Critics enthused by Dynagroove

[weary flake]

For fans of revolutionary audio technology breakthrough hype
here's praise of Dynagroove from the back of an LP, unfortunately
missing the insert INSIDE: THE STORY ABOUT DYNAGROOVE -- WHAT IS IT?
WHAT WILL IT DO FOR YOU? So buy Dynagoove or be a luddite!:


THE NEW SOUND OF THE STARS -- Red Seal Mono SP-33-224

This one record will tell you more about DYNOGROOVE than any amount
of technical information could possibly suggest. Play it -- on whatever
phonograph you own -- and you will quickly discover how much DYNOGROOVE
has added to your listening enjoyment.

What the critics are saying about DYNAGROOVE

William D. Laffler -- United Press International

"The new process possibly is the greatest breakthrough
in recorded sound since the introduction of the long
play record."

Doug Watt -- New York News

"... a dramatic advance in fidelity."

Conrad L. Osborne -- High Fidelity

"... the sound has a freshness and lift that bar
any possibility of listening fatigue."

Jack Suitner -- San Francisco Chronicle

"Dynagroove is not a gimmick. The improvement is
noticeable."

Dean Wallace -- San Francisco Chronicle

"The result can be heard by anyone with even a
moderately decent phonograph ..."

Herman Schaden -- Washington Sunday Star

"Victor's claims of less distortion from outer groove
to inner groove seem to be borne out, as do the
claims for good tonal qualities at either high or
low volume."

Durwood McAlister -- Atlanta Journal

"... most important, I think, and most significant,
is the fact that the innovations offered by the RCA
process are beneficial to owners of less-expensive
record players."

Time Magazine

"The result is the highest of the fi's ..."

Robert Taylor -- Boston Sunday Herald

"The new RCA Victor process known as Dynagroove
sounds to us remarkably lifelike and vibrant."

Arthur Bloomfield -- San Francisco New-Call Bulletin

"His master is in better voice ... Incidentally,
there is nothing so radical about Dynagroove that
new equipment is needed."

[gggg gggg]

According to this:

- This, of course, is the old story all over again. The serious listener, who listens to music instead of using it as a pleasant background for conversation, is a nobody as far as the record industry is concerned, and does not warrant its consideration.

https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/95/index.html

[John Fowler]

As a geezer who was buying records in the '60s, I can confirm that Dynagroove was crap.

[Mr. Mike]

On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 03:32:26 -0700 (PDT), John Fowler
<johnwy...@gmail.com> wrote:

>As a geezer who was buying records in the '60s, I can confirm that Dynagroove was crap

Which was really worse, Dynagroove or Dynawarp? (The latter = RCA
records made of plastic which was so flimsy they looked like Salvador
Dali watches.)

[Frank Berger]

On 6/23/2021 10:16 AM, Mr. Mike wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 03:32:26 -0700 (PDT), John Fowler
> <johnwy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As a geezer who was buying records in the '60s, I can confirm that Dynagroove was crap
>
> Which was really worse, Dynagroove or Dynawarp?

Technically Dynaflex, introduced several years after Dynagroove.

[cooper...@gmail.com]

Still fun to read: https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/95/

AC

[John Fowler]

Dynagroove was crap.
Dynaflex was crap.
RCA's CD-4 four channel audio discs were crap.
RCA's video discs were super-crap.

[Frank Berger]

A little research indicates there was plenty of contemporaneous criticism of Dynagroove.

[Ed Presson]

"John Fowler" wrote in message
news:74c5c368-1d5b-49dd...@googlegroups.com...

> > snip <<

>As a geezer who was buying records in the '60s, I can confirm that
>Dynagroove was crap.

Seconded.

[Bob Harper]

Dynagroove was crap, as Mr. Fowler states. Dynawarp (or Dynaflex, to
give it its proper name) was the offspring of Dynagroove and higher oil
prices-->higher vinyl prices-->thinner records, and was crap cubed.

Bob Harper

[gggg gggg]

On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 9:00:17 PM UTC-7, weary flake wrote:

As I recall, Dynagroove recordings began appearing in the early sixties when RCA Victor affiliated itself with Reader's Digest to sell lp box sets (e.g., "Mood Music for Listening and Relaxation") that would appeal to the middlebrow tastes of the masses (as opposed to the highbrow tastes of elites which Living Stereo had been serving) where presumably there were more profits to be made:

https://www.google.com/search?q=dynagroove+box+sets&tbm=isch&sxsrf=ALeKk01xCBiXEl3Phe9ZS1R8eLEw0qq-7w%3A1624483952387&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=657&ei=cKjTYMSVFdfH-gTH97OIAQ&oq=dynagroove+box+sets&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzoECCMQJzoFCAAQsQM6CAgAELEDEIMBOgIIADoECAAQHjoGCAAQChAYOgQIABAYUJwIWI0wYJAxaAJwAHgAgAGTAogBgROSAQYxNS40LjKYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZw&sclient=img&ved=0ahUKEwjEjbGn2q7xAhXXo54KHcf7DBEQ4dUDCAc&uact=5

[Owen]

On 6/23/21 12:13 AM, Dan Koren wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 12:00:17 AM UTC-4, weary flake wrote:
>>

>> "The result can be heard by anyone with
>> even a moderately decent phonograph ..."
>>
>> Herman Schaden -- Washington Sunday Star
>>
>

> No ears needed ?!? And what is a
> "moderately decent phonograph"?
>
> dk
>


<https://youtubemusicsucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/old-gramophone.jpg>

-Owen

[gggg gggg]

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Fritz_Reiner/4AMPNyaD-CkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22rca-victor+had+recently+arranged+with+reader%27s+digest+to+make+special+recordings%22&pg=PA231&printsec=frontcover

[LarryLap]

On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 3:02:30 PM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:

As I heard it from Seymour Solomon (of blessed memory), Dynagroove was the engineering response to a push from the marketing department at RCA to push sales of their "Home Entertainment Centers," which employed turntables with heavy (3+ gram) tonearms with ceramic cartridges and conical styli, which couldn't track high frequencies worth a damn, especially in the inner grooves, where high excursion (loud) passages distorted horribly. The solution was to compress the signal throughout and increase the width of the grooves in the inner third of an LP side. Voila: Dynagroove! Salesmen at Sears and Macy's, where the Entertainment Centers were flogged, would put on a Columbia LP and, after noting how bad it sounded, replace it with the Leinsdorf/BSO Mahler First or Brahms First and comment on their superiority. In my view, it was the beginning of the end of RCA as a serious publisher of classical recordings. It paved the way to the takeover by Bertelsmann, who gave us Maazel rather than Reiner and Buchbinder rather than Rubinstein, and finally sold the catalogue to Sony.

[Owen]

Let's see -- were any of the above damning with faint praise? Perhaps
some of them hedged their bets against being shutout of RCA freebees by
careful parsing of their words:

>>> Conrad L. Osborne -- High Fidelity
>>>
>>> "... the sound has a freshness and lift that bar
>>> any possibility of listening fatigue."

Translation: It sounds so bad that you'll turn it off much quicker than
you could ever tire of it

>>> Dean Wallace -- San Francisco Chronicle
>>>
>>> "The result can be heard by anyone with even a
>>> moderately decent phonograph ..."
>>>

Translation: It's so bad, even you can tell the difference.

>>> Durwood McAlister -- Atlanta Journal
>>>
>>> "... most important, I think, and most significant,
>>> is the fact that the innovations offered by the RCA
>>> process are beneficial to owners of less-expensive
>>> record players."

Translation: You've got to have pretty bad equipment for this to sound
somewhat decent.

>>> Arthur Bloomfield -- San Francisco New-Call Bulletin
>>>
>>> "His master is in better voice

Translation: in better voice than Dynagroove

>>> ... Incidentally,
>>> there is nothing so radical about Dynagroove that
>>> new equipment is needed."

Translation: Better equipment will only sound worse.

All the rest sold their souls...

-Owen

[gggg gggg]

On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 4:54:09 AM UTC-10, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 6/23/2021 10:16 AM, Mr. Mike wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 03:32:26 -0700 (PDT), John Fowler
> > <johnwy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> As a geezer who was buying records in the '60s, I can confirm that Dynagroove was crap
> >
> > Which was really worse, Dynagroove or Dynawarp?
> Technically Dynaflex, introduced several years after Dynagroove.

(Recent Y. upload):

RCA Dynaflex Records. Does Size Matter?