comprised Christopher Perry. He was Kaleidoscope: it was just himself, or perhaps in partnership with his wife, trading under the name "Kaleidoscope Publishing". He then incorporated a limited company, a one-man company, most likely for tax reasons, which was quickly struck off when he didn't file its annual accounts. They usually only strike-off trading companies; there are various types of private company where the requirement to file audited accounts is treated laxly, or simply waived altogether, but they won't do that for a commercial business. He then re-incorporated a year later under the same name. He seems never to have registered either company with the Charity Commissioners, as a registered charity: which certainly makes sense, since Companies House can be pretty slow to strike off a charity, yet they evidently moved quickly in this case. He didn't need to incorporate in order to register as a charity, for that you only need a board of Trustees (but he would not have had the required charitable purpose, being simply an ordinary commercial business). Any company of course can distribute part of its profits to charity, and there can be tax benefits to doing so, but these outgoings will normally be shown in its annual accounts. At any rate, as of today Kaleidoscope seems to exist only as a private limited company, incorporated for non-charitable purposes -- including television distribution. But its main purpose, as I'm sure we all know, is holding an annual event, a one day convention in the West Midlands, and selling the books it publishes.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Feb 13, 2021 15:29:56 GMT
At any rate, as of today Kaleidoscope seems to exist only as a private limited company, incorporated for non-charitable purposes -- including television distribution. But its main purpose, as I'm sure we all know, is holding an annual event, a one day convention in the West Midlands, and selling the books it publishes. Hmm. No. I think you have misunderstood what I was saying. Kaleidoscope, the group of enthusiasts who track down lost TV is one thing. Separately there is Kaleidoscope Television Archives Limited, a registered plc with two directors, the aforementioned man and his wife. There is also Kaleidoscope DVD, the directors of which are Christopher Perry and a guy in the USA. The other companies that were started by Chris (Kaleidoscope Music Publishing Ltd. being one) were I think all dissolved by Companies House. The point I was making is that if you are planning to donate material to Kaleidoscope, which of the two are you donating to? The group of enthusiasts or Chris Perry's private shebang? I mean, one is basically a private members club and the other is a private business. Neither are charitable concerns and never have been. Bearing that in mind, it's difficult to see how Kaleidoscope is funded. Where for example are the million or so items in their collection stored and who pays for the storage? Is material just going from one dusty attic to a basement in a private home? These films that are bought from Ebay at (frankly) ridiculous prices; who actually does own them? Kaleidoscope the business or individuals who have stumped up the cash who just happen to be members? Is the material any safer in their hands than the private collector they bought it from? I've seen some describe lost material donated to Kaleidoscope as "...returned to Kaleidoscope..." as if somehow material that was never theirs in the first place could manage that miracle. And what happens to this 'material' when it is donated? One colleague of mine refuses to deal with them anymore because a film print of a lost programme that he loaned to them, a film he only handed over because he was told that they wanted to make a copy for the copyright holders, was copied by them and then traded amongst some members of Kaleidoscope. I think if you're planning to donate to any organisation, you should be careful and do your own research into them. What are they, how do they work and how do they plan to preserve the material? All important questions if your material is unique. You may then decide to donate whatever you have to an official archive such as the BFI or the BBC or the British Library where material will be properly preserved and hopefully made use of. You could even (shock, horror) donate the material to the organisations that own the copyright. Paul
|
|